imperialism is a very specific form of expansion driven by specific material conditions. Not all expansion is 'imperialistic' because not all expansion is driven by the creation of a bourgeoisie order or the creation of the capitalist mode of production.

the USSR liquidated the bourgeoisie and was not creating a 'capitalist mode of production' so is not imperialist.

w8 a minute

"is a spoon a spoon or is a spoon a table?" is what I said earlier and I feared so. thats how you define imperialism? than this whole argument has been utterly pointless.

so you're saying the USSR was anti-materialist?

@🌼Kalina🌹🌸🌹Zay🌹🌸🌹Scott🌼

I'm saying the USSR had being going through the trans formative system of socialism so was not creating a capitalist mode of production. the feudalism -> socialism transformation was rectified by the N.E.P. and even under the N.E.P. the kulaks and bourgeoisie did not control the dictatorship of the proletariat therefore the USSR was not imperialist then. Stalin had liquidated the bourgeoisie so even under Stalin the USSR was not imperialist. There is nothing anti-materialist about that.

Well then.

What do you think the USSR was?

How is the debate going lads?

the primary stage of socialism with a DoTP

im getting attacked on marxist theory by fash 😂

Who is winning, though?

no one really

That is surprising.

@Mr.AnalTwister4000 gave up because my definition of imperialism wasn't his definition of imperialism

xd

but anyways

but i was only defining imperialism by how it occurs in the material world and the material conditions it arises from 😦

but do you find the USSR successful, by any means?

what are you implying? theres absolutely no reason to argue about wether something is imperialist or not if we cannot even agree on what imperialism is.

Lenin/stalin USSR yes going into Khrushchev and Brezhnev ew

gorbachev absolutely not

the dismantlement of the socialist core of the USSR by reactionaries and revisionist was disgusting and what caused its collapse smh.

yeah man germany should have stayed split for even longer

yes

or maybe SU could have just given up the rest of east germany to poland and deported the rest to the western part

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/homesick-for-a-dictatorship-majority-of-eastern-germans-feel-life-better-under-communism-a-634122.html so sad

they want dictatorship

they had hitler

they had stalin

they want dictatorship again die spiegel

it was a joke lol

```As an apologist for the former East German dictatorship, the young Mecklenburg native shares a majority view of people from eastern Germany. Today, 20 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, 57 percent, or an absolute majority, of eastern Germans defend the former East Germany. "The GDR had more good sides than bad sides. There were some problems, but life was good there," say 49 percent of those polled. Eight percent of eastern Germans flatly oppose all criticism of their former home and agree with the statement: "The GDR had, for the most part, good sides. Life there was happier and better than in reunified Germany today."```

```Today's Germany is described as a "slave state" and a "dictatorship of capital," and some letter writers reject Germany for being, in their opinion, too capitalist or dictatorial, and certainly not democratic. Schroeder finds such statements alarming. "I am afraid that a majority of eastern Germans do not identify with the current sociopolitical system."```

when germany isn't democratic 😂

you know you've dun fucked up when people think the GDR is more democratic than modern Germany 😂

can we agree @Mr.AnalTwister4000 that modern german is awful?

at least that?

youre constantly so impatient

@GucciToiletSalesman