How We Got Cold War Politics Backwards

Big thanks to our pals over at Ridge Wallet for sponsoring today's video. Follow our link ridge.com/mrz to get up to 30% off through December 20th and enter free for a chance to win a Ridge bundle worth $4,000.
Americans remember the Cold War as a struggle of America against Russia, Capitalism against Communism, Christianity against Godlessness, Right-Wing against Left-Wing, but is all of that right? Did we get the Cold War backwards, and was the Soviet Union the Conservative Right-Wing country while the United States was the Liberal Left-Wing country? Looking especially at politics in America today versus the politics of Russia and other post-Soviet countries, it make you wonder if some framings of the Cold War got mixed up. The history of the United States is not the history of a remarkably conservative or right-wing country in the traditional sense, in many ways the politics of the United States both among Republicans and Democrats is rooted in old liberal and anti-authority values, while the values of the Soviet Union were heavily influenced by the values of Imperial Russia, Communist order, and Soviet authority.
🕓New videos every weekend.
🪶Support Us On Patreon: / membership
🎖️Become A Channel Member:
/ @monsieurdean
👕 Merchandise: us-of-z-shop.c...
📘 Our Flags: / 100086678611994
✴️ Fan Reddit: / mrz_official
#politics #history #russia

[@MonsieurDean]

Big thanks to our pals over at Ridge Wallet for sponsoring today's video. Follow our link ridge.com/mrz to get up to 30% off through December 20th and enter free for a chance to win a Ridge bundle worth $4,000.

[@diegoyanesholtz212]

Just see how North Korean society is. North Korea is the old school communist country that I would rank number one as being the most like the Soviet. South Korean men thinks North Korean refugee are more traditional and would rather marry them to be more socially conservative. North Korea is a country that would be socially rightwing by American or western standards even though they are definitely economically leftist and communist.

[@GermanConquistador08]

The Soviet Union had abortion, the US had anti-addiction and anti-smoking campaigns, the USSR supported and made Anti-colonialism a major part of it's foreign policy, the US funded Right-wing death Squads in Africa and Latin America, the USSR fiercely repressed Non-Russian Orthodoxy for the sake of control and not out of some ideals of religiosity. It's really naive to take Soviet propaganda at it's word like this, that it viewed the US as decedent rather than how they were really seen; as "meddling"; similarly to how Russia sees the US today. They were viewed similarly to how the Japanese viewed the West prior to the end of it's isolation - As foreign barbarians who had no right to be there and (often therefore rather than objectively) had poor mannerisms and culture. This was largely a Czarist inheritance, as Russia and the US had developed poor relations under Theodore Roosevelt. Seeing the promotion of women in the USSR and the incorporation of its Asiatic populations, which can still be seen in the Higher ranks of the Russian military today - even it's defense minister; it's also a little underobservant to call the USSR "Not a radical Egalitarian State" - another note would perhaps be the Ukrainian Premier in Khrushchev (the equivalent of perhaps a Hispanic President of the US during the Cold War, something unthinkable Egalitarian). It's also just historically stereotypical, but not necessarily true, that Old Russian culture was in any way more "traditional" than any other pre-industrial society. Modernizing Russia had the Bolsheviks after all, had widespread female participation in urban politics, democratic aspirations and a village culture of almost Libertarian self-reliance similar to American frontier culture. There was nothing traditional about Moscow or a Siberian village in the late Czarist period - except that there was less Avant-garde in the former (it would come) and less technology in the later. The point about economics is fair, as well as the point about the justifications for opposition between the US and USSR changing over time. But your idea that Soviet citizens were somehow "more conservative" than Cold War Americans is just laughably, and verifiably, untrue. Soviet citizens were programmed by the State in ideals of free love, women's rights, anti-colonialism and a lot of other leftist tropes that would be widely ridiculed outliers in the Hippie movements of the West and not by State indoctrination as we see today. Racism against Asiatics or between ethnicities of the Soviet Union for example is where the WORD AND CONCEPT of Racism actually comes from, courtesy of Leon Trotsky. Anti-Racism was a glue between the ethnicities of the USSR and a justification in keeping them all under the same State. Criticism of Russians lording over your Asiatic village for example could be denounced as "Racism". It was a tool of control - no different than how it was used today. This video is largely coming from a perspective that never lived through a time in America where these things weren't common, and few of us realize that this experience WAS the experience of the average Communist - and that failure of realization exists largely because of the way that Russia portrays itself today and is trying to rewrite the history books in it's favor. But the record is clear: They created the strains of Far-Leftism that we deal with today, even if they don't suffer from some of it's most ridiculous aspects today. Ultimately, this video is just ultimately, glaringly and frankly embarrassingly wrong. It's a Right-wing apology of the Soviet-Union and that's ridiculous.

[@newwaveinfantry8362]

Prediction for the video: You're gonna conflate authoritarianism and social conservatism with "right-wing" politics and you're gonna conflate liberalism with "left-wing" politics.

[@irispaiva]

A small correction, the Soviet Union was indeed liberal to our standards, but only around Lenin's rule, Stalin undid many of his reforms. Oddly enough, Mao's commies were the same before he took over the mainland, guess ideology couldn't fully wash over the culture

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

Some good points, especially in the ending summary, but the initial framing of this overall point almost gave me a headache in annoyance. The Soviet Union was not conservative in any American sense. And I don't mean small c conservative as it's taught in liberal education, meaning simply to conserve the current society. I mean the lost original sense of capital C Conservatism. Attempting to figure out how to continue society and civilization with the perspective of an obnapuntant power to look to outside of man. The Conservative that views ideas though their alignment with higher Natural Laws and religious derived social values. A new and improved idea can be adopted if it adheres to complimenting or amplifying the core higher values in society outside of man's ultimate ability to properly alter, as if he was more than a man. There is no stagnation. True in line progress, not degenerative decay. The Soviet Union's ideology made mankind their own "god" who could and should reorder society and eventually individuals as a whole to eventually bring about the greater utopian society, new individuals, and essentially new plain of existence. The Soviet Union was not Conservative in how it uprooted families, forced them to live with other families if need be, had an unprecedented amount of oversight on how children were forced to be raised and how people lived from cradle to grave, propagated that an atheistic ideology should be what every individual owes their utmost allegiance to, and the Party and the State that pushed forward its tenants, and so on. Every Conservative virtue was explicitly under the jurisdiction of the revolutionary state in so far as it was useful at any given moment for long-term building of conformity and securing of the whole. Marxism in the Soviet Union indeed put the greater good of society and especially the Revolution above the individual in the name of one day reaching the Communist Utopia, where all individuals would be truly and fully liberated. Where such virtues were drawn from behind the atheistic ideology were simply from previous Is pervancive Christian created assumptions about the "brotherhoodof mankind." Outside of repressed Orthodox Church influence, with actual higher moral connection assertions to draw upon, it was morally empty. With that, any seemingly Conservative values enforced by the State also amplified previous instinctual Russian mentalities of suspicion. By the end of the Soviet Union not only had any fervent and genuine belief in the ideology turned to pessimism, the overall society was not exhibiting Conservative trades due to attempting to achieve higher moral virtue in life but simply because they were nervous of others around them.Thinking of how actions could be perceived. How the state would possibly intervene. People conformed because they didn't feel secure and couldn't trust enough to do otherwise. In short: Not for its higher virtues put into practice. The Soviet Union became a morally bankrupt and nihilistic society. This is all seen today in the aftermath of what the Soviet Union left behind. Outside of some rural communities where families managed to remain close for generations, Russia is only an on paper religious society, filled with extremely low trust of others, drugs, alcoholism, prostitution, high suicide rates, and depression. Often, Higher Faith in anything has simply reverted back to looking to the big state or Leader, and the idea of the eternal Russia itself they are apart of as something greater beyond themselves. On Reagan, I do largely agree that after the ever-increasing chaos, disillusion, and then nialism of the 60s and 70s, he brought back a sense of clarity, moral righteousness, and seemingly more clear and simple world view. The USA represented Freedom and liberty, and the Soviets represented repression and control. Adding on top of that therefore, good versus evil. I think this was a really effective move. Not only because it fit his own ideology and brought various political factions together, but I personally credit it with bringing in a lot of the boomers, even many who had previously been Democrats. Reagan seemed to just be advocating more liberty and freedom filled individualism to the point of outcompeting Democrats in some areas. The economy with Free trade and not burdened by others on welfare for too long, as examples. Yet it also unavoidably still included social movements as well. Liberalism pushed further along, even if just focused on more in specific areas of life but still being pushed everywhere, was still, of course, self-destructive. Liberalism was originally just meant to help in determining the power and accountable relationship between the government and the people. It's a morally bankrupt self-destructive ideology on its own if ever attempted to be applied to every aspect of life without actual Higher Morality to keep it in check and on balance. Alone, it seeks ultimate individual non-constraint. Marxism is the rejection of liberalism in so far as it sees liberalism as ineffective in achieving liberalism's goal of the truly liberated individual. Marxism seeks to do away with alienation through class cooperation, to collectively bring about the utopia where individuals can truly "act" and "be free." The Higher Moral and practical observate Conservatism is supposed to be balanced by rejecting both Liberalism in and of itself alone and Marxist in total. (Obviously, thank you for reading all of this if you do.)

