Before any of you sorry ass libs reiterate Nazi propaganda via the Holodomor in here, I would suggest you just look further down in the thread and see what your sorry ass loser lib friends got in response.
Nobody believes your bullshit here. You’re not going to convince anyone here.
i do 3000 calories of cardio a week and find it hard to eat only 2k. I started counting my calories about half a year ago and I was eating 3k/day. I cut it down to 2k and tried to make better diet choices and lost about 30 lbs, but I'm really fricking hungry all the time due to how much I exercise.
Can relate. For a period I was always at a caloric deficit due to having to bike to work in addition to running 10 miles or so every other day. Running injuries and finally being able to afford a car but a cabash on that.
Without seeing how they arrived at those numbers, I'm going to assume they aren't accounting for food waste. They might be using food "sold/purchased."
This is actually a misunderstanding of American culture. Anyone consuming less then 120% of their daily recommended calorie intake is considered starving. It's just how we do things over here.
Your stomach and throat can stretch quite a bit over time. And overeating regularly affects the production of the hormone which tells you you’re full, especially when you’re eating processed bullshit that’s scientifically curated to make you want more food. The mechanisms our bodies have for regulation of caloric intake were really not balanced for the modern American diet. American kids who are genetically predisposed to obesity need to try way harder to avoid it than the average human. We stuff so much goddamn sugar in literally everything. Why is our regular bread so sweet? And once obesity sets in, the feedback mechanisms get really difficult to counteract. Shit sucks.
Edit: forgot to mention that some people just have a crazy high RMR and can eat that and much more without gaining much weight. Shit’s wild, but the flip side of that is that a lot of parents of kids with high metabolisms get side eyed like they’re starving their kids because they’re not gaining weight.
I’m going to stick with the countless eye-witness reports and first hand experiences of older people who lived through it over the American lie machine pretty much any day of the week.
Since you care oh so much about what other people think, particularly from the people that actually lived in communism, you will 100% change your view if the majority of them have a positive opinion right? Yes? Yessssss? (I doubt it, but let's get some real data in here shall we?)
Reflecting back on the breakup of the Soviet Union that happened 22 years ago next week, residents in seven out of 11 countries that were part of the union are more likely to believe its collapse harmed their countries than benefited them. Only Azerbaijanis, Kazakhstanis, and Turkmens are more likely to see benefit than harm from the breakup. Georgians are divided.
A remarkable 72% of Hungarians say that most people in their country are actually worse off today economically than they were under communism. Only 8% say most people in Hungary are better off, and 16% say things are about the same. In no other Central or Eastern European country surveyed did so many believe that economic life is worse now than during the communist era. This is the result of almost universal displeasure with the economy. Fully 94% describe the country’s economy as bad, the highest level of economic discontent in the hard hit region of Central and Eastern Europe. Just 46% of Hungarians approve of their country’s switch from a state-controlled economy to a market economy; 42% disapprove of the move away from communism. The public is even more negative toward Hungary’s integration into Europe; 71% say their country has been weakened by the process.
The most incredible result was registered in a July 2010 IRES (Romanian Institute for Evaluation and Strategy) poll, according to which 41% of the respondents would have voted for Ceausescu, had he run for the position of president. And 63% of the survey participants said their life was better during communism, while only 23% attested that their life was worse then. Some 68% declared that communism was a good idea, just one that had been poorly applied.
Glorification of the German Democratic Republic is on the rise two decades after the Berlin Wall fell. Young people and the better off are among those rebuffing criticism of East Germany as an “illegitimate state.” In a new poll, more than half of former eastern Germans defend the GDR.
Roughly 28 percent of Czechs say they were better off under the Communist regime, according to a poll conducted by the polling institute SC&C and released Sunday.
The majority of Russians polled in a 2016 study said they would prefer living under the old Soviet Union and would like to see the socialist system and the Soviet state restored.
The claims you have read in reddit comments are almost always made by Americans, whose brains are riddled with red scare brainworms and are completely devoid of any knowledge or understand of what the left thinks in Europe, because Americans do not have a left.
Let's end on something a bit more scientific than polls of people's feelings:
In 28 of 30 comparisons between countries at similar levels of economic development, socialist countries showed more favorable PQL outcomes.
