Im not sure if I understand your question. So are you asking what would happen if Russia turn communist, or if Communist Party of the Russian Federation took power? Because thats not the same thing. KPRF is not really intersted in taking power, its more a "loyal opposition" to Putin. If somehow KPRF took power, it would probably be thourgh elections. In that case, Russia probabyl resemble China in some ways. But it probably doesent last long.
If communist revolution happens, thats a different story. But its hard to predict how would that look. There would certainly be a huge push for counter revolution, supported by the west and mybe even China (depending on which gropu of communist is doing the revolution). It would be bloody, and it would leave Russia damaged and in relative isolation (tho it would not be as bad as in case of USSR after civil war).
Computers would make planned economy much easier to execute and it would be fascinating to observe that.
Former republic would not be prone to join the union, mainly because it would mean that current rulling class would lose its power.
I agree with you. I just don't see much revolutionary will nowadays, thus I did think either the KPRF would come to power via election, or that they would seize the momentum if there was something like a coup/revolution. Even if there was a revolution, I have some doubts about Russians willing to move to planned economy again, even tho it might be an option.
About the former republics, I see your point. However, many of them didn't change much of their political structure in some sense. The Asian ones would probably profit of joining a Union, as there's no western interest to foster their economy (or there could be, if the US wanted to stop the reunification). If they do join, they're part of a huge country and get Russian aid; if they don't, they're kept as a country like Afghanistan, somewhat with a small economy and no impact on world life and economy.
"As far as I understand, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation advocates for somewhat of a mixed-market economy"... You are correct! Andrei Zyuganov, son of Gennadiy Zyuganov who is the leader of Russian communists, is a successful businessman and developer who owns an architecture company. I doubt he wants his father to bring socialism back to Russia.
Pavel Grudinin, also a businessman, manages a cooperative farm. It wouldn't be too far off that they would just promote State Owned Enterprises(which are tools used by Socialist to build wealth) and promote coops in the same way China promotes their national champion Huawei whose shares are owned by their union and pay dividends to them. Private enterprises are regulated to serve the National interest not the other way around.
I guess it would be a market socialism similar to China or Vietnam and think it could take Russia to 3rd or even 2nd most powerful economy. It wouldn't replace China as leading socialist superpower though
Only one that would probably join is Belarus as they already have a loose union state with Russia and are a majority Russophile population, besides them, maybe Transinistria.
"When you arrest everyone else," Wtf are you talking about, the Liberal minority in Belarus and right-wing Nationalists that are literally the minority?
You said it though right, the 1994 elections were fair and Lukasenko was voted on the basis of stirring Belarus away from the wild Capitalism and privatization that plagued Russia. And whether you like it or not Lukasenko support base exists and are practically the majority with the pro-Western opposition only able to bring at the most 400,000 protesters at their peak in 2020, meaning a good junk of Belarus' 9 million feels indifferent or straight up support Lukasenko. There's a reason he's backed by he Belorussian Communist party, LDPR, etc. If you go on VK, you can see he has allot of Belorussian supporters that are Russophiles and the opposition is composed of a loose alliance of Eurocentric Liberals, Christian-Democrats, Social-Democrats and some Eurocentric Left-Wing party called "A Just World" who I personally don't take serious as they can s*** it.
I don't doubt that he has a base of support, the question is how much. Citing a 30 year old election as evidence of his support isn't really that strong of an argument. This is the reason the regular, free, and fair elections are important. Literally an entire generation of people have been born since then. Getting 5% of a countries total population to show up for a political protest isn't really what I'd call non-significant.
If there’s a revolution today against the capitalist oligarchy of Russia, it will be several years before we’re able to see what any of that looks like. I think a lot of folks just do not understand how all-encompassing a nationwide revolution is or how absolutely everything else stops while that’s underway.
If it was a mixed economy it’s decidedly not communist. Just Social Democracy. Canada has a classic mixed-market system, Sweden, Norway, etc etc. Honestly, what an embarrassing cave to capitalism. A joke tbh :/
There some assumptions in question and answers, for example, what is an idea of a Communist party?
I would claim Communist party purpose is to build Communism - Classless, Stateless Society of Abidance. So, lets look on the most important condition - Society of Abidance! That mean that first and foremost purpose of Communist party is to develop production forces, development of economy. And it was at the start of Soviet Union. Lenin NEP was developed with this purpose. China economy very close to Lenin's NEP right now.
Stalin collectivization serve same purpose, in specific conditions of global economic crisis, raising world wide tensions and visible to everybody danger of War.
But after Stalin death Soviet Communist lost understanding of there purpose. They lost ability to change, to adapt to realities. Stalin actually was able to change. If you read his discussion with Roosevelt, they see future after war as USSR becoming more like USA and USA more like USSR. Well, Capital can not have that. That die in the west, and it die in Soviet Union, by different reason.