[@LuisGonzalez-hs5pe]

This video just proves that the Cold War was quite complex. It also doesn't help that the Soviet Union foreign policy was a mess, if you consider the fact that they supported regimes that dint follow all the tenets of their social conservatism (helping the Afghan communist against the Muslim fundamentalist).

[@meanwhilepalmer7993]

If by complex you mean "not determined by preconceived formal notions of ideology" then you'll find that's true of all history

[@abrahamgn3614]

​@@meanwhilepalmer7993bro has no idea that the Cold War wasn't actually Communism & Totalitarianism vs. Capitalism & Democracy 💀 (it was just a nonideologcial geopolitical struggle for global influence, one couldn't exert their world order with the other in the way)

[@davidcervantes9336]

The US has also supported regimes that are opposite to its core values, like absolute monarchies and fascistic dictatorships. It’s all about the 💵.

[@Snp2024]

Influential is all that matter USA and china literally had good relationship just to fuck up Soviets even though china was communist and Soviets support arab nationalist and islamic nations even though some nation like iran literally purged commies . People will bend their values for geopolitical gains

[@chickenfishhybrid44]

​@davidcervantes9336 people talk about that 24/7 though. Don't hear as much about the Soviet angle

[@awe-fullanimations4737]

Shows how arbitrary and obsessively categorical the political spectrum is.

[@HappyGuy-cn9po]

The spectrum is so innacurate.

[@Aarlaeoss]

Its only remotely useful in the relative. But trying to extrapolate a concrete idea about what is absolute "left" and absolute "right" is so meaningless. Unfortunate that talk like this will just chuck you into the far opposite category relative to the eyes of whoever you are talking to

[@EliW95]

absolutely. i wish more people realized this simple obvious truth

[@EliW95]

@@HappyGuy-cn9po in some some sense, 'conservatives' who support a government strictly limited to a rigid constitutional role could be considered 'leftist' because the origin of left and right as a concept dates back to the french assembly after the french revolution where the 'left' were the ones that supported a constitutional republic and the 'right' supported keeping the monarchy

[@EliW95]

@@Aarlaeoss it is if you are kleptocrats trying to consolidate more and more authoritarian control, you take the playbook from Julius Caesar and artificially divide large segments of the population and p8t them against each other over meaningless bullshit

[@familygash7500]

Honestly, I'd say that as The Cold War progressed it became less about ideology and more about influence. Seeing how The Soviets began supporting Non-communist countries like Egypt and Libya, whilst The Americans began supporting Communist countries like China and Cambodia (under the genocidal Khmer Rouge).

[@Web720]

So the US later on became less anti-commie but more anti-Soviet? I guess vice-versa for the Soviets.

[@googane7755]

It's a great power game first and foremost, ideology came second.

[@charlesbeal8066]

I always found it quite interesting and a subversion of expectations that in the US supported Israel, which was a rather left-wing nation through most of the Cold War. At the same time the USSR supported nations like Egypt, Syria and Jordan which could be considered rather right-wing when they were ruled by their respective autocrats of the time

[@johnwinthrop2702]

Really solid point!!

[@mortuuslupus666]

the usa never support the Khmer Rouge that just a lie

[@gabrielv5285]

As a conservative from Moldova (former USSR) I do not fully agree with the video. Firstly, USSR and the West started as socially progressive (revolutionary even) and socially conservative, respectively. During Lenin's times, the Soviets wanted to go as far as to abolish the family and make the government the sole parent of the Soviet children. Sexual liberation was also promoted, because the Soviets wanted the people to be loyal only to the Communist Party, and not to their families. Somehow in the following decades the USSR and other Eastern European (socialist) countries got less progressive and the West became very socially liberal. I myself cannot explain how this happened, probably our authentic national values which survived in the minds and hearts of the people resurged. Still, it is wrong to call the late USSR socially conservative. Even then you could have been persecuted for going to the church. It is just that the Soviets became less progressive. Or another way to view this would be to see the Soviets as communitarian/collectivistic progressives in opposition to the individualistic progressivism of the Western left-liberals who are very much focused on individual liberty (individual liberty for the "oppressed" groups of course, they are quite authoritarian with conservatives). Or you can see the Soviets and other Eastern European communists as socially authoritarian instead of socially conservative - Nicolae Ceaușescu - the Romanian communist dictator outlawed abortion not because of moral religious reasons, but because the country needed more people. Still, I am personally glad that the Soviet Union fell. It definitely was not a conservative country (even though it may be perceived as conservative compared to today's Western left-liberals)

[@vulpes_channel]

I think one important role was the preparation of war, which under this pressure the Soviet Union started to discourage abortion to have more kids. The war devasted the nation and forced the Party to conciliate with conservative Russian values to ensure stablity and unity. The social imperialism later on also discourage individual liberalism as it would challenge the party authority

[@samurguy9906]

What’s missing from Z’s video is that communists use social fault lines to fracture a country, ensuring chaos that they can take control over. Instability is the goal before the revolution. After the revolution, they’re now in charge, and destabilizing activists become liabilities. Then they purge the useful idiots and clamp down hard on anything that could threaten unity.

[@gabrielv5285]

⁠@@vulpes_channelYes, you are right. WW2 and the Cold War had a role as well. This also proves my point. The Soviets did not believe in conservative values, they addopted some conservative values out of pragmatism. I think extremely socially progressive/liberal societies can exist long-term only in peaceful/prosperous times - like today’s West (and although today’s West has its own economic problems, Western people have very comfortable lives compared to what most people experienced throughout history). That’s not to say that in prosperous societies there won’t be socially centrist or socially conservative people.

[@vulpes_channel]

@@gabrielv5285 Yes, that's often the case proven many time. In greece's best period when they had peace and prosperity, Athen's art and culture was valued. But when they were under threat, Spartan values were emphasized. Basically in properous society people find no pressure of confrontation and thus allowed idealism to be discussed.

[@rocknmetaldisciples]

Based on my own research of the history of the USSR I would argue that Joseph Stalin changed a lot and made it a more socially conservative place that Monsieur Z is describing it to be. Yes I have read and watched videos suggesting the same about the first years of the USSR being that way under Lenin, but once Lenin died and Stalin came to power and he changed a lot including implementing a much more socially conservative view point. Stalin's rule had a big impact on the USSR. Those things like sexual liberation that you mentioned were thrown out by Stalin and his supporters. Stalin got rid of a lot of what you mentioned that Lenin and his supporters did. Even before World War 2 happens Stalin was changing the USSR to being a much more socially conservative place compared to Lenin. I would also argue that social conservatism isn't inherently religious either. I do not see them as being equal. Atheists can also hold beliefs that would usually be seen conservative leaning not just religious people. Not all atheists hold super progressive or liberal beliefs. Someone like Stalin leaned conservative and his policies compared to Lenin.

