WI: Communist Mexico?

IIRC mussolini was a socialist.

True partially, but a distortion.

he was a socialist for a time, but left the party before the Italian intervention in World War One. Later on he kept up appearances of some strands of socialism, but the record disagrees with assertations that he believed that. by the end of the war he had made an about face and believed Socialism was a failure, and the end result was Fascism.

Calling Mussolini a socialist at the point in time when he was in government is slightly less ridiculous than considering Hitler a socialist, if only because he had been a socialist. Calling either of their nations socialist is downright wrong.
 
How the hell can you count Milosevic's Serbia as either truly communist or socialist. It was multi party state with regular elections (yeah he cheated, yeah he got caught and payed the consequences every time he tried, lack of Slobo's fall in '97. was mainly do opposition being split and involved in petty squabbles. And there are implications that Democratic West (tm) didn't want Slobo out of office untill Kosovo gained independence as that would have been a bit more difficult with pro western oppositon taking power), he got elected on multiparty elections and got ousted by the same. Also a country involved in civil wars in two neighboring former Yugoslav republics, with extreme involvement of organized crime in politics in all three sides/states during the war.

And you are counting total victims of a three sides civil war as "victims of communism". How can "communist" (And it most certainly wasn't. Yes it was a oligarchy and cleptocracy with very little rule of law and very dubious democratic process) Serbia under Milosevic be responsible for deaths in Muslim (beg your pardon, Bosniak) Croat conflict in Bosnia that lasted for over 2 years until Clinton convinced them to stop it and shut up as it was problematic in light of media effort to put any and all blame on everything on Serbs? To be clear, I'm not saying none of casualties are Serb responsibility, far from that. I'm just outraged at you putting the blame for all casualites in a three sided war to single side.

And 1 second of googling tells that SFRY is Socialist Yugoslavia. There were gross crimes committed at the very end of the war (WWII to be precise) where new communist regime was still consolidating power. But incomparable in magnitude and scope both in absolute and relative numerical terms to Stalin's or Mao's crimes. There were purges and detentions of Stalinist symapthizers and agents in '48. that lasted couple of years (although with very little executions and death)
 
What is "SFRY?"

I don't think the many millions of victims of Soviet OR Chinese-inspired Communism would argue with my statement, btw. :mad:

Pretty much. I have run into a lot of Russians in the west coast that came to American fleeing from Stalin era USSR. Which isn't saying others didn't flee with other groups in control, they just had better systems in place to stop them. Some went as far as changing their names. Though I don't have a lot of connection with that side of my family I was given the impression some of them did the same.

That and the numbers do tell, Socialist regimes have killed more people in history than any emperor, king, or republican dictator by quite a large margin.
 
If Mexico went Communist, I very much doubt it'd be Stalinist Communism as many of you may be thinking of (IE, evil and tyrannical). Likely, Trotsky would have something to do with it, in which case you probably get a Democratic Communist state if all goes well.

If it is pre-Trotsky, I still have doubts it'd be Stalinist Communism.
I will have to argue with the idea that Trotskyist Communism=democratic socialism, personally. All of my research does tend to lend credence to the fact that Trotsky would have been a better leader than Stalin(if only because he was less paranoid and wouldn't launch the purges) but I have yet to see any evidence that he supported a democratic approach. Some sources mention he might have continued Lenin's tradition of peaceful debate within the Communist Party, but nothing about actual democracy for the populace.

That said, if you can point me to some place that argues otherwise, please do so.
 
There is much debate over whether Trotsky supported Democratic Socialism or Leninist doctrine to the nth degree, and many ways what he said could be interpreted one way or another hence why such a debate has credence, so I couldn't give you any consensus to solidify any one side. However, if you wiki his work or look over the controversy of such debates at Wikipedia (as the obvious source) you can find somethings. I can't give you anything specific since I don't recall where I ran across any of that information before save simply at wikipedia or some other sites I can't recall.
 
While there is no real strict difference between Socialism and Communism in linguistic use, Socialism generally refers to anything softer on Marxist ideals and Communism as anything harder and more radical. And Leninism is Communist rather than Socialist by that measure.

Likewise, they were Stalinist. Stalin took over the USSR, screwed with the baser ideology greatly (I suggest reading 1984) and exported it to the world.
 
Top