It’s like that 80s news footage of the first McDonald’s opening in Moscow where they’re like ”finally those filthy commies get to enjoy our superior Western treats”
Then they interview someone who says it wasn’t really worth it to stand in line and pay so much
What sort of nonsense response is that? Anyone can poop out any anecdote they like to support their position and say “I know it hurts so it’s easy to reject”.
Give me a break. No system is perfect and the discussion isn’t about perfection vs horror. It’s about a series of tradeoffs and the tradeoffs done in the west broadly resulting in better outcomes, on average, for the population there than they did in the Soviet Union. For China nowadays, I’m less certain. Definitely in the big Tier 1 cities, life is on par with Western outcomes, for some better for some worse.
I’m just saying, it’s ironic to use that example of a diplomat as opposed to how many people live paycheck to paycheck barely able to make ends meet or are actually homeless, I doubt those people are crying in joy when they walk into a Walmart
I think you’ve missed my point entirely - that could be my fault.
The example illustrates that even for those well-connected enough in the Soviet Union the sight of a western supermarket was enough to make them weep (this was ‘88).
I brought this example up to address the false belief that people in Russia weren’t all that impressed with western products (like McDonalds) back when the Soviet Union existed.
I don’t know how you’re managing to connect that with how people live today and their experience of walking into Walmart.
Finally, this didn’t take place in Harrods but in ICA in Sweden. Hardly a luxury shop - just an average supermarket.
The idea of communism (extremely simplified) everyone has the means to live and people at “the top” don’t get special privilege on that, obviously almost all actual implementations turn into dictatorships so the point is somewhat moot, however the fact a well connected diplomat in a communist country had to live in the same conditions as other non-well connected people would be a positive, not a negative, they’d see and hopefully be able to improve the lives of everyone as they understand what it’s like.
Compare that to a majority of the rich and powerful in America, they’re so ridiculously disconnected from the average experience that they literally do not understand at all what it’s like for those with less.
Ah, with that I broadly agree. But I do feel the goalposts are shifting.
In the case of “was it right for the west to feel their system was better than the Soviet one” my example simply illustrates that a western supermarket in ‘88 reduced someone from the Soviet Union to tears.
But that’s really misdirecting of the overall issue right? That’s why I brought up homeless or very low income people in America as a counter-example.
Sure capitalism brings us some good things because of the profit incentive driving some to continue pushing the envelope (there’s pros and cons, don’t want to get too in the weeds) but there’s also massive inequality, compared to the ideal of a communist or socialist perspective where sure it might not be as shiny or you don’t have as many options, but you’re definitely housed and fed.
It’s like that 80s news footage of the first McDonald’s opening in Moscow where they’re like
”finally those filthy commies get to enjoy our superior Western treats”
Then they interview someone who says it wasn’t really worth it to stand in line and pay so much
Removed by mod
This is unironically funny as hell. Great copypasta, I’ll add it to my collection.
Bullshit
Well, there’s no use sitting here arguing about this, is there. I know the truth hurts, so it’s easy to reject.
What sort of nonsense response is that? Anyone can poop out any anecdote they like to support their position and say “I know it hurts so it’s easy to reject”.
Who’s truth?
Man it’s a good thing homeless people in America get to enjoy all that choice!
Well, if you need to compare a diplomat to a homeless person, then that is a pretty big self own.
In what way?
Give me a break. No system is perfect and the discussion isn’t about perfection vs horror. It’s about a series of tradeoffs and the tradeoffs done in the west broadly resulting in better outcomes, on average, for the population there than they did in the Soviet Union. For China nowadays, I’m less certain. Definitely in the big Tier 1 cities, life is on par with Western outcomes, for some better for some worse.
I’m just saying, it’s ironic to use that example of a diplomat as opposed to how many people live paycheck to paycheck barely able to make ends meet or are actually homeless, I doubt those people are crying in joy when they walk into a Walmart
I think you’ve missed my point entirely - that could be my fault.
The example illustrates that even for those well-connected enough in the Soviet Union the sight of a western supermarket was enough to make them weep (this was ‘88).
I brought this example up to address the false belief that people in Russia weren’t all that impressed with western products (like McDonalds) back when the Soviet Union existed.
I don’t know how you’re managing to connect that with how people live today and their experience of walking into Walmart.
Finally, this didn’t take place in Harrods but in ICA in Sweden. Hardly a luxury shop - just an average supermarket.
The idea of communism (extremely simplified) everyone has the means to live and people at “the top” don’t get special privilege on that, obviously almost all actual implementations turn into dictatorships so the point is somewhat moot, however the fact a well connected diplomat in a communist country had to live in the same conditions as other non-well connected people would be a positive, not a negative, they’d see and hopefully be able to improve the lives of everyone as they understand what it’s like.
Compare that to a majority of the rich and powerful in America, they’re so ridiculously disconnected from the average experience that they literally do not understand at all what it’s like for those with less.
Ah, with that I broadly agree. But I do feel the goalposts are shifting.
In the case of “was it right for the west to feel their system was better than the Soviet one” my example simply illustrates that a western supermarket in ‘88 reduced someone from the Soviet Union to tears.
But that’s really misdirecting of the overall issue right? That’s why I brought up homeless or very low income people in America as a counter-example.
Sure capitalism brings us some good things because of the profit incentive driving some to continue pushing the envelope (there’s pros and cons, don’t want to get too in the weeds) but there’s also massive inequality, compared to the ideal of a communist or socialist perspective where sure it might not be as shiny or you don’t have as many options, but you’re definitely housed and fed.
And that Soviet lady’s name? Albert Einstein!
Liberal theory is just bullshit anecdotes on top of bullshit anecdotes.