[@maxtucker7344]

Well, by the end of the Soviet Union it had become a more conservative society but this was only because of Stalin. Pre Stalin takeover the culture was much more similar to the current progressive movement. For example the Soviet system did allow for minorities to have their own quasi independent nations in the USSR, advocated for women’s liberation, and were strictly anti religion. It was really Stalin who advocated and pushed for a more conservative social society that really ended the “progressive” policies of the previous leadership. He did this both for personal opinions and mostly for rallying the people to defend the homeland during WWII and avoid mass defections. This is when they loosened oppression of religion, clamped down on minorities, pushed through Russian culture and control, and “encouraged” women to be mothers.

[@NeostormXLMAX]

Thats why hitler made a mistake attacking the soviet union, stalin was a national socialist in all but name, he even ordered massive purges of jews in commanding positions. Ernst rolm and strasser wanted to add china and the soviets to the axis instead of japan and italy WHO WAS GERMANYS ENEMY in ww1 in fact the japs brutally massacred germans in their pacific territories

[@grandmastersreaction1267]

That’s because the early Soviet Union elite and the current US elite are J-ish.

[@grandmastersreaction1267]

That’s because the early Soviet elite and the current US elite are Yiddish.

[@grandmastersreaction1267]

The early Soviet elite were (KZbin keeps deleting my comment). After 1948, Stalin became suspicious of the other Soviet elite after the creation of a particular state in the Middle East. In the 50s he expelled them and they went to the US. The grandchildren of these expelled elites now rule over the US.

[@grandmastersreaction1267]

The early Soviet elite were (KZbin keeps deleting my comment). After 1948, Stalin became suspicious of the other Soviet (comment deleted) after the creation of a particular state in the Middle East. In the 50s he expelled them and they went to the US. The grandchildren of these expelled (comment deleted) now rule over the US.

[@angliccivilization1346]

This just proves the point that a 'political spectrum' is a flawed and shallow model. to be used for political labeling.

[@AlabamianCrusader1776]

What is your take on the political compass? I take you view it as a more accurate depiction of politics.

[@proeramoka9168]

@@AlabamianCrusader1776even worse it was made by a lolbert

[@latenightorange4439]

@@AlabamianCrusader1776trying to map all ideologies on to a two dimensional plane and calling them left and right is as shallow as it gets. The political compass only exists to get people who know nothing about politics to pick a “side”

[@hurinthalion5984]

@@AlabamianCrusader1776 The political compass compass is really only a tool made by libertarians to explain libertarians. I mean calling everyone who isn't libertarian as being authoritarian is already incredibly reductionist imho. Like I said its really used so when someone is like "Oh I think liberals and conservatives both have problems because both are corrupt" and then a libertarian can jump out of the bushes and tell that person they're actually libertarian. The main online political compass also has bias in it because it uses a lot of leading questions and tends to give anyone less authoritarian than Hitler a major leftwing or libertarian slant and is almost completely useless for mapping political opinions.

[@gamervox1707]

na they where mess labels from the start for political reason like cutting down unions and doing all kinds of rightwing things for both powers.

[@BigmanDogs]

Jackson Hinkle felt a tingle through his body the second this video became public.

[@reeseman1932]

Hinkle’s gotta tinkle

[@trenaceandblackmetal5621]

Twinkle

[@AlabamianCrusader1776]

I legit thought of him watching this video

[@2010hyundaielantra]

he got demonetized for being a kremlin bot (still has extremely valid points though)

[@BigmanDogs]

@@2010hyundaielantra he's mostly on Twitter now, 2 million followers which was pretty surprising to me

[@dustint2482]

Most people just take a simplistic view of conservative versus liberal values and don't take any account into authoritarian versus libertarian views as well. The Soviet union was far more authoritarian than the United States. Even though on some social issues, they might've been more conservative they were still authoritarian in the way they carried it out.

[@DougieG7130]

Here's the main problem with that view point is that the terms we use shouldn't be authoritarian and libertarian but rather statism vs anarchy. If we were to accurately describe communist or Nazis for that matter they would be considered Conservative leftist which sounds wrong to say but it's makes sense when you consider the fact that they were socially more conservative (even though they were secular) and economically left wing. But the exact opposite of those values would be no government and complete and total freedom which is essentially the wild wild west or the radical right if you will.

[@nameless-og]

​@nicholasmcdougall7130 that's sort of correct, but in what ways exactly, we're the nazis "conservative"? That sounds like an attempt to paint current left wing rhetoric on conservatives where there is no basis for it... but back then, it's not clear to me what that would be either... if you have an example, that would be great, but this just sounds like another attempt to twist reality in a slight of hand.

[@niclasnyberg4173]

@@DougieG7130 huh? left right scale goes from anarchy to totalitarianism, from individual rights on the left to total state control on the right.

[@MJ2A]

@@niclasnyberg4173Isn’t it more like up and down (if we’re going by the political compass scale)? The left-wing isn’t exactly exclusive to authoritarianism, and the other way around to the right

[@L8Pl]

The word liberal is thrown around so much without people knowing what it means. The correct term is as we use it in ‘liberal democracy’ as opposed to authoritarianism. Democracy in any form where the general population gets the vote is liberal. Respecting and being able to cope with the fact that others will disagree with you is liberal. Human rights - liberal. Individualism - liberal. Liberty and personal freedoms - liberal. Ironically enough not many places in the world fit that description now with the way things are headed, and a lot of the the most radical left wingers, and indeed the establishment left certainly don’t fit it. That’s definitely not to say these right wing crazies are democratic either. The radicalisation and corruption were seeing on both sides now is what’s paving the way for the west to turn into this technocratic ultra-corporatist neo-gilded age nightmare that none of us actually want

[@monsieurcharcutier4490]

So I'm as wrong when I call them communist as they are when they call me a fascist? Lesson learned, thank you sir.

[@dunbass7149]

Communist and fascist are kinda different

[@Er1k.161]

​@@jakeroper1096whats you point with that argument?

[@Er1k.161]

If anyone calls you a facist you should reflect on yourself and start to grow as a person.

[@monsieurcharcutier4490]

@@dunbass7149 but what does that have to do with the point of my statement? I agree they are different. My point was, being that I'm politically right-wing I tend to refer to people and disagreements that are left-wing as communist, they tend to refer to us as fascist. I was merely pointing out that both objectively incorrect.

[@monsieurcharcutier4490]

@@Er1k.161 everyone should reflect and try to grow as a person everyday regardless of what names other people might or might not call them

[@Captain_Eagle]

4:10 you’re just blatantly lying. The USSR called the USA racist many times.

[@mandaloretheproud6622]

He could just be wrong, not necessarily lying. Also he seems to be talking about what was the general characterisation of the US by the Soviets, which doesn't mean that they never characterised them differently in any particular point.

[@CultureCrossed64]

I know this is hard to believe. But politicians and governments say things things don't believe ALL OF THE TIME

[@zacharyporter5515]

Since the lobotomy removed all knowledge of comparative politics and historical materialism from my brain, this video has really helped me relearn history, thanks!

[@averagedemocrat9546]

lobotomy?

[@pipsqeak7104]

​@@averagedemocrat9546lobot robot

[@kevinyaucheekin1319]

​@averagedemocrat9546 Via your high-end liberal art murican University. You need to go back to your old core. You know the core.😊

[@francescocarlini7613]

One could use this video to explain Dugin's Eurasian thing in a nutshell, by fleshing out how and why far-right nostalgia for Stalinism is not the contradiction it appears to be at first glance.

[@darthhodges]

That idea could also be explained by the horseshoe theory, that the extreme left and extreme right are closer to each other than either is to the middle.

[@francescocarlini7613]

@@darthhodges Not really, the horseshoe theory is descriptive, it doesn't explain why some opposites coincide and others do not.

[@redline841]

Stalin being based as usual

[@_Its_Ya_Boy]

@@redline841 We all gotta like Gorbachev

[@sirius6738]

@@darthhodges The political compass, and by extension horseshoe theory has no value outside of memes

[@user-sh3cf7kd6e]

Russia and the USSR always were leaning towards ultranationalism. Only because the USSR had leftist economics, absolutely doesn't mean it was left wing. Nothing has "shifted".

[@imperiumbritannicum4323]

So they were National Socialist?

[@gamervox1707]

Leftist economics is unions, co-ops, guilds, and induvial working together with some welfare added in. Soviet economic is public state run companies planed by the government which are a thing in the U.S as well just not as much.

