how long did it take Europe to shed absolute monarchism? Centuries

Yes, but history progresses at accelerating rates as societies develop. Humanity spent tens of thousands of years being hunters-gatherers, the neolithic and agricultural revolution brought forth much faster changes, then feudalism, and ultimately capitalism and the industrial revolution.

The USSR was a nice idea, but it took less than half a century for it to succumb to bureaucratic corruption

I’m not sure what you’re talking about, care to explain?

Arguably, it was even deeper autocratic corruption than in Western democracies.

Only arguably so if you go against material evidence, in my opinion. Universal free healthcare and education to the highest level, guaranteed right to housing, abolishment of unemployment, high level of worker rights, respect and promotion of the local cultures and languages to an extent unparalleled until that point in history, women’s rights (more Soviet female engineers by the 1960s than in the rest of the world combined and highest rates of female representation in organs of power), extremely high rates of unionization, quality of public transit and urban planning… None of that points, in my opinion, towards deep autocratic corruption. If there had been a deep autocratic corrupted regime, politicians would have had higher wages than professors of universities, artists or researchers, wealth inequality wouldn’t have been the historical lowest in the region and the lowest in the world. So, what do you mean by autocratic corruption?

We could achieve, incrementally, the same results as through toppling and rebuilding society

That’s not how historically systems have changed. The owning class will not let you remove exploitation by voting, in as much as the kings and queens of old went through the guillotine to remove them from power. When you get massive leftist voter turnout, you either get an Allende situation (I’m Spanish, we had a similar thing during the Second Spanish Republic in 1936), or a Syriza situation, historically. You can also check the case of Mosaddeq in Iran for that matter, the list is endless. The western global empire won’t allow a peaceful, democratic transition to socialism.

Now you have a system with class interests + charismatic manipulation. I want to move to a system with only charismatic manipulation. That would already be significantly better, and I have no answer as to how to remove charismatic manipulation politically

Erasing established power at one point in time does not prevent it from rising again in a new form

By changing the material and historical conditions you can change that, though. Europe has spent centuries without slavery or absolutist monarchy within its borders, because the material conditions that favored such regimes have expired. The material conditions enabling capitalism class society are also expiring.

The fact that there are not two classes in communism is the primary reason. When you don’t have a powerful minority with opposed interests to those of the powerless majority, the majority becomes powerful.

Literally no. You have the far right going crazy all over Europe and half of Latin America, unaffordable housing and ever-decreasing social services everywhere, and the practical entirety of Africa, India, Southeast Asia and again Latin America are doing anything but just fine

Yeah, if it weren’t for NATO making EU subservient to the US, it would have been invaded by them.

The greatest human invention murdered hundreds of millions through colonialism?

Almost as if I had already given answer to those points in my previous comment about supply of housing (Buenos Aires example) or reduced construction (publicly driven construction) and you just refused to address those points! I explicitly said rent control is a band-aid and I gave solutions to literally every “problem” you brought up in the study such as higher rent for uncontrolled units (control them all), lower mobility (that’s a good thing meaning people get evicted less), and reduced residential construction (can be solved by public construction and has historically been solved like that).

Half of your original claim was that it does nothing to solve rent prices, and your own source claims that you’re wrong on that, and you have the ballz to be here questioning my sourcing abilities lmao

Your original claim:

Rent control does NOT control prices

Your source:

rent control appears to be very effective in achieving lower rents for families in controlled units

You are very smart

Cry me a river, landlord bootlicker

Source: Dude, trust me

I literally provided a source lmfao

I know that you just linked the very first link on google

I did not, I’ve read the whole exchange between Nitzan and Bichler and Cockshott, he has many videos on his YouTube channel talking about LVT and empirical demonstrations, and you can go through the references of the paper I sent such as the Zacchariah multi-country study.

Third of all, nobody ever responds to response papers

That would be a good point if LVT wasn’t an extremely politically important point. If neoliberal economists had any sort of empirical proof showing otherwise, they’d be more than happy to share it, but there are no studies in the academia providing this. Please search them for me if you will.

As for references for why you’re wrong, you can go through Albert Szymanski’s “human rights in the Soviet Union”, Robert B Allen’s “Farm to Factory”, Pat Sloan’s “Soviet Democracy” or Alec Nove’s “economic history of the USSR” (paraphrasing the title of the last one because I read it long ago). You can go through my comment history and find references to all of those books if you want, but I have nothing to prove to you.

you’re not able to provide sources

I gave you a summary paper collecting references several studies on labour theory of value, that’s already more evidence than you have provided. When you actually bring up sources to the conversation you may change my mind and make me do the effort, but you won’t do that I bet.

You can do both, I don’t see the problem with doing anticapitalist propaganda on the internet, it’s probably what pushed me most towards organizing

I don’t know why you keep bringing up the word “ideal”. Marxists are opposed to idealism, we’re staunch materialists. Saying that “things change over time and place” doesn’t automatically negate historical examples , and following those historical examples doesn’t imply not achieving progressive victories over time.

You claim to follow the path that works, but that’s what the western left has been following for the past 50 years and look where that led us.

Why are you lying? Posts on Hexbear about Platner:

I’m sure .ml has similar posts. Again, why are you lying?

You’re describing the Soviet model of housing. Flats were often assigned by the union of the worker, and the rent dues were about 3% of the monthly income, which paid for basic maintenance. Homelessness was eliminated and housing was constantly improved through the construction of literal millions of housing units per year, more than any country at the time.

Urban planning was also cool, organized in so-called “Mikroraion” (microdistricts) with accessibility on-foot to basic services being the core of planning. Green spaces, health centres, childcare and social activities were all within a 15-minute walk (the neighborhoods in most Eastern Block countries retain these features with whatever services haven’t been dismantled in capitalism). Quality affordable public transit (e.g. Moscow metro) also ensured mobility.

The landlord is casting the grenade and knife rain spell on the child

I’m glad you’re a human with empathy and good intentions, but tenants shouldn’t be in a position that their housing (one of the most fundamental rights of people) relies on the good will of whatever landlord they happen to be stuck with.

Why not though? The experiments done in housing nationalization have been extremely successful in abolishing homelessness and guaranteeing access to affordable housing. In Cuba, if you study in (completely free) public university, the state assigns you a flat at no cost. In the Soviet Union, housing used to cost 3% of monthly incomes back in the 1970s.

Imagine the possibilities that we could get with 50+ years of technological and industrial development if we nationalized housing in the west…

It’s not a utopia, housing has been nationalized successfully in several countries, with the result of the abolition of homelessness, extremely affordable rent (think 3% of monthly incomes), and evictions essentially not existing.

I’m all for revising zoning laws, enacting rent caps, and other transitional measures, but the end goal should be the collectivization of housing, which would eliminate the parasitism altogether.

I’m genuinely happy for you getting a good landlord, but access to housing shouldn’t be conditioned by being lucky to get a decent and altruistic landlord (a minority in people’s experience, hence the massive upvotes of the post).

I can think of a myriad of other reasons than sheer cost why I might not want to buy a home straight away

Me too and you make a great point. The problem isn’t with renting homes as a concept, it’s with renting from a private owner at market prices. Publicly owned housing for rent at maintenance cost-prices would eliminate the exploitative relationship and still allow people to rent for as long as they want.