This isn't about assigning blame, not for me. Yes, they did get a shit deal. Hobbled at first by the sort of royalty/nobility like out of some fucked up fairy tale right until and even into the 20th century, then almost nonstop warfare. For all the lack of fighting, even the cold war was nearly as bad.

Though I am not generally sympathetic to communism, I wince to think what might have happen if they had no developed nuclear weapons. But that cost dearly.

They had a shit hand.

If USSR could’ve devoted all the effort that was put into keeping up with the west militarily into domestic development, amazing things could’ve been achieved.

Possibly. Or they could have squandered it. Even if a person accepts that communism and marxism is a legitimate political ideology and in the right circumstances can flourish, it can also fail... and fail without any deliberate sabotage or harsh misfortune.

The funny thought is that, had they succeeded peacefully, that might have been most threatening of all.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago

Thing is that even with all the external pressures, USSR managed to provide a good standard of living for the the people. Personally, I remember my time growing up in USSR very fondly and I think I had a far better childhood than most kids growing up today. Everybody had housing, food, healthcare and education. Everyone had a job guarantee without any grind and with over 20 days vacation. Nobody worried about losing their job and ending or on the street or not being able to retire in dignity. Life wasn't opulent, but it wasn't bad either, and after 30 years of capitalism it got significantly worse for the vast majority of the population in former USSR republics.

I think that the threat of a good example is precisely why capitalist nations are so hostile to any socialist experiments. Not a single socialist country has ever been allowed to develop free from threat of invasion, coups, or economic warfare.