Message from @nerd
Discord ID: 418254645660745730
@chill with that shit You got now two sources in English and Russian
The first one is not a source
It's an image
And numbers
The first one can't be a source it is in English
It wasn't though. Soviet Democracy was based on Direct Democracy. In a Soviet democracy, voters are organized in basic units, for example the workers of a company, the inhabitants of a district, or the soldiers of a barracks. They directly send the delegates as public functionaries, which act as legislators, government and courts in one. In contrast to earlier democracy models according to Locke and Montesquieu, there is no division of powers. The councils are elected on several levels: At the residential and business level, delegates are sent to the local councils in plenary assemblies. These, in turn, can delegate members to the next level. The system of delegation continues to the Congress of Soviets at state level. The electoral processes thus take place from the bottom upwards. The levels are usually tied to administrative levels.
I aint understandin you for shit so ima just peace
If you like a source you have it man.
Ya but I wanna know what it says
It says the same thing
-_-
As the picture in English
I dont think so
There's a lot of words
Just look at numbers
And the English meme got like
A couple
No
I wanna know what it says
"Despite their relative discipline, the Bolsheviks were not of one mind, the Party being a coalition of committed revolutionaries, but with somewhat differing views as to what was practical and proper. These diverging tendencies resulted in debates within the Party over the next decade, followed by a period of consolidation of the Party as definite programs were adopted."
@chill with that shit It is an invitation to participate in demographic research with past researches results
Cool
That's not all of it though
People were free to criticize without fear of violent retaliation. And yeah, people disagreed with Stalin at times. He didn't mind it.
ok...
He's often painted as some kind of brutish sociopath but this couldn't be further from the truth.
He was a very agreeable and personable individual.
you got some citations here for saying that he didn't crush political dissent
I'm pretty sure Trotsky would strongly disagree
Well, Stalin didn't have absolute power.. He wasn't the Czar, so he couldn't have singlehandedly crushed any dissenters.
"Political opposition in the USSR was barely visible and, with rare exceptions, of little consequence." -- Barber, John (October 1997). "Opposition in Russia". Government and Opposition. 32 (4): 598–613. doi:10.1111/j.1477-7053.1997.tb00448.x.
anyone got any ideas for posters or anything?
I'm bored and love to produce that kind of stuff, even if it's just an amature hobby thing
@rhinoceros leftypol international members slauthering fascist scum?
In the decades following Stalin's death in 1953, the existence of interest groups and lobbies within the party and state apparatuses was persuasively argued by foreign observers; and occasionally fractional opposition within the ruling elite surfaced. The latter aimed at reversing specific policies and, twice, at replacing the country's leader — Khrushchev on both occasions, unsuccessfully in 1957 and successfully in 1964. From the 1960s onwards, dissent from the regime's values and goals was reflected in the statements and actions of individuals and small groups, often described as the ‘Soviet dissident movement’, though lacking either common objectives and strategy, or impact on the Soviet Union's rulers.
@Firefly Like you ever could!
@Firefly#9983 oh my