this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2026
272 points (100.0% liked)

Memes of Production

1717 readers
514 users here now

Seize the Memes of Production

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the “ML” influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great Communities:

founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fonix232@fedia.io 24 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Fun fact: there were no (involuntary) homeless people in the USSR. And even voluntary homelessness was reduced (although through forced work - if you were caught panhandling or otherwise begging for money/food, you'd be put in a worker's home and scheduled for work at whatever nearby factory or farm that needed more people).

Tons of "social housing" was built - cheap but for the time, well made blocks of flats, houses, etc., often sold at a very low price thanks to state driven programs. Homeownership rates (as in, residential housing that was occupied by its owner) was up to 90%, East Germany being the main stickler to rentals that even the hard Soviet "no landlordism" rules couldn't eradicate fully (albeit in this case the landlord was the state, and the rent was dirt cheap).

So this is one VERY SPECIFIC aspect that wasn't true under socialism/communism.

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 18 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Reducing homelessness by making it illegal isn't such a great advert for Soviets

[–] JennyLaFae@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Big difference between tossing someone in prison for being homeless vs. a home/job program

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, and the Soviets had the former

[–] fonix232@fedia.io 0 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Uh, no? At least not in Hungary.

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Hungary was never part of Soviet Union. And if you want to bring that up, remember where the term "tankie" originally comes from while you're at it.

[–] fonix232@fedia.io 0 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Ah sure. Let's fight about whether or not Hungary was formally a member or not, when the entire point is: was the country under the (in)direct control of Moscow or not?

The answer is: yes it fucking was, dipshit.

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Real mature and good faith argument you've got there. Maybe you should go back to lemmygrad where that shit actually works because you can ban everyone who disagrees.

[–] fonix232@fedia.io 1 points 15 hours ago

Never been to that instance, and I don't ban people who have a factually incorrect opinion, even if they're being an ass about semantics.

Also not a tankie, nowhere did I defend the Soviet Union.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No, but reducing homelessness by having rents around 6% of people's income is.

[–] DarkSirrush@piefed.ca 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I mean, its what our governments in north america are doing instead of solving the problem.

The liberals here in Canada feel that housing is a commodity, not a right.

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 5 points 1 day ago

And it's equally fucked up, yes.