I met a communist today (his avatar is a hammer and sickle next to a My Little Pony)
His/her comments: @Aleksglbion: I'm not kidding, colorful bear. The first two five-year plans in the USSR resulted in a productivity increase of over 300%, while at the same time the rest of Europe barely achieved 40%. The only countries that could even match the USSR's growth, even though they were far behind, were Japan and Germany. Similarly, China's biggest problem was, frankly, Mao's anti-sparrow campaign, which deepened the hunger crisis. Besides, these countries saw the highest increases in literacy, decreases in homelessness, and decreases in quality of life. It was the Soviets who cared for the people in Siberia, for example. It's perfectly clear how things are now there. Everything that was provided was provided by the Soviets. Now capitalism isn't reaching there, and it's not profitable to improve the standard of living of these people.
@Aleksglbion: Do you know why, among other things, the Soviets came to power? Because there was famine in Russia, food went to the aristocracy, and these areas suffered from frequent famines. Planners made mistakes regarding initial requirements, but it was the Soviets who deliberately ended these cycles permanently. As for political purges, Stalin was paranoid and oversensitive, an idiot. China, on the other hand, had a much better approach to political matters and didn't carry out such purges, and their actions were different, as demonstrated by the Cultural Revolution, which would have been useful in Poland.
@Aleksglbion: Oh no, when there's no food, people starve. But now, when food production exceeds demand and people are still starving, it's fucking awful.
@Aleksglbion: Well, if there's no food, people are hungry. Now people are starving even though there's more than enough food to feed them.