Why do you think liberalism is one-to-one with voting, as though no other political philosophy can have voting?
Great reading comprehension. /s
Marxism is anti-liberal, definitionally. Yet, all historical Marxist movements, including the USSR, have had voting of some form or another. What they don’t have is party politics, instead replacing parties with factions. And for good reason.
“We have a really good reason for instituting single-candidate ‘elections’ that are controlled entirely by the PEOPLE’S oligarchy!”
It’s selection by the elected officials of the parties in the majority coalition.
In a single party situation, elections are multi-candidate where there are multiple candidates available - this was seen in the USSR and is seen in China, and like the USA or many places in Europe, some races only have one candidate just simply by virtue of the office.
There are other offices that are not selected by popular vote. All democracies have these too, both liberal democracies and Marxist democracies. Some of these offices are appointed, some of these offices are elected from within specific committees or other bodies.
You can study the Soviet system, too, ya know. It’s not illegal. You can learn all about the workers councils, the right to recall, the Congress of Soviets, etc.
Of course, in 1936 they got rid of the Congress of Soviets and added universal direct sufferage well ahead of any liberal democracy, and they added the right to rest and leisure, right to care in old age and sickness, right to housing, etc.
It also constitutionally enshrined the equality of women and of all peoples regardless of nationality/race. Very fascist, I know.
What was very anti-democratic was when Stalin a year later had been purging political opponents and made all the elections single-candidate elections because he was “paranoid” about the emergence of counter-revolutionary powers taking over.
I put paranoid in quotes because immediately after Stalin left office, Kruschev took over and began the liberalization of the USSR complete with attempts to collaborate with the West in an effort to divide up the world and build a Soviet Empire. So Stalin wasn’t wrong that there was a large threat of counter-revolutionaries trying to get power. He just failed to stop them from taking power. He only delayed them long enough for the USSR to save Europe from the Nazis.
It’s selection by the elected officials of the parties in the majority coalition.
Those ‘elected’ in single-candidate elections. Wow.
That you go on to simp for Stalin and the entire Stalinist system is unsurprising. Red fascists just can’t help themselves. Boot leather is too tasty to resist, apparently. Next you can tell me how the DPRK is a good and holsum worker’s democracy because it says it is. I’m sure just thinking about that level of fascist apologia makes your mouth water.
I mean, the DPRK has gone from being bombed into the stone age by the US where the citizens literally lived in caves to avoid being hit with napalm to building amusement parks, nuclear weapons, and computers. You can’t actually achieve that with slave labor, this is well known. It requires intrinsic motivation, and I can think of no better intrinsic motivation than rebuilding my country from the ground up next to my neighbors in defiance of the brutal fascism of the West.
I get that it helps you to feel like a rebel to imagine that there are zero examples of successful alternatives to the West, but you end up supporting the narratives of fascist imperialists without narry a thought to how closely you are aligned with them. You wouldn’t be bothered at all if the US managed to destroy the DPRK, the PRC, Iran, Venezuela, Vietnam, and Laos. You’d think it serves them right for being fascists while the actual fascists were committing mass murder and consolidating their global dominance over 99% of the human population on the planet. And it would be OK, because you have the correct reasoning and proper liberatory line and one day, you will be out in the streets fighting that empire to build the first ever real attempt at liberation, without any hint of self awareness as the autonomous weapons systems hunt you down.
Great reading comprehension. /s
“We have a really good reason for instituting single-candidate ‘elections’ that are controlled entirely by the PEOPLE’S oligarchy!”
Fuck off, red fascist.
Wait until you find out how prime ministers are elected.
Through single-candidate elections controlled by unelected apparatchiks?
I don’t think you’ve ever followed government formation in your fucking life, fascist.
It’s selection by the elected officials of the parties in the majority coalition.
In a single party situation, elections are multi-candidate where there are multiple candidates available - this was seen in the USSR and is seen in China, and like the USA or many places in Europe, some races only have one candidate just simply by virtue of the office.
There are other offices that are not selected by popular vote. All democracies have these too, both liberal democracies and Marxist democracies. Some of these offices are appointed, some of these offices are elected from within specific committees or other bodies.
You can study the Soviet system, too, ya know. It’s not illegal. You can learn all about the workers councils, the right to recall, the Congress of Soviets, etc.
Of course, in 1936 they got rid of the Congress of Soviets and added universal direct sufferage well ahead of any liberal democracy, and they added the right to rest and leisure, right to care in old age and sickness, right to housing, etc.
It also constitutionally enshrined the equality of women and of all peoples regardless of nationality/race. Very fascist, I know.
What was very anti-democratic was when Stalin a year later had been purging political opponents and made all the elections single-candidate elections because he was “paranoid” about the emergence of counter-revolutionary powers taking over.
I put paranoid in quotes because immediately after Stalin left office, Kruschev took over and began the liberalization of the USSR complete with attempts to collaborate with the West in an effort to divide up the world and build a Soviet Empire. So Stalin wasn’t wrong that there was a large threat of counter-revolutionaries trying to get power. He just failed to stop them from taking power. He only delayed them long enough for the USSR to save Europe from the Nazis.
Those ‘elected’ in single-candidate elections. Wow.
That you go on to simp for Stalin and the entire Stalinist system is unsurprising. Red fascists just can’t help themselves. Boot leather is too tasty to resist, apparently. Next you can tell me how the DPRK is a good and holsum worker’s democracy because it says it is. I’m sure just thinking about that level of fascist apologia makes your mouth water.
I mean, the DPRK has gone from being bombed into the stone age by the US where the citizens literally lived in caves to avoid being hit with napalm to building amusement parks, nuclear weapons, and computers. You can’t actually achieve that with slave labor, this is well known. It requires intrinsic motivation, and I can think of no better intrinsic motivation than rebuilding my country from the ground up next to my neighbors in defiance of the brutal fascism of the West.
I get that it helps you to feel like a rebel to imagine that there are zero examples of successful alternatives to the West, but you end up supporting the narratives of fascist imperialists without narry a thought to how closely you are aligned with them. You wouldn’t be bothered at all if the US managed to destroy the DPRK, the PRC, Iran, Venezuela, Vietnam, and Laos. You’d think it serves them right for being fascists while the actual fascists were committing mass murder and consolidating their global dominance over 99% of the human population on the planet. And it would be OK, because you have the correct reasoning and proper liberatory line and one day, you will be out in the streets fighting that empire to build the first ever real attempt at liberation, without any hint of self awareness as the autonomous weapons systems hunt you down.