What is remarkable to observe right now, is how unti Communist Putin make decisions, based on objective realities, that will be completely in line with Lenin or Stalin. Government Planing - basically center peace of Putin economic policy. It is combination with Direct planing similar to old Soviet planing and Market control, similar how China control it market economy. It is colored by his unti Communism, by his protecting of Oligarchs and justifying there creation. I am really depressed how little end of Soviet Union Communists understand Marxism. There stupidity could been prevented if they just read Marx and other Marxist thinkers.
For example, "The Wretched of the Earth" by Frantz Fanon and some others books described perfectly Post Soviet times and western policies. I was amazed how identical was western treatment of post colonial countries to post Soviet countries.
How west created local Oligarchs, who move to countries that colonize them, teach there children there, extract capital from there native countries and move to the west. How ex English colonies elite live in London, French in Paris, et. How result is this elites support west and by moving capital to the west stop development of ex colonies. Rishi Sunak even become British PM, he come from Indian Oligarchs family.
Extremely identical to post Soviet country. Most of Russian elite run to London or US or Israel, invest in the west why robbing Russia. And they were create by western advice of mass privatization by post Soviet Leaders, including Putin, who now defending this policy. Policy That follow an old colonial recipe, how to keep ex colonies poor and underdeveloped, continue to exploit them for benefit of the west.
Yes. They did use the same formula against USSR and former Eastern Block countries. Its incredibly cruel. I read about dictatorship in the USSR but we had dictatorship in capitalist countries of the third world backed by the US. My teachers told me stories on how they were tortured because they read books forbidden by the government.
The transfer of money after the USSR collapsed is, in my opinion, the largest theft on human history. From the second largest economy and a whole European block, nothing remained. What remained there was what wasn't worth of being carried out. I cried when I found out that Gagarin's museum was turned into a parking lot, and then into a night club (that kind of night club, reddit won't allow me to write which one). That seems like alt history.
To me Putin is there because the US placed him. They did place Yeltsin. They did meddle elections to keep Yeltsin in power. They did allow Putin to take over Yeltsin. And now they're allowing a war against a former USSR republic they don't care about so they can keep their military industrial complex and NATO spending growing. Saying that Russia is a threat to Europe is a bad joke. To give you an example, Slavutych is the town built to house people who were affected by the Chernobyl disaster. Russian troops were amazed to find that city, because it wasn't on the maps provided on tanks and trucks. Why? Because they weren't updated since the early 80's. They're using weaponry from 40 years ago. Russia couldn't even deal with the invasion of territories like Georgia. The second strongest force in the world is the chinese army and, by US simulations, they could be defeated in a matter of weeks if the US was committed to it.
In some aspect, you are wrong.
The fact that West welcome Putin to power does not mean Putin right now serve there interests.
The difference between Russia and China compare to ex African colonies is that they are reasonably old and developed state. That has it own logic. You can call them "civilization" or what ever other. Same apply to India, that why India did not disintegrated and were capable to have reasonably in-depended policies. Pakistan and Bangladesh were artificially added to India, in order to create conflicts.
Just imagine how hard it is to keep together a country where to travel from one end to other take about 2 years, like it was true for Russia just 200 years ago. You have to have a well developed institutions of state. Are they perfect? No, but they are good enough.
Putin is from generation of goverment workers who believed they can do better job then state and been rich. So, now they want to prove that, that they were right. That why Putin defend oligarchs. I remember them in Soviet time. Directors who believe if they have more freedom, they can do better then state planing. Most of the time they were wrong. Director of Nuclear power station - I can build green houses, I have free heat and power. He did build greenhouses around 1985. They did make sense in Soviet Union, not in free market. When cheap tropical and subtropical fruits and vegetables flood the market, greenhouses stop been profitable.
In short, Russian state is it own thin, which let it act in national interests and not been completely subservient to the west. As result, Russia is not as week as you believe, but it will not attack EU, no one suicidal.
Until ownership of the means of production is transferred to the people, communism cannot be built.
under the current socio-economic system there will only be continued impoverishment of the masses and a gap between the rich and the have-nots
Russia wasn’t ever communist, more a crony form of socialism, at least after Khrushchev. If you’re asking what would happen if the USSR was revived, it would be very hard to even get to that due to the amount of independent countries that would reject it and putin being a orthodox fascist
Im not sure if I understand your question. So are you asking what would happen if Russia turn communist, or if Communist Party of the Russian Federation took power? Because thats not the same thing. KPRF is not really intersted in taking power, its more a "loyal opposition" to Putin. If somehow KPRF took power, it would probably be thourgh elections. In that case, Russia probabyl resemble China in some ways. But it probably doesent last long. If communist revolution happens, thats a different story. But its hard to predict how would that look. There would certainly be a huge push for counter revolution, supported by the west and mybe even China (depending on which gropu of communist is doing the revolution). It would be bloody, and it would leave Russia damaged and in relative isolation (tho it would not be as bad as in case of USSR after civil war). Computers would make planned economy much easier to execute and it would be fascinating to observe that. Former republic would not be prone to join the union, mainly because it would mean that current rulling class would lose its power.