[@user-sh3cf7kd6e]

@@user-xm9is5nf7p Many Americans have a different definitions of "Left" and "Right" than the rest of the world. The USSR nationality was based around certain social values. Heavily influenced by Russian ones. But they were still ultranationalists. Gorbachev, for comparison, was less so.

[@user-sh3cf7kd6e]

​@@user-xm9is5nf7p And what the heck does it even mean """"Americans are gay"""?!

[@ImperiumMagistrate]

socialism is nationalism.

[@washingtonradio]

Basically the use of terms such as fascist, marxist, nazi, etc. as epithets is done mostly by those who don't understand what those ideologies were.

[@onomatopoeia162003]

As people today still do.

[@ilyasharin1976]

I would like to thank Monsieur Z for actually speaking out what we, post-soviet citizens call 'Communism' not blue-haired Californians that don't know the definition of woman.

[@joseperez1308]

A few things to note here: 1) the USSR had one of the highest number of abortions in the entire world at the time, nearly a fifth of a generation was wiped out as a consequence. 2) These policies were not universal across the Eastern Block, East Germany for example actively promoted 3rd world immigration and race mixing; Bulgaria promoted abortion for whites but cultural autonomy and reproduction for Muslims, Turks and Gypsies 3)

[@BigmanDogs]

Much of the abortion stuff at that time had to do with thoughts related to eugenics. Fascists like Oswald Mosely were in favor of abortion too.

[@Vlain-hc5sb]

About Bulgaria, i heard that they will become a minority in their own country, is it true?.

[@ManiacMayhem7256]

Didn't Stalin ban abortion

[@joseperez1308]

@@Vlain-hc5sb if current trends continue, it is highly likely

[@joseperez1308]

@@ManiacMayhem7256 but Khrushchev reliberalised it

[@noahrice6671]

A lot of people forget that liberalism is more of a right wing thing, not left wing. The word is being misused.

[@AlabamianCrusader1776]

It's more centrist than anything else.

[@clementbianchini8651]

there are two "liberalism" economic and social, an american republican is liberal regarding economy and his relation toward the government while being conservative on social issues. An american democrat will be socially liberal and economically leaning toward socialism/egalitarianism.

[@SockieTheSockPuppet]

​@@AlabamianCrusader1776Yes, at least during the era of the Founding Fathers. But clearly nowadays even what used to be just left-of-center is now under the umbrella of "right-wing", due to how far the Left has gone.

[@Helperbot-2000]

@@SockieTheSockPuppet lol, lmao even. its the us thats far right in general. the rest of the world sees what americans call far left as centre right

[@SockieTheSockPuppet]

@@Helperbot-2000 Well no wonder Western Europe has become such a pit.

[@user-uf2df6zf5w]

This is an anachronistic take: the leftism the Sovjet Union adhered to was that which formed in the early 20th century. They had a very different focus than today (wealth distribution and ownership rights in the context of an economy with emphasis on heavy industry, rather than the identity politics of today), aka the leftism of the sovjets was less about promoting gay rights and more about taking away your stuff to be owned by the state. That being said, from about the 1970s onwards communism was only a shallow word almost no one believed in. PS.: a lot of right wingers in the west have a completely upside down picture of modern Russia, hailing it as some conservative paradise. Such people would be shocked to know how the place really works.

[@necropolistc6357]

I've seen this too, it isn't about Russia being conservative, it's about a country standing up to the globalist world order. they want countries to fend for themselves and not the global market economy

[@davidsenra2495]

"your stuff"?!?! Personal property was always protected in the USSR. You're making the classic mistake of thinking communism eliminates private property. It doesn't. It eliminates private property of factories, huge farms and things like that (the means of production). Big difference.

[@christianchellis9057]

In my high school, the librarian was named Mr. Z, and he was not like this at all.

[@unclesam5230]

The same situation can be said of the People’s Republic of China 🇨🇳 North Korea, Cuba and many of the other Communist States that have existed

[@mrnanner5162]

eh cuba is more democratic (in my and many other socialists opinion) than the US

[@meanwhilepalmer7993]

Cuba's government has become infested by western pandering SJWs like Marianne Castro who foolishly think they can bring back the Obama era detente if they shill hard enough. Ironically this will only alienate the catholic and socially conservative people of Cuba and if anything make the collapse of their Communist Party more likely.

[@kaisermarxistdixie6842]

Cuba is more like Centre-right as the Latino socialists movements do hold some social values that would be considered left wing, such as they are more okay with things like abortion and prostitution although they don't promote it and do want regulations on both things

[@unclesam5230]

@@kaisermarxistdixie6842 you should take a look at Fidel Castro’s reign

[@kaisermarxistdixie6842]

@@unclesam5230 well to be fair, I was speaking generally about the Cuban Communist party, and the Latin American socialist movements. But yeah Castro was much more socially conservative and even had meetings with Spain's ruler Franco( which side note apparently they both liked each other since Franco was raised in Galica and Castro's father was born in Galica)

[@tomrio8243]

This is why some KZbinrs are talking about MAGA communism.

[@meanwhilepalmer7993]

What happens when the bourgeois see traditions as superfluous in the modern context yet the working class from their practical vantage point still experiences the truth of tradition? Who is right and who is left?

[@SockieTheSockPuppet]

What the everliving *_F&%$_* is "MAGA Communism"? That's worse than an oxymoron, it's completely nonsensical.

[@meanwhilepalmer7993]

@@SockieTheSockPuppet I'm sure it doesn't make sense to someone coming from the Bo Burnham school of theory

[@SockieTheSockPuppet]

@@meanwhilepalmer7993 It doesn't make sense to anyone with a functioning brain. And no idea who Bo Burnham is.

[@sirius6738]

@@SockieTheSockPuppet In short, its communists who saw MAGA as a working class movement that need Marxism to truly succeed

[@fullcirclehistory]

Thank you for mentioning the difference between Social Liberalism and Communism. People love mixing those two ideologies up.

[@dontcomply3976]

Extreme social liberalism has had clear path from Marxism to Cultural Marxism, which was to be used as a tool to subvert the West

[@fullcirclehistory]

@@Mathguy363 Yeah exactly. A European "liberal" is very different from an American "liberal" 😂

[@fullcirclehistory]

@@Mathguy363 Yeah when I use the term “liberal conservative” or “conservative liberal” people laugh and say that’s not a real thing. Cos in America liberal and conservative are seen as opposites. But I would argue that the Republican Party is liberal too. Just not socially liberal.

[@thewhitehousevietsubarchiv2625]

Soviet legalized abortion in 1920, legalized it in 1936 then made it happen again in 1955. It was until 1995 when Russia finally put it back illegal, they had 56 years of legal nationwide abortion. While the US only did that in 1973 and it took only 48 years to put it back to the states, and now we have 11 states banned abortion so far. The Soviet legalized homosexuality back in 1917, and only recriminalized it after 1933, became the soonest nation too mess with homosexuality that early. While the US only legalized it after 2015. The Communists were success to turn a Christian country into an atheist country when there was only 30% of the population were Christians at the time the Soviet collapsed, and only went up again in the Post-Soviet era. Despite of being more secular and being sabotaged by the Liberalism, even nowadays, the US still has almost 60% of its population are Christians, which is still higher than Russia despite of its decline. You can tell me anything, but it wouldn't change the fact that my country (United States) is a right-wing country and Soviet Union was a left-wing country. The US itself is becoming more degenerate doesn't mean we can change that fact.

[@rickyratcomics]

Wow, I had no idea thanks!

[@popNdawg]

Your country is not becoming degenerate, your leftoids are becoming extreme degenerates and other degenerates from other leftoid countries are using their influence on your "leftwing" presidents party to push UN&EU agenda.

[@Dima-ym7fc]

I disagree about the homosexuality part. Bolsheviks never legalized homosexuality, they just decriminalised. Italy for example, legalised same-sex activities in 1890, and France was the first country to decriminalise homosexuality in 1791

[@rylencason4420]

The actual Christian population of the United States is around 20% at best. 60% of Americans (not including myself) support the legalization of abortion. If you look deeper into the country you realize it is already weakened and degenerate. There is a rich oligarchial class and government that works for it on behalf of the remainder of the country.

