The Soviet system used psychiatry as a weapon by diagnosing political opponents as mentally ill in order to confine them as patients instead of trying them in court. Anyone who challenged the state such as dissidents, writers, would-be emigrants, religious believers, or human rights activists could be branded with fabricated disorders like sluggish schizophrenia. This turned normal political disagreement into supposed medical pathology and allowed the state to present dissent as insanity.
Once labeled in this way, people were placed in psychiatric hospitals where they could be held for long periods without legal protections. Harsh treatments were often used to break their resolve. The collaboration between state security organs and compliant psychiatrists created a system where political imprisonment was disguised as medical care, letting the Soviet regime suppress opposition while pretending it was addressing illness rather than silencing critics.
Being called a shit-lib by campist tanky is quite a complement! Thanks pal! Your disproval Is a wonderful sign that I haven’t lost touch with reality. Unlike some people.
Stalin and Hitler worked together to kill members of my family. It makes a lot of sense to compare them. I get that you think it’s okay because he’s your bad guy. Only other people’s bad guys are bad.
I am not a tankie ( if you mean by tankie that someone who supports russia and china, which I absolutely dont ). What I want to convey is dismissing former socialism efforts by calling them authoritarian without seeing the material condition and circumstances that led to those authoritarian condition is dishonest.
Again comparing stalin and hitler when it was the red army which practically saved the world from being nazified. I get your personal experience with USSR maybe bad, that doesnt mean we will negate facts here.
As much energy you guys spend combating online tankies who are minute in number, had even a fraction of that energy been spent on stopping western imperialism in the 3rd world, maybe we wouldve been in better condition by now.
I support socialism, not authoritarianism. And there are multiple instances of socialism without authoritarianism, but in those case the CIA and other western imperialist forces did sabotage (e.g. burkina faso, chile, cuba, etc.), maybe thats the reason socialist experiments tend be authoritarian? Maybe libs should focus on sparring the 3rd world from ongoing colonial rule of western imperialists and not spend there tax dollars on civilising the rest of the world.
Have you ever heard of this never before said phrase? The ends don’t justify the means.
It is inarguable that industrialization and automation can generally be a net benefit to mankind and society. It’s also inarguable that that does not justify or excuse abuses in pursuit of it.
Industrialization and automation benefited a lot of people in America, too. Does that make what the United States did acceptable or justifiable? And if not, why not? You know what an actual shitlib/tankie take is. Our side did it, so that makes it okay.
Good things can happen in spite of bad leadership. How does that make bad leadership good?
The thing is, you guys automatically co relate socialism with authoritarianism and justify it through selective cases, most of which are western capitalist propaganda. Bad things happened in USSR? sure, does that make the socialist ideology bad? hell no. You would rarely see any liberal talking about the successes of socialist experiments, rather they will just dismiss them by calling it authoritarianism. Ends doesnt justify means but what led to bad things in those means should also be seen critically.
You literally compared lenin to hitler, that boggled my mind like lenin led peoples movement and overthrew tsarist russia and freed peasants and working class from feudal chains. Lenin was progressive, he didnt hated a certain ethnic group nor he murdered anyone on basis of their skin color. You are far off the cliff, you should atleast read about lenin and read more about communism in general.