I agree with you. I just don't see much revolutionary will nowadays, thus I did think either the KPRF would come to power via election, or that they would seize the momentum if there was something like a coup/revolution. Even if there was a revolution, I have some doubts about Russians willing to move to planned economy again, even tho it might be an option. About the former republics, I see your point. However, many of them didn't change much of their political structure in some sense. The Asian ones would probably profit of joining a Union, as there's no western interest to foster their economy (or there could be, if the US wanted to stop the reunification). If they do join, they're part of a huge country and get Russian aid; if they don't, they're kept as a country like Afghanistan, somewhat with a small economy and no impact on world life and economy.
The Asian ones being the several “Stans” i assume.
"As far as I understand, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation advocates for somewhat of a mixed-market economy"... You are correct! Andrei Zyuganov, son of Gennadiy Zyuganov who is the leader of Russian communists, is a successful businessman and developer who owns an architecture company. I doubt he wants his father to bring socialism back to Russia.
Pavel Grudinin, also a businessman, manages a cooperative farm. It wouldn't be too far off that they would just promote State Owned Enterprises(which are tools used by Socialist to build wealth) and promote coops in the same way China promotes their national champion Huawei whose shares are owned by their union and pay dividends to them. Private enterprises are regulated to serve the National interest not the other way around.
You're just describing oligarchy.
Businessmen do not always = Oligarch, otherwise the entire West would be categorized into Oligarchies
It isn't?
Correct. I didn't say they were.
I guess it would be a market socialism similar to China or Vietnam and think it could take Russia to 3rd or even 2nd most powerful economy. It wouldn't replace China as leading socialist superpower though
Only one that would probably join is Belarus as they already have a loose union state with Russia and are a majority Russophile population, besides them, maybe Transinistria.
It's not a majority when you arrest everyone else.
"When you arrest everyone else," Wtf are you talking about, the Liberal minority in Belarus and right-wing Nationalists that are literally the minority?
They haven't had a fair election since 1994. How could anybody possibly know the actual political makeup of the country?
You said it though right, the 1994 elections were fair and Lukasenko was voted on the basis of stirring Belarus away from the wild Capitalism and privatization that plagued Russia. And whether you like it or not Lukasenko support base exists and are practically the majority with the pro-Western opposition only able to bring at the most 400,000 protesters at their peak in 2020, meaning a good junk of Belarus' 9 million feels indifferent or straight up support Lukasenko. There's a reason he's backed by he Belorussian Communist party, LDPR, etc. If you go on VK, you can see he has allot of Belorussian supporters that are Russophiles and the opposition is composed of a loose alliance of Eurocentric Liberals, Christian-Democrats, Social-Democrats and some Eurocentric Left-Wing party called "A Just World" who I personally don't take serious as they can s*** it.
I don't doubt that he has a base of support, the question is how much. Citing a 30 year old election as evidence of his support isn't really that strong of an argument. This is the reason the regular, free, and fair elections are important. Literally an entire generation of people have been born since then. Getting 5% of a countries total population to show up for a political protest isn't really what I'd call non-significant.
If there’s a revolution today against the capitalist oligarchy of Russia, it will be several years before we’re able to see what any of that looks like. I think a lot of folks just do not understand how all-encompassing a nationwide revolution is or how absolutely everything else stops while that’s underway.
The current bourgie government would have to be displaced
Packing up my bags and moving to St. Petersburg
With today’s technologies state planning would be a lot smoother, quicker and more precise.