[@thewhitehousevietsubarchiv2625]

@@rylencason4420 Then you forgot the turn out rate. Tell me how many people went out to vote on those polls?

[@bvzv]

Cold War was just Civil War between two flavors of managerialism.

[@onepangaean3018]

Yes. An economy with specialists will defeat an economy without them. Cope.

[@averagedemocrat9546]

wtf does this even mean? Managerialism? That's how industrial economies work, you cant have some decentralized system at the US or USSR's level of productive capacity

[@gabbar51ngh]

Cold war was between land and a sea power to be precise which has been going through history. In most cases sea power wins.

[@suburbansurvival8239]

Just because these countries were adversarial doesn't mean they have to be opposites on an arbitrary spectrum. Soviet communism is, by no means, "right wing".

[@ServantoftheDivine1701]

That video made me love the USSR more than modern USA

[@bellphorusnknight]

The USA really is the great Satan, you just need time to understand and not be a forgetful midwit

[@yumallah]

As a Russian I’m glad

[@Guardias]

Left or Right...doesn't matter. I'll oppose Communism and the Authoritarianism that comes with it, at every turn.

[@Snp2024]

🎉 exactly

[@dango6266]

What about Fascism and the authoritarianism that comes with it?

[@trenaceandblackmetal5621]

Murica

[@Helperbot-2000]

ah yes of course, communism which is a stateless society, is authorative? well thanks for admitting youre retarded immediately at least

[@bellphorusnknight]

You may not care about power but power certainly cares about you ........ And your children

[@Marcus-nn6js]

I think it's more of a "Authority Vs. Liberty" rather than "Left Vs. Right".

[@RomanJohnBrice]

Basically authoritarian left versus liberal right

[@mieszkoaders3270]

While I do agree that Soviets were much more conservative than we give them credit for, we cannot forget that America during Cold War was a literal apartheid regime, that has kept its black population in check through constant and unending violence. Soviets were much less conservative than for example America in year 1960. Soviets would stay conservative trough Cold War, while America on paper grew more liberal, but what also is to be noted is that America is far closer to Soviet Union in 1960s than to for example Sweden or Spain. The Soviets became much more conservative after Stalin would took charge and introduce practicly everything from Tsarist goverment just with changed names. The conservatism of the USRR grew as power was more centralised after Kronstadt Uprising, and Great Purge. Stalin was a Tsar in all but name, so much that Mjaldorossi, who were a faction of Russian emigres who believed in "Soviet monarchy" where role of "First secretary of the Party" would be replaced with a Tsar, had no quams with him. What needs to be said, is that Soviets were only more conservative than US, during the tail end of the Cold War, and through much of the Cold War it was the US that was the conservative power.

[@VegitoBlue202]

Post Lenin era was the downfall, the USSR was doomed as Trotsky wouldn't be any better.

[@CultureCrossed64]

You're a stupid fuck, you know that? Spain was under a literal dictatorship in the 60s.

[@theodorerobertscoffieldkoz9329]

I think a better explanation is that what we we call socially conservative is generally just the default zeitgeist of most societies throughout most of history.

[@MattSinz]

100% correct. Fascism was economically left, the Corporate Nationalism of Fascist Italy was a type of syndicalism, and syndicalism is a form of socialism.

[@bjehulk]

I wouldn’t say fascism is left wing. It has some left wing influences but it was specifically designed to be neither left nor right

[@FazeParticles]

Fascism is likely a centrist type of system.@@bjehulk

[@xxvxxv5588]

Fascism was economically right wing because fascists (and nazis) favoured economic inequality.

[@chandelier6811]

@@bjehulkfascism is right wing economically since it is class collaborationist among other things

[@bjehulk]

@@chandelier6811 Well it depends what you would consider to be true right wing economics.

[@chamberlin9883]

It’s because people put economics on a political side, which is stupid both sides can make an argument for a give economic practice

[@antonioperito6607]

I think my favorite part of this video was the rosary and prayer book in the background during the Ridge commercial.

[@Dutchfin]

Thanks for pointing that out I missed it.

[@lukegallagher353]

Communism is left wing, even if it has changed. It rises out of socialism. The difference is how they divide oppressor vs oppressed class. In the soviet union it was rich vs poor. In modern western Communism its victim level.

[@dylanbuchanan6511]

Bro I have been saying this forever. The West (mostly America) is the most liberal place in history and more eastern civilizations like the USSR, Asia and the Middle East is far, FAR more more conservative. I never understood how liberals hated the west considering no other place supports their progressive values. Despite Muslims and minorities generally not having as much tolerance on gender nonconformity and homosexuality, you’d think liberals would hold up whites as a shining example of “progressiveness” but instead they pick the opposite demographic that agrees with their politics. It’s like each side of the political spectrum basically decided to pick the nations and peoples that had THE OPPOSITE beliefs as their ideological troops.

[@DrewPicklesTheDark]

Because modern liberals are ultimately useful idiots. Their mindset is self-serving, self-absorbed, emotionally impulsive, short-sighted, and holier than thou. They are easily manipulated in to serving the powers that be since all it takes is reframing an issue(s) to fit their ideology, no matter the level of mental gymnastics. They are the modern version of the insufferable evangelical Christians that came before them, which is ironic since they claim to hate them. Their life is not hard so they have to invent problems to bitch about and larp as part of "la resistance" which the media they grew up with has taught them is the ultimate virtue. Years from now their talking points will sounds just as laughable as "D&D is literally Satanism" sounds today, or when we make fun of the French Revolutionaries for trying to implement the Cult of Reason. The only grievance with any legitimacy is the current state of the economy and the system that enables it, which, amusingly enough, most rightoids are also against. More people need to understand Wokeism is the modern West's religion. Born in the aftermath of WW2 which painted the Nazis as the ultimate evil, therefore, anything that was the opposite of the Nazis was a virtue, no matter how self-destructive. Now that older generations are dying off, and Evangelical Christianity is dying off with them (The 2000s was the last decade Evangelical Christianity had any real power and influence). Wokeism is the dominants moral framework that remains. Those in power _will_ use it to secure their hold and for their benefit, much like they did with the Evangelicals, even though those in power themselves don't subscribe to it.

[@andrewmichaelschaefferXIV]

Thanks Trotsky

[@PancakeBoy07]

I'm glad someone finally talked about this

[@dalebewan]

Remember that George Orwell - a socialist - strongly warned about the rise of the USSR being contrary to socialism as he (and many others) saw it. That's in fact the entire point of his book "Animal Farm". It may therefore be more accurate to say that the idea of communism was mutated in to an authoritarian one by the USSR and those others who later followed the Leninist ideas rather than it being inherent to the idea of communism to begin with. The original "communists" were much more socially liberal and were the first against the wall once the USSR established itself.

[@JoseRodriguez-lp7rs]

Jorjor well

[@CultureCrossed64]

Orwell was also a fucking moron ideologically who excused a LOT of atrocities in Spain. Communism inherently leads to the deaths of the most liberal

[@francescocarlini7613]

This is your best political video by far! Altough one cannot ignore how homosexuality was not illegal under Lenin and how Soviet women played a pivotal role even under Stalin (which other country had women in the military? Certainly not the US!)

[@ImperiumMagistrate]

No this video is awful. Yeah it’s totally fair comparing people from the 1920s to modern day people.

[@asscheeks3212]

Could make a good argument but then you forget Berias exist, and then it all flushes down the toilet.

[@redline841]

Wtf, Bolsheviks were based?!?!?

[@ImperiumMagistrate]

@@redline841 no

[@zgramzhnisk3036]

The legalization of homosexuality under Lenin was an indirect consequence of the abolishment of Tsarist laws, rather than a direct reform progressive in nature meant to give more rights to homosexuals.

