862
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2023
862 points (98.1% liked)
World News
31537 readers
481 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
They outrage is such a great example of western exceptionalism. The existence of western consumer businesses in the countries of the non-Aryan jungle is supposed to be an immense benefit to these places and their departure must necessarily be disastrous for them. Nowhere is the idea entertained that Russians are perfectly capable of creating their own shitty burger restaurants to replace those if the west.
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
This is unironically funny as hell. Great copypasta, I'll add it to my collection.
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.
I agree but I wasn’t trying to address the overall issue. Certainly no more me than the people I responded to, who used the example of shitty junk food joints to claim the people of the Soviet Union didn’t look with envy on the choices offered to the western citizens.
In theory the communist system is fantastic, in the same way the society described in The Culture is. There just hasn’t been any implementation that got close to that ideal and certainly the median citizen seems better off in the west.
I guess the main thing they might have been talking about is how a lot of the "west culture" will only trumpet the "good" aspects of capitalism and downplay any/all negatives.
Like it's cool we have McDonalds and many other fast food places available, but so many of them are bottom of the barrel quality/health wise and therefore it's really not like it adds a ton of value to our lives over if we didn't have to worry about having healthy food provided to us, even if we don't have the choice.
Mostly splitting hairs at this point, I think we broadly agree :p
Yes agreed 🤜🤛
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?
And that Soviet lady's name? Albert Einstein!
Liberal theory is just bullshit anecdotes on top of bullshit anecdotes.
You're missing the point. For BK to operate in Russia means dollars flowing into Russia, because BK needs to buy Rubles. Dollars that Russia needs to buy arms on the international market, because nobody is accepting Rubles.
Except BK is an American company. They wouldn't operate in Russia if they weren't making a profit. So their net effect is to have money flowing out of Russia.
This is true. However, if I owned BK, I'd see this as an amazing business strategy, although a quite unethical one (but as we can see, multi million+ dollar companies aren't the most ethical either way). I mean, now the literal government has an interest for it to stay in business, they may even start to promote the brand.
Many words considering no point.
Let them.
Don't be upset
Commies say the dumbest shit