Whats that got to do with anything? Are you attempting to claim the USSR invented socialism? I sure hope not.
Not my point. My point is that the specific symbol of the H&S was created by those that formed the USSR as a symbol of the USSR. Orgs adopting it are identifying themselves as Marxist-Leninist, the state ideology of the USSR.
Yeah, you’ve got yourself mixed up with the symbolism here. I understand why you don’t want to venture away from it but we are going to have too.
Its a perfectly good comparison for showing why simply declaring a country to be something is, at best, problematic. I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make but I’m sure you made it well enough for whatever argument it would actually fit in.
The Hammer and Sickle did not predate the Soviet System. It was not some vaguely Socialist symbol, but one created by and for the USSR. The Hammer and Sickle is not a declaration that the USSR is Socialist, the Hammer and Sickle itself is a declaration of the USSR itself.
The point I am driving home here is that various anti-USSR Socialist orgs exist, and use symbols like The Fist and Rose or the Anarchist symbols of the Black Cat or Circle A. Deliberately choosing to use the Hammer and Sickle identifies Marxism-Leninism and support for the general ideology of the USSR, because alternative symbols exist and are used by non-Marxist Socialists.
Let’s make it real simple, is the peoples democratic republic of Korea a democracy?
It doesn’t matter, I understand that your point is that what States label themselves as doesn’t determine what they are. I agree with you on that concept, the Nazis for example were fascists, not Socialists in any capacity. However, the Hammer and Sickle was not some generalized symbol for Marxism adopted by the USSR as well as other Socialist groups, it was created by and for the USSR, so it never had a period where it could be disassociated with the USSR.
Put another way, if someone adopted the Stars and Stripes as a symbol of freedom, you would not be able to untie that from support for the system of the United States.
The simple fact of the matter is that the overwhelming majority of Marxists globally do support the general idealized system of the USSR, at the very least, ie Soviet Democracy, Central Planning, Democratic Centralism, and so forth, which is why they take on the mantle of the USSR through the Hammer and Sickle, even if they decide to denounce actions taken by the Soviets, or believe it to have failed to actualize its ideals.
Again, I get why you want to stay on the symbol but its a very minor point here. The nazis weren’t Hindus, yet they used the swastika.
Thats great and all but the conversation is about how the USSR was a fascist country which it was. Them declaring to mot be fascist doesn’t change that, neither does their choice of symbolism or trim.
Again, I get why you want to stay on the symbol but its a very minor point here. The nazis weren’t Hindus, yet they used the swastika.
The Nazis did not create the Swastika, they adopted the Swastika. The Bolsheviks created the Hammer & Sickle. The Swastika has centuries of usage outside the context of the Nazis, the Hammer & Sickle has never existed without the context of its creation by the Bolsheviks.
Thats great and all but the conversation is about how the USSR was a fascist country which it was. Them declaring to mot be fascist doesn’t change that, neither does their choice of symbolism or trim.
The USSR was not fascist, they were Marxist-Leninist. Measuring the USSR against the 14 points listed by Umberto Eco in Ur-Fascism, the USSR only fulfills 2 or 3 points (points 4 and 13, possible 9), while the Nazis covered all 14, as did fascist Italy, Israel currently fulfills no less than 9 of these points, while the US fulfills 13 of them (with respect to the GOP and its relative influence). Something can be “bad” without being fascist, fascism is not a buzzword, but a reaction to declining Capitalism as a form of Class-Collaborationism between the Bourgeoisie and Petite Bourgeoisie against the Proletariat, to “turn the clock back” to when Capitalism was not as decayed. The USSR fulfilled none of those, it was State Socialist along Marxist-Leninist lines.
Even still, this conversation is about symbols, and the stances of those who adopt them. There are no groups that adopt the Hammer & Sickle without intending on calling back to Marxism-Leninism. The Hammer and Sickle was founded as a symbol of the USSR, it was not a pre-existing symbol the USSR latched onto. There are no contexts the Hammer and Sickle exists in that are not intended on drawing those associations.
Not my point. My point is that the specific symbol of the H&S was created by those that formed the USSR as a symbol of the USSR. Orgs adopting it are identifying themselves as Marxist-Leninist, the state ideology of the USSR.
The Hammer and Sickle did not predate the Soviet System. It was not some vaguely Socialist symbol, but one created by and for the USSR. The Hammer and Sickle is not a declaration that the USSR is Socialist, the Hammer and Sickle itself is a declaration of the USSR itself.
The point I am driving home here is that various anti-USSR Socialist orgs exist, and use symbols like The Fist and Rose or the Anarchist symbols of the Black Cat or Circle A. Deliberately choosing to use the Hammer and Sickle identifies Marxism-Leninism and support for the general ideology of the USSR, because alternative symbols exist and are used by non-Marxist Socialists.
It doesn’t matter, I understand that your point is that what States label themselves as doesn’t determine what they are. I agree with you on that concept, the Nazis for example were fascists, not Socialists in any capacity. However, the Hammer and Sickle was not some generalized symbol for Marxism adopted by the USSR as well as other Socialist groups, it was created by and for the USSR, so it never had a period where it could be disassociated with the USSR.
Put another way, if someone adopted the Stars and Stripes as a symbol of freedom, you would not be able to untie that from support for the system of the United States.
The simple fact of the matter is that the overwhelming majority of Marxists globally do support the general idealized system of the USSR, at the very least, ie Soviet Democracy, Central Planning, Democratic Centralism, and so forth, which is why they take on the mantle of the USSR through the Hammer and Sickle, even if they decide to denounce actions taken by the Soviets, or believe it to have failed to actualize its ideals.
Again, I get why you want to stay on the symbol but its a very minor point here. The nazis weren’t Hindus, yet they used the swastika.
Thats great and all but the conversation is about how the USSR was a fascist country which it was. Them declaring to mot be fascist doesn’t change that, neither does their choice of symbolism or trim.
The Nazis did not create the Swastika, they adopted the Swastika. The Bolsheviks created the Hammer & Sickle. The Swastika has centuries of usage outside the context of the Nazis, the Hammer & Sickle has never existed without the context of its creation by the Bolsheviks.
The USSR was not fascist, they were Marxist-Leninist. Measuring the USSR against the 14 points listed by Umberto Eco in Ur-Fascism, the USSR only fulfills 2 or 3 points (points 4 and 13, possible 9), while the Nazis covered all 14, as did fascist Italy, Israel currently fulfills no less than 9 of these points, while the US fulfills 13 of them (with respect to the GOP and its relative influence). Something can be “bad” without being fascist, fascism is not a buzzword, but a reaction to declining Capitalism as a form of Class-Collaborationism between the Bourgeoisie and Petite Bourgeoisie against the Proletariat, to “turn the clock back” to when Capitalism was not as decayed. The USSR fulfilled none of those, it was State Socialist along Marxist-Leninist lines.
Even still, this conversation is about symbols, and the stances of those who adopt them. There are no groups that adopt the Hammer & Sickle without intending on calling back to Marxism-Leninism. The Hammer and Sickle was founded as a symbol of the USSR, it was not a pre-existing symbol the USSR latched onto. There are no contexts the Hammer and Sickle exists in that are not intended on drawing those associations.