So it plays a major role in the existence of capitalism

Is of not based on profit. It is based on the collective mode of production. The goods made for exchange might not bring profit but be an equal barter and still from it capitalism is born.

@Zircuits Wow, it isn't like I said that at the beginning of the argument.

@Firefly The oxford dictionary would disagree with you.

You can't have capitalism without it. I'd be skeptical if a socialist came into power and privatized the roads, for example

@Zircuits You can have private property without capitalism, nazi germany is a good example.

If you need an example of privatization in socialist countries, just take a look at the later soviet union and occupied europe, and south amerika.

During the rise of economical reformism

Lenin actually allowed private property.

During the reforms on the economy because of the civil war

Nope, he allowed it after the civil war.

Stalin was the one who revoked it, and then it ironically came back very soon after his death.

During another rise of economical reformism

@Zircuits Lenin wasn't the reformer, he was the founder.

He allowed privatization under communism, and stalin was the only one who actually ended it.... temporarily.

One of many criticisms of Lenin is his reforms on the economy, but some socialists defended it because of the civil war

@Zircuits What did I say earlier?

He allowed it to stay after the war.

It only ended under stalin.

So it was ended, just not under lenin

Then it came back.

Hell, collectivization lasted shorter than capitalization by almost 100 years.

It led to the fall of the USSR and a rise in poverty

Poverty and starvation was it's worse under stalin actually.

But to be fair, that can be attributed to WW2...... for the most part.

Starvation can also be explained by the massive industrialization effort

Isn't that a reckless maneouver though? Europe managed to do it just fine without the mass starvation.....

Russia was a very backwards country at this time

It had famines all the time also, even before communism, as a result

Hell, it should have been much easier to do at that time, since technology had advanced by 40 years.

@ᵈˢʳ✪ But none so severe.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droughts_and_famines_in_Russia_and_the_Soviet_Union#Pre-1900_droughts_and_famines Russia has always had this problem, though

@ᵈˢʳ✪ True, but it only became worse under communism.

The soviet tried to solve it, but while undergoing a rapid industrialisation process

Of course they would have worsened

@ᵈˢʳ✪ And look at how it turned out.

Look at the Great Leap Forward in the PRC

@ᵈˢʳ✪ >Of course they would have worsened

are you sure it worsened?

After a civil war and a push for industrialization which led them to become one of the most powerful countries

@Zircuits Not really, they were inferior in everyway to the west, their only advantage was numbers and territory.

I think ww2 had a greater effect, though @Deleted User