I think that should just about cover it all. I don't think any of this will change your mind because you're clearly ideologically committed to your anticommunist brainworms, but someone with more intelligence and less stubbornness might happen by that has fewer personal failings.
I can't find it right now but Ghodsee regular brings up in interviews that a (I think) World Bank study of post re-united Germany showed that unification was so disadvantageous to the former GDR that years later the population's children were stunted in height at levels typically found in countries that experienced famine, or something like that.
reactionaries like you believe everything the CIA says today, then disbelieves everything they declassify 60 years later. Which is funny, since they only declassify things once they're low stakes, and have fallen out of public attention, and no longer matter strategically. If the CIA said "we have nothing to do with this coup against socialists in Latin America" 60 years ago, you'd have believed them. But if today they were like "yeah we totally did that shit." suddenly you're willing to call them The Lie Machine. You believe them whenever they are lying, and you disbelieve them whenever they finally admit the truth. This is because you believe what is convenient to your reactionary anti-worker national chauvinist ideology.
FWIW, even though I think @Awoo@hexbear.net is probably right in her assessment that you won't, it would genuinely be the coolest shit you ever did if you read the replies to your comment, accepted even some of the maelstrom of data provided that undermines what you said, and opened yourself up just the tiniest little bit to the pathway out of the propagandized worldview you've been blasted with your entire life.
Yeah. It’s a lot to go through and a lot more than I was expecting. I’m open to being wrong here, most of the people I’ve met don’t seem to indicate anything similar to the above, but that could still be broadly anecdotal. Certainly a lot to think about and read up on here, and I’m not anti communist at all, but I think that WWII alone is enough for me to be anti-Stalin and make me less likely to believe that his people were treated well. I could be wrong there too.
I’ll point out though that I’m not making an argument. It’s literally impossible to “undermine” someone’s experience unless they’re lying about it. And I’m more likely to believe someone about their experience over the numbers which describe what their experience should have been. I still see some humility in that, but I would understand if not everyone does
I actually agree with you that this is not that great of a source. It debunks the claim that the USSR starved its people in general but does not show the time of Stalin. There are of course many comrades here who can point to how Stalin didn't starve the USSR either, but the point still stands.
If a communist state in 1980s didn't starve their people then it follows that socialism without starvation is possible. The starvation argument isn't done cause liberals care about victims - they don't really - they care about denying the viability of socialist projects. When even the Soviet Union with all its falls was able to do achieve what the CIA did show, then this means the socialist project is viable and could work in various versions.
Stalin used starvation as weapon quite effectively.
The idea that Stalin intentionally committed genocide in Ukraine is literal Nazi propaganda that was in turn pushed by right-wing groups in the US. Great article on it here:
It may not be sheer coincidence that faminology took wing just after the OSI was commissioned in 1979. For here was a way to rehabilitate fascism- — to prove that Ukrainian collaborators were helpless victims, caught between the rock of Hitler and Stalin’s hard place. To wit, this bit of psycho-journalism from the 33 March 24 Washington Post, in a story on accused war criminal John “Ivan the Terrible” Demjanjuk: “The pivotal event in Demjanjuk’s childhood was the great famine of the early 1930s, conceived by Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin as a way of destroying the independent Ukrainian peasantry … Several members of [Demjanjuk’s] family died in the catastrophe.”
Coupled with the old nationalist canard of “Judeo-Bolshevism,” faminology could help justify anti-Semitism, collaboration, even genocide. An eye for an eye; a Nazi holocaust in return for a “Jewish famine.”
Just as the Nazis used the OUN for their own ends, so has Reagan exploited the famine, from his purple-prosed commemoration of “this callous act” to his backing of the Mace commission. Faced with failing fascist allies around the world, from Nicaragua to South Africa, the U.S. war lobby needs to boost anti-Communism as never before. Public enthusiasm to fight for the contras will not come easy. But if people could be convinced that Communism is worse than fascism; that Stalin was an insane monster, even worse than Hitler; that the seven million died in more unspeakable agony than the six million …. Well, we just might be set up for the next Gulf of Tonkin. One cannot appease an Evil Empire, after all.
The article is from 1988 by the way, in case you were wondering about the reference to the Contras.
More Kahazkhs died in those famines than Ukrainians but nobody talks about that because the CIA hasn't been funding Kazakh Nazis for the better part of a century