this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2025
927 points (98.7% liked)
People Twitter
7736 readers
695 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
He did claim to be communist though - as in, he is ideologically driven to attempt to bring about communism. So calling the USSR "communist" is 100% correct. And naturally, what do you call life under communists? Communism! (This is wrong, but it's an understandable switch-up).
Well, that's where I have to disagree with Stalin's official narrative. I don't think he was a communist, I think he was an opportunist with no ideology beyond personal empowerment. I think he'd have said he believed in anything if it gave him more power.
Sounds a lot like trump
To elaborate on the evidence for this:
Marx said after the workers seize the state, it should become unnecessary and wither away. Stalin was the primary person in charge of overseeing this process. He should have been encouraging the development of community governance. Helping set up neighbourhood watches so he could defund the police. Granting power over workplaces to the trade unions. Encouraging the gift economy to grow to the point that the ruble could be cancelled. These were always the steps in the plan to get from the USSR to a communist system.
Stalin didn't want to do that, because it would have made him less powerful. Instead of defunding the police, he expanded their powers. Instead of empowering the trade unions, he put down workers' revolts. This is the opposite of communism.