It isn't

We're questioning whether it was communist or not

By a question that has no meaningful answer, as there are no operable criteria to ascertain whether "the workers" own a factory or not

Again. The definition of communism is workers owning the means of production. Therefore, in order to say whether the USSR was communist, we have to see whether the workers did in fact own the means of production in the USSR
So I'm asking you, did the workers own the means of production in the USSR, or did the STATE own the means of production

Spoiler alert you fucking libertarian denialist fool, it's the latter, hence making them socialist

>There are no operable criteria to ascertain whether "the workers" own a factory or not

How fucking stupid are you?

You can just ask for the criteria instead of avoiding to answer the question you baffoon

Ask for the criteria instead of avoiding the quesiton you stupid fool

Good. What are the criteria?

I did not evade the question, I said it's meaningless.

The criteria of ownership in communism is whether or not you put your labor into it. If you put you labor into it, it's yours

You did

The state owned the means of production within USSR

Really not that hard stupid denialist

You claim not to be a Marxist but you take your definitions from them

of course I have to define communism in reference to their ideas lmao

But even in reference to my definition of ownership, the workers didn't own the means or production

The means of production were owned and and were distributed by the state

Thus making them socialist

I'm sick of retards conflating communism with socialism

What if I told you that this distinction between socialism and communism doesn't fucking matter?

Call it socialism then

This is so pedantic

It's crucial? Workers owning the means of production isn't the same as the state owning the means of production. In the former you basically have syndicalist anarchy, while in the latter you have concentrated top down approach towards economics

If you think its meaningless you haven't read any of the marxist literature

Have you read das kapital?

At least the first volume?

Of course you haven't.

Parts of it. Until I realized he didn't even justify his central premises

Whether or not he justified them is irrelevant to whether or not you can understand his general conception without sperging and redefining it

I only need to understand it enough to know what commies are talking about. I don't need to know every little definition

Not the least because I simply don't care about them. Why should I?

You wasted what, a full week of your life to reading three volumes of this shite?

Good for your ego, I suppose

Imagine being this braindead

fucking hell

"Look mom! I read Das Kapital!"

"Yeah guys, why the heck should i care about literally understanding their crucial ideas prior to trying to dunk on them"

Did I say I don't understand them?

I understand them better than you do, and better than they do

You don't have to say everything in order for me to conclude that