[@MrThePsychologist]

not left vs right now rather than traditionalism vs uncontrolable progresivism

[@MrThePsychologist]

this is just a copy and not a good contructions since it was made by communist on the other hand fasicst such i we belive in futurism which is exacly what you mean @@lemonboy9208

[@meanwhilepalmer7993]

I have heard very often among Trump supporters: "I was a Democrat/independent before this". There used to be a familiar idea of American conservatism which was hawkish and supportive every excess of empire. Now most grassroots Trump supporters will tell me how Gaddhafi got a bad wrap, and no to war in Ukraine, Israel, Russia, or China. A left and right wing alignment are not determined by ideological prescription but by a practical position relative to the current establishment of power. Many don't know that even within the USSR (and the CPC and what have you) there was a left, right, and center, none of which at any point directly correlated to the modern western understanding of those terms

[@PouLS]

More like uncontrolable traditionalism vs progressivism.

[@Dima-ym7fc]

@@PouLSmore like uncontrollable traditionalism and uncontrollable progressivism

[@hashkangaroo]

So the Soviets were economically r*tarded and culturally based, while America was economically genius and culturally depraved. And if the Revolution had never happened, Russia would've been both economically genius and culturally based, a very potent combination.

[@BigmanDogs]

There is most definitely a scenario where the Russian empire industrialized a couple years earlier and managed to avoid civil war through some labor reforms.

[@chico9805]

This is what we're slowly witnessing in Russia today; if the successor of Putin can get the economics right and maintain the basedness, we may witness a Russian century soon in the future.

[@hashkangaroo]

@@lemonboy9208 Everyone has an equal right to be in a gulag, but some people are more equal than others.

[@ichdu-fk6xc]

Absolut bullshit American culture was superior by the fact that the people where confident enough to participate in government. When the USSR disbanded none of its people were able to take their own share of responsibility.

[@LucaShutz]

Take the Japanese Empire as an example of how powerful a hive mind can be. However, this moves well with the fascist ideology. It's important to be culturally sound but also welcome ideas that can make a country move forward, without letting it kill itself with decadence. The USSR's overall population mindset, to me, was very culturally sound, the problem was the political power not welcoming change when needed, economically and so on.

[@Sebman1113]

I’m proud to be an American. Left or Right, I think America is better because the man who works harder and lives more thankfully is happier. I reject what the Soviets stand for in favor of traditional American mainline Protestant values as we live more comfortably and work hard.

[@NightingaleSong]

Look, America's the better country, albeit that's not the first impression most people who travel to both get anymore, but it certainly has nothing to do with working harder. Russians work hell of a lot harder, for lower wages, and that's not a good thing. Also, a lot of their effort is misplaced because the state is treated with such relative respect and not everyone is always obsessively re-evaluating the market demand for whatever they're doing. This actually makes Russians into better American citizens than most Americans, because they actually listen to the US govt. But that's not necessarily a good thing, because govt is sometimes up to no good. It's so complicated lol. I recommend travelling to Russia to see the good and watching Russian opposition KZbinrs like Varlamov and Maxim Katz to see the bad. It's all very counterintuitive and convoluted. Gives me a headache.

[@ShallowSociety]

I'm really glad you made a video on this subject, because this subject had been in my brain for a long time. The USSRs type of communism would be seen as right wing communism in the eyes of the left wing US communists. It really is a strange time we live in. I know I tried to make this subject sound as straightforward as I possibly could, but it really is a weird outlook on the concept of communism, with two countries having two variations of communism.

[@Spido68_the_spectator]

The USSR used the marxist Leninist approach to socialism: a vanguard party controls the state which in turn is very powerful, to enforce a " d!ctotorship of the proletariat " and then transition to true communism.

[@FlagArmadaProductions]

I like the Soviet Union then. Because I am far-left economically but moderately conservative sociallh

[@Josh_004]

Have you heard of maga communism?

[@chelseatillidie3450]

Im also left wing economically and right wing socially however i would hardly describe the economic system of the Soviet Union as favourable to live under and would more prefer a more Scandinavian style economy that is left but not to far left, however i must admit aside from the policies regarding religion i far prefer the social landscape of the Soviet union to my country (the UK).

[@FirstnameLastname-qe3ry]

There is one ideology.......

[@johnfox2975]

they destroyed the country. why would you like them

[@AndreasEvgenikos]

And this is when I suggest an alternate history to follow up on this. What if the initial plan of uniting the Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarussian SSRs into the Russian Federation went through during the 1990s. The move was one that was initially supported by then presidents involved, but then opposed by Yeltsin when he realised that the Aleksandr Lukashenko would become a sizeable threat to Yeltsin's hold on power in Moscow (as tenuous as it was already with the country existing in complete anarchy following the collapse of the Soviet Union).

[@crusader2112]

I second this suggestion.

[@fortpark-wd9sx]

Good point that you have made. When the USSR ended, a sizable chunk of the core Russian/Belarusian/Ukrainian population expected a reformed USSR minus the Baltics and Moldava. The Caucasus was somewhat uncertain. The Central Asians were quite happy to rejoin if it was not top-down Moscow governance. For the Central Asians, their history told them if Moscow was not around, another group of powers would come in that could ignite a Central Asian Great War. Their reasoning was better to have Moscow as a soft hegemon. If Ukraine had undergone a Czechoslovak style velvet divorce, the mess we saw later might have been contained.

[@mattkacar]

Wasnt this what Francis Parker Yockey was on about

[@crusader2112]

Yockey viewed the Soviet Union as a lesser threat to Europe than America because he viewed it under a spiritual lens. While the Soviets were physically a threat to Europe, Europe can rebuild, but American Materialism and Liberalism would destroy Europe’s soul according to Yockey. Pomen has a good video on him.

[@Спирт-ъ3й]

​@@crusader2112they did

[@trenaceandblackmetal5621]

The only American that understands politics and tradition

[@DrewPicklesTheDark]

People need to understand wokeism is the modern West's religion and moral framework and not merely a political movement. Because in the aftermath of WW2 the Nazis were painted as the ultimate evil, it reached a point that anything that was the opposite of the Nazis was a virtue, and this religion in all but name developed around that doctrine. People love to criticize Evangelical Christianity, and rightly so, but fail to realize wokeism has just replaced it as the West's moral doctrine, now that most of the generations that subscribed to Evangelical Christianity are dying off. Viewing it through that lens, it makes perfect sense these self-proclaimed "leftists" are just as ignorant about communism and the USSR as Evangelicals were ignorant of the Bible and Christianity.

[@AmericanCaesarian]

The Soviets were far more devout (especially after Stalin returned to his roots) than America ever was…

[@asscheeks3212]

"Sorry Lenin, survivalism outweighs progressivism."

[@AmericanCaesarian]

​@@asscheeks3212 Based Lenin

[@NeostormXLMAX]

Stalin used to be a priest lmao

[@mrgrom338]

Dude, this video turned me into a commie

[@MonsieurDean]

Uh oh.

[@SockieTheSockPuppet]

🤢🤮

[@Bluesonofman]

The Cold War was Hegelian Dialects at its finest

[@TheSiban]

People keep using the term of left and right too generally, just need to say in what characteristics. Human nature to think your either with us or your against us and demonise those who have very different ideas when in reality It's a complex web as we're complex beings

[@dylangtech]

The way that I describe this to my fellow Americans is noting that the USSR did conservative things because they yielded utility, not because it was morally rightious necessarily. In other words, reality is conservative.

[@averagedemocrat9546]

Much of the west's conservative values didnt exist until christianity spread. The Romans, Greeks and Persians would not be considered conservative at all (or liberal) by our standards. There is no utility to 99% of the conservative values expressed today as many civilizations have risen and fallen that believed/didnt believe in similar values.

[@averagedemocrat9546]

Reality is not 'conservative' lol.

[@ilyasharin1976]

@@averagedemocrat9546 Most definitely is

[@EzioAuditoreDaFirenze99]

The central tennent of communism is the eradication of individualism. Modern "progressives" are highly individualistic and value their identity above all else. In the USSR, the only thing you could identify as was a worker.

[@HappyGuy-cn9po]

@@averagedemocrat9546It is. Liberalism is just idealism and can only be afforded when you live in a utopia. Conservatism is survivalism and is the essential element of any surviving society.

[@ArchOfWinter]

Yeah, I agree. This even applies to modern mainland China. You see this very apparently when conservatives Chinese-American would literally use the same talking point against the CCP to praise right-wing American policies. Chinese-American conservatives pundits praised the protestor during the last major protest in Hong Kong and villainized the Hong Kong police, around the same time the BLM protests was happening in the US and the same pundits villainized the villainized the protesters and praising the police in the US. Both the protesters and polices in the respective events behaved very similarly too.

