HighFructoseLowStand

And you cited a website that denies the Uyghur Genocide and the Holodomor.

You're doing genocide denial.

Right. Beria was well known for his trigger discipline.

It wasn't that impressive for the people living there. Otherwise they wouldn't have rejected it.

Debunked, according to a genocide denying Russian propaganda asset.

To portray the opinion of Stalinists. Which they contrast with actual data and the opinions of actual historians.

How about you cite some of those liberals, instead of a tankie rag?

"Expand as an ideology" is a strange way to say, "they weren't shot for disagreeing with the Party."

The reforms didn't weaken the economy. The economy was weak, therefore there were reforms. And it's not cherrypicking, the Soviet system worked poorly, objectively.

Nostalgia doesn't prove anything. What they feel now has nothing to do with what the people felt at the time.

Read Robert Conquest.

No, you denied that the Soviet Union was a dictatorship. The GDP does not effect that.

And books describing the Soviet Union as a totalitarian dictatorship are used as reference. Wikipedia is providing a variety of opinions of the Soviet government. It's not declaring Pat Sloan the sole source of truth on the question of human rights in the Soviet Union.

You clearly don't care about being righteous or correct.

This is a good example of one of things people hate about lemmy.

Communism fan boying, implicit denial of genocides committed by communist powers, out in the open on the front page.

So, you're denying that glasnost allowed for political dissent?

Second, no they didn't.

Finally, it does not matter because we were debating whether or not the Soviet Union was a dictatorship, which the literacy rate has nothing to do with.

Well-respected by Tankies, not by actual historians.

We weren't debating the quality of the Soviet Union. We were debating whether or not it was a dictatorship.

That's what dissent is.

Nothing you said disputes it being a dictatorship. The people could not choose their leaders, there were no limits on the power of their leaders, er go it was a dictatorship. None of your "pros" matter. And that's before we get into the lack of freedom of speech and press and total absence of transparency, meaning that I have no reason to trust those supposed accomplishments.