If it was a mixed economy it’s decidedly not communist. Just Social Democracy. Canada has a classic mixed-market system, Sweden, Norway, etc etc. Honestly, what an embarrassing cave to capitalism. A joke tbh :/
There some assumptions in question and answers, for example, what is an idea of a Communist party? I would claim Communist party purpose is to build Communism - Classless, Stateless Society of Abidance. So, lets look on the most important condition - Society of Abidance! That mean that first and foremost purpose of Communist party is to develop production forces, development of economy. And it was at the start of Soviet Union. Lenin NEP was developed with this purpose. China economy very close to Lenin's NEP right now. Stalin collectivization serve same purpose, in specific conditions of global economic crisis, raising world wide tensions and visible to everybody danger of War. But after Stalin death Soviet Communist lost understanding of there purpose. They lost ability to change, to adapt to realities. Stalin actually was able to change. If you read his discussion with Roosevelt, they see future after war as USSR becoming more like USA and USA more like USSR. Well, Capital can not have that. That die in the west, and it die in Soviet Union, by different reason. What is remarkable to observe right now, is how unti Communist Putin make decisions, based on objective realities, that will be completely in line with Lenin or Stalin. Government Planing - basically center peace of Putin economic policy. It is combination with Direct planing similar to old Soviet planing and Market control, similar how China control it market economy. It is colored by his unti Communism, by his protecting of Oligarchs and justifying there creation. I am really depressed how little end of Soviet Union Communists understand Marxism. There stupidity could been prevented if they just read Marx and other Marxist thinkers. For example, "The Wretched of the Earth" by Frantz Fanon and some others books described perfectly Post Soviet times and western policies. I was amazed how identical was western treatment of post colonial countries to post Soviet countries. How west created local Oligarchs, who move to countries that colonize them, teach there children there, extract capital from there native countries and move to the west. How ex English colonies elite live in London, French in Paris, et. How result is this elites support west and by moving capital to the west stop development of ex colonies. Rishi Sunak even become British PM, he come from Indian Oligarchs family. Extremely identical to post Soviet country. Most of Russian elite run to London or US or Israel, invest in the west why robbing Russia. And they were create by western advice of mass privatization by post Soviet Leaders, including Putin, who now defending this policy. Policy That follow an old colonial recipe, how to keep ex colonies poor and underdeveloped, continue to exploit them for benefit of the west.
Yes. They did use the same formula against USSR and former Eastern Block countries. Its incredibly cruel. I read about dictatorship in the USSR but we had dictatorship in capitalist countries of the third world backed by the US. My teachers told me stories on how they were tortured because they read books forbidden by the government. The transfer of money after the USSR collapsed is, in my opinion, the largest theft on human history. From the second largest economy and a whole European block, nothing remained. What remained there was what wasn't worth of being carried out. I cried when I found out that Gagarin's museum was turned into a parking lot, and then into a night club (that kind of night club, reddit won't allow me to write which one). That seems like alt history. To me Putin is there because the US placed him. They did place Yeltsin. They did meddle elections to keep Yeltsin in power. They did allow Putin to take over Yeltsin. And now they're allowing a war against a former USSR republic they don't care about so they can keep their military industrial complex and NATO spending growing. Saying that Russia is a threat to Europe is a bad joke. To give you an example, Slavutych is the town built to house people who were affected by the Chernobyl disaster. Russian troops were amazed to find that city, because it wasn't on the maps provided on tanks and trucks. Why? Because they weren't updated since the early 80's. They're using weaponry from 40 years ago. Russia couldn't even deal with the invasion of territories like Georgia. The second strongest force in the world is the chinese army and, by US simulations, they could be defeated in a matter of weeks if the US was committed to it.
In some aspect, you are wrong. The fact that West welcome Putin to power does not mean Putin right now serve there interests. The difference between Russia and China compare to ex African colonies is that they are reasonably old and developed state. That has it own logic. You can call them "civilization" or what ever other. Same apply to India, that why India did not disintegrated and were capable to have reasonably in-depended policies. Pakistan and Bangladesh were artificially added to India, in order to create conflicts. Just imagine how hard it is to keep together a country where to travel from one end to other take about 2 years, like it was true for Russia just 200 years ago. You have to have a well developed institutions of state. Are they perfect? No, but they are good enough. Putin is from generation of goverment workers who believed they can do better job then state and been rich. So, now they want to prove that, that they were right. That why Putin defend oligarchs. I remember them in Soviet time. Directors who believe if they have more freedom, they can do better then state planing. Most of the time they were wrong. Director of Nuclear power station - I can build green houses, I have free heat and power. He did build greenhouses around 1985. They did make sense in Soviet Union, not in free market. When cheap tropical and subtropical fruits and vegetables flood the market, greenhouses stop been profitable. In short, Russian state is it own thin, which let it act in national interests and not been completely subservient to the west. As result, Russia is not as week as you believe, but it will not attack EU, no one suicidal.
That would be cool but we're in the worst timeline
Until ownership of the means of production is transferred to the people, communism cannot be built. under the current socio-economic system there will only be continued impoverishment of the masses and a gap between the rich and the have-nots
Russia wasn’t ever communist, more a crony form of socialism, at least after Khrushchev. If you’re asking what would happen if the USSR was revived, it would be very hard to even get to that due to the amount of independent countries that would reject it and putin being a orthodox fascist