[@paulminh3525]

People are hypocrite! They use whatever they get to achieve their goals! They believe the end justified the mean! In their path, they lost their own codes and ideology in favor of power! This is human nature! No one is this one is following a political beliefs 100%. They does what they does to benefit themselves! If that ideology make them harder to survive, they will abandon it, yet act self righteous and angry when other does the same toward them!

[@cocaineminor4420]

Meanwhile I'm out here living in china comfortably while y'all talk trash about china 😂

[@NeostormXLMAX]

Half of the stuff about china you hear in the usa is straight up made up. Like the social credit system doesnt exist

[@FirstnameLastname-qe3ry]

I have a wild statement. Stalin is more of a fascist. If stalin was Ethnic Russian, Russia could have seen a fascist revival

[@CultureCrossed64]

Communists are fascists. The main difference is that communists want INTERnational socialism.

[@SeasideDetective2]

I grow weary of people on both sides of the aisle insisting that the USA has been an essentially conservative country. It has not been, at least not in the original, 18th-century sense of the term. We've been too devoted to democracy and reformist in impulse to have been that rabidly reactionary. The Soviets' hatred of organized religion has been gravely misunderstood. They weren't anti-religion because they deplored "traditional values," but because civil institutions were a threat to their monopoly on power. THEY wanted to be the ones to enforce the traditional values.

[@PremierCCGuyMMXVI]

Tbh the really don’t think the Cold War was about communism vs capitalism, the US and Russia would have had some kind of Cold War regardless of Russia become communist or not. I mean look at Russia today, it’s pretty Capitalistic yet still considered an adversary of the United States.

[@CultureCrossed64]

Untrue, prior to the Soviet revolution the Russian empire was one of America's greatest allies. The October revolution was truly a crime against both our peoples...

[@rationaloutlaw]

I have to disagree. Economics is still a very big factor of difference. And I think only things can be judged as to be left or right is on economics. Because that's the only thing that can be consistent.

[@proeramoka9168]

Economic positions shouldn’t be stagnant for someone, of course I’m assuming your a liberal idealist but economics is not the most important position someone can hold, only materialistic godless people would say that

[@crusader2112]

I respectively disagree. I judge someone being left or right based of off of social issues, their patriotism, and then economics.

[@CultureCrossed64]

That's not even consistent. You can justify the same evonomic policy from either ideological perspective. It's not even hard

[@graye2799]

Just remember that conservativsm and liberalism dont mean the same thing everywhere. A Muslim conservative in the Middle East is very different from a American conservative.

[@AD-en5dq]

Monsieur Z MAGACOMMUNISM ARC!!!!

[@wyattsunkel1048]

I would argue that, depending on how you define socialism, the US was closer to economic socialism than the USSR. Lenin said that they failed to achieve socialism and it merely moves capitalism from the bourgeois to the state.

[@purpledevilr7463]

When I was thinking of the train of thought/psychology of the left vs right in history and today. I came to the conclusion that the modern ‘left’ is psychologically right and the modern ‘right’ psychologically left. Edit: so for clarification. - I was making up a list of traits to do with how people thought. I ended up putting right-brain (creative part), intuition, irrationality, schizophrenia, psychedelics, chaos, sun-conscious acting, Dionysian and heightened levels of disgust on the right. Then I put the left-brain (logical articulate part), learnt thinking, rationalism, autism, stimulants, order, conscious acting, Apollonian on the left (for left brain). I thought this was good. The structure and rationalism fits for communists and the French Revolution. - the disgust, irrationality, etc fits for traditionalism and far-right regimes such as the Nazis. But with this. I conclude that the modern left shares the traits of the right. Claiming things are made up structure so should be destroyed. Valuing emotionality and feeling. Having high degrees of intolerance for political opponents, one may even say disgust. - and the right-wing values rationality, stoicism, and has characters saying ‘facts don’t care about your feelings’ or breaking things down with psychology. It’s not a perfect binary, I don’t expect it to ever be so. But more than not the modern right fits into the left category, and the modern left into the right.

[@AlabamianCrusader1776]

I'm perplexed. Could you please elaborate on that?

[@luizgarcialuizgarcia3386]

What It means?

[@purpledevilr7463]

I made an edit to my comment. Explanation now included.

[@crusader2112]

This makes sense. Just look at MAGA Communist figures like Haz from Infared, Jackson Hinkle, and Caleb Maupin. A lot of what they say most genuine conservatives could get behind what they say. P.S. I’m not a MAGA Communist.

[@asdasdasddgdgdfgdg]

Most people dont know this but Hinkle is a Green party member and anti nuclear activist. You can find pictures of him holding speeches at anti-nuclear rallies and the like on Google. There are also others thing which are highly suspect about Hinkle but thats another subject.

[@frostnova8300]

Yep. Though most of them are just grifters. Hinkle was a Bernie bro up until a few years ago.

[@crusader2112]

@@frostnova8300 Yeah, they are.

[@mountfuji87]

@@asdasdasddgdgdfgdg Yes, he was he is literally 23 years old, people change their opinions. What a stupid statement

[@wehatetimmy]

Maga communism?

[@zyanego3170]

MAGA Communist Monsieur Z When??? Lol

[@trunklemcjeans]

Bro there’s no way u got this much brain rot like come on yal

[@CultureCrossed64]

You're literally the one saying "I've always heard this, it has to be true" and YOU'RE accusing US of brainrot? Consider hara kiri.

[@alex4863]

I respectfully disagree, during the Cold War era Kruschev which was the longest lasting PM was the liberal branch of the communist party, and the most well known American president in the time RR was super right wing. It’s fair to say that both players were simply labeling themselves for PR. Because both were doing the exact same thing (giving money to there respectful military industrial complex)

[@yumallah]

Khrushchev wasn’t the longest ruling, Brezhnev. And Brezhnev was anything BUT liberal.

[@alex4863]

@@yumallah Stalin is the longest, DURING the COLD WAR (timeframe 1946-1990) Khrushchev was the longest lasting PM.

[@parkmallbaby]

This isn't about personalities or parties its more about the societies they were in. I believe that's the point of this video.

[@yumallah]

@@alex4863 I know Stalin served the longest overall, I meant precisely during the Cold War. Now, Khrushchev served from 1953 to 1964, 11 years, while Brezhnev served from 1964 to 1982, which is 18 years, making him the second longest serving after Stalin overall.

[@alex4863]

@@yumallah I personally see Brezhnev reigning stopping the second his mental health issue was visible, because you’re not theoretically yourself.

[@cevinzeke5110]

Damn, seems like we weren’t the good guys after all.

[@redline841]

Same

[@yumallah]

As a Russian I’m glad you realize that

[@cevinzeke5110]

@@yumallah you’re not the good guys either. No one is 🤝

[@Dima-ym7fc]

​@@cevinzeke5110agreed, we're all evil

[@eljefe8942]

Thanks for bringing up the key difference in Egalitarianism vs. Utilitarianism. As a lefty myself, I always find it confusing when people champion the USSR as a liberal icon. Like no, they're highly collectivist to the point it's okay to sacrifice some for the many (e.g. turret go brrrrr). The USSR is against current leftist values of individuality and consent, as they would push for conformity and obligated service to the whole. In short, it's like saying Kant and Bentham are the same, which is wildly far from the truth

[@AllenUry]

Excellent analysis. In fact, as per your description, both Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia could be described as "fascist," as subservience of the individual to the "state" or the "greater good" was part and parcel of both philosophies. This stands in sharp contrast to liberal "do your own thing" and conservative/libertarian Americans for whom individual liberty is sacrosanct.

[@ilyasharin1976]

Bro is actually calling the USSR a fascist, what the hell are you smoking. I know what I'm talking about because my family lived in the USSR and I have done my research to find the truth for myself.

[@gabbar51ngh]

That's the most clownish political take I have seen in a while. This channel and their followers need to read more books than to lump everything in modern day american political perspective. USSR wasn't Fascist. It was just socialist. Want to know why? Because fascism itself grew out of socialist and syndicalists movement. On top of that authoritarianism within the left isn't new, neither is suppressing individual liberty or making people do things for greater good. Violent revolutions were outright encouraged within the left and liberalism itself is a right-wing ideology.

[@DigitalShaolin]

@@ilyasharin1976dude the people who watch this guys videos are most likely actual fascists lol, but nobody wants to describe themselves as a fascist so they just attach the label to communists

[@artje90]

They are both authoritarian but there was a massive difference between them

[@khaaneph7311]

​@ilyasharin1976 basically every communist government to ever exist was never actually communist. Just because they said they were doesn't exactly make it a reality. They were about as communist as North Korea is democratic

[@remcodevrieze1922]

My issue with western politics, left-wing economics automatically gets labeled as being liberal, and right-wing economics as conservative, while these are two independent axes. One can be left-wing conservative, or right-wing liberal.

[@Stejers]

In my family and social circle in general we divide left and right between economic right (capitalism) economic left (comunism social right (conservatives) social left (liberals) of course all within a spectrum

[@luizgarcialuizgarcia3386]

Like 8 values

[@pepperonish]

Is left and right are social constructs

[@johnweber4577]

At the end of the day, yes.

[@Edgar_Hoods]

We’ve changed so much since the Cold War, so to compare the Left and Right at that time with what we have now is like comparing a Istanbul in 1023 A.D with how it is today.

[@stevengoldsworthy2079]

I think that viewing international politics as "conservative" or "liberal" is inherent flawed. The soviet revolution would be a very liberal idea when the monarchy was in charge, but yeltsin was also a liberal for wanting to change russia when he came to power too. Liberal also doesnt necessarily mean they want liberty anymore either, just that they want change. A comunist in the US is a liberal, but so is a facist because they dont want to conserve the constitution.

[@valmid5069]

Cant wait for more analyzed content!!!

[@GiRR007]

Communism liberal policies focus on the classes of wealth. In this it is very much based on liberal ideology. Mean whole the US view point on class was conservative as it did not want this new way of class and economic distinction.

[@theromanorder]

Please do a video on all the resons why the Japanese empire fall, like army and navy fighting, resources uses, ect And alternative history idea, what if titkourau never lost his suport He is the best military leader in aotroa (new Zealand) history, I planed on doing it but seems like ive just been too lazy lol

[@AmericanUnionState1824]

I agree with you, MonsieurZ. I always think that the USSR and the Western Left are polar opposite of each other. Yeah, both are left-wing, but the late USSR was very masculine, militaristic, and very nationalistic, which is what all modern western leftists opposed. Sure, the USSR did find Black and other Minorities Communists moments here and there, but it wasn't like that would be having those kind of people in their own country. Just like you said MonsieurZ, if you take a Soviet citizen from the late Soviet Union and put them in modern day America, he or she would be seen as a social conservative today.

[@xxvxxv5588]

I think it's mainly because Eastern Europe was always more conservative than Western Europe. This gap existed even 120 years ago.

[@deus_vult_1099]

The Soviet Union had the highest abortion rates on earth and had gender equality. It was socially liberal for the time.

[@CultureCrossed64]

They were also prohibitionist. They weren't socially liberal, they were pro workers rights and equality. There is a difference.

[@BioAbner]

I think this left vs right one dimensional view of politics is the real problem. But we have Marx to blame for that one.

[@jesuschrist2268]

Finally some good content

[@jakubekch.3621]

Tbh Americans just water down politics to binary When its a lot more complex We should always remember to mention Liberal left wing (social net for weed smokers) Conservative right wing (we build the church for the God becouse we've been ordered to) Liberal Right(Oh you ain't touching my lawn! *loads gun*) Conservative Left (Great to see you comrade, and don't say otherwise, the last man to do so is sleeping in a potato bag in gulag) Dear Americans, do your best

[@bellphorusnknight]

It's their puritanical nature to view things in binary and ni nuance That's why Americans are considered spiritual neanderthals

[@daltonsherrod1573]

There is, though, Soviet propaganda saying that America was racist. Other than that, perfect video

[@brothers_of_nod]

This was quite a perspective,

[@thomasclay7156]

The issue here comes from comparing the Soviet Union of back then to America today. America still had a hard semi-conservative nature across the whole country. Even by the 1990’s, things such as gay rights, transgender people, hell even things as fundamental today as interracial marriage in some parts of the country were nonexistent. Socially, we were still about as conservative as the USSR across most categories. We were a majority Christian nature even more so than today, and many people held views that would be considered conservative today. A man from the USSR or USA of comparable times dropped in the USA today would probably hold similar views barring very select topics. The USA actually was behind the USSR in several fields- the USSR got everything from legalized abortion to pushing women into the workforce ahead of us. Even then, the USSR did not fit some categories discussed here such as being more moral or family focused than the US. Many “social conservative” stances of the USSR were simply about controlling the people rather than conserving values- for example banning abortion under Stalin was about improving birth rates and not about what we have today, they banned porn because it made men lose focus rather than on the grounds of it being a moral wrong, etc. We were equally socially conservative all things evened our imo, economically we were polar, then authority-wise we were polar. The conflict is still overwhelmingly some flavor or left vs right (if we boil it down to something so simple), even if those waters are muddied more today because we’re polarized over different left vs right politics at home. The only way this video works is restructuring the arguments towards individualism vs authoritarianism, which is ultimately what is understood but not conveyed as the main point. America of that time was more about expanding individual rights than upending the whole established order, while the Soviets were more about controlling their population than conserving much of anything.

[@CowboyCavalier]

One of your best videos in a while. The difference in social and economic values is often lost in two party debates.

[@lt4109]

it was bourgeoisie democracy (USA) vs bourgeoisie dictatorship (USSR)

[@timothycarrington9884]

Ironically, although the Soviet Union was an œconomically left-wing nation due to its communist œconomic system, it was right-wing from the perspective of its social values because its ideology was comprised of imperial Russian values with the characteristics of socialism.

[@KerbalProductions777]

It is true the uncomfortable truth is that the average Soviet citizen in the 1970s USSR had a far more likely chance of dying and waking up in heaven afterwards than many Americans today. The Cold War needs to not be viewed as a fanatical ideological issue, but rather a case by case issue. I see no contradiction with supporting Ireland against Britain or the Arabs against Israel while also simultaneously supporting South Vietnam or South African central government. As christians, we need to see what’s best for these people in each scenario. For example, Ireland was a 95% Catholic country fighting against secularism and the heretical Church of England, and the IRA can only be properly described as a Catholic group, while Britain was martyring Catholics for their faith. At the same time as this south vietnam was ran by a catholic dictator doing the best he could to propagate Saving Christianity, also promoting conservative moral values, while Ho Chi Minh was fanatically murdering Christians en masse. Overall fanatically supporting either the USSR or the USA is a pretty childlike way to view history as circumstances were different all throughout the world with various groups fighting for different reasons with varying degrees of alignment to the Will of God.

[@GeorgianSSR1921]

Glory to our Soviet motherland

[@redline841]

Same. The Based Union

[@thenightwalker7084]

The breakup of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century - Vladimir Putin

[@danielsantiagourtado3430]

Idea man! What if harold godwinson defeated william and england remained in saxon rule?

[@Morgformer]

famously left wing: USA

[@chamberlin9883]

Based Soviets

[@slavchomarinov9909]

The first 6-8 years of the Soviet Union‘s existence were marked by a modern American liberal‘s wet dream - nationalisation, common ownership of the means of human reproduction - a term, which means exactly what you think about the role of women in it. Then Stalin showed up on the scene abolished those nightmares. This is why modern Russians view him favorably, despite his genocides.

[@Спирт-ъ3й]

He organized genocides of chechens in particular and muslims. No wonder Russians love him, right? :)

[@Спирт-ъ3й]

@offroadguy7772 a lot of them, actually

[@birgirdav]

Damn, Z's nail game is on fleek, oh and the wallet is cool too I guess

[@joshuahawkins9847]

The Soviets also crushed religion and enforced atheism. Not exactly socially conservative

[@cringewatcher4229]

You should make a video on what if Gorbachev won the Cold War for the ussr