They usually cannot imagine something completely new, they must “piggyback” off of something that already exists.
Because there has only really been Authoritarian Communism a la Russia, that’s the only way authoritarians can think of what communism would be, since again, they lack imagination and creativity.
Seemed pretty clear to me. You link about art but OP not talking about making art. I think you just saw the word “creativity” and thought they meant art or something. They were more so talking about creating systems of governance than creating art.
I saw the word creativity and assumed they were talking about creativity. Soviet cinema and socialist realism disproves this. If they were truly talking about envisioning different systems of government, they should have said that. Instead, they made a comically huge and hand waving statement about raw creativity from socialist projects.
Soviets cannot create new ideas
Then explain the Soviet artistic renaissance
Oh well I’m only talking about creating new political philosphies
I am talking about creativity. Soviet era entertainment was based on pre-existing fairy tales and examining the human condition. LOTS of introspection and very little new or innovative that would challenge the status quo.
Over the same time across the world there were new world of art introducing new ideas and characters that no one had seen before. Comicbooks took the world by storm but were ignored in Soviet controlled areas.
Soviet art is exactly what I said authoritarian art is: it lacks innovation and new ideas, instead building on what exists. Instead of creating new heroes that resonate across cultures they have deep introspective works examining the human condition. New forms of art come from egalitarian communities. New ways of expressing existing art forms comes from authoritarian communities.
Comic books find their roots in cartoons, satire, and humor books. They didn’t just manifest out of nothing. Do tell me what “original” or “new” ideas were coming out during that era that don’t find their roots in earlier work.
You’re prepared to be broadly reductive but tell me what Soviet cultural innovations arose? The West had super powered comic book heroes not based on preexisting fairy tales. The West had movies an entire generation before Soviet film developed as a cultural feature. The West had genre defining literature. The West created game shows. There is so much stuff that didn’t exist before and it was the science of the West that powered these innovations. What did the Soviets do that didn’t copy what came before?
To be clear: they’re not moving the goalposts, they’re correcting a point of misunderstanding.
Moving the goalposts is when someone attempts to redefine a claim after the original claim was proven wrong. If you reread it, @ChicoSuave@lemmy.world’s point from the beginning was a critique of modern-day Soviet apologists, not of the citizens, artists, activists, and workers of the Soviet Union.
Again you talk about cinema and plays and art when that’s not what the topic was to begin with. You’re just shadowboxing my comment. Have fun being disingenuous online I guess.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_realism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_art
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinema_of_the_Soviet_Union
Again - dafuq? You say a lot of words, but I don’t understand what your point is.
Authoritarians lack imagination and creativity.
They usually cannot imagine something completely new, they must “piggyback” off of something that already exists.
Because there has only really been Authoritarian Communism a la Russia, that’s the only way authoritarians can think of what communism would be, since again, they lack imagination and creativity.
Seemed pretty clear to me. You link about art but OP not talking about making art. I think you just saw the word “creativity” and thought they meant art or something. They were more so talking about creating systems of governance than creating art.
I saw the word creativity and assumed they were talking about creativity. Soviet cinema and socialist realism disproves this. If they were truly talking about envisioning different systems of government, they should have said that. Instead, they made a comically huge and hand waving statement about raw creativity from socialist projects.
That’s textbook moving the goalposts.
I am talking about creativity. Soviet era entertainment was based on pre-existing fairy tales and examining the human condition. LOTS of introspection and very little new or innovative that would challenge the status quo.
Over the same time across the world there were new world of art introducing new ideas and characters that no one had seen before. Comicbooks took the world by storm but were ignored in Soviet controlled areas.
Soviet art is exactly what I said authoritarian art is: it lacks innovation and new ideas, instead building on what exists. Instead of creating new heroes that resonate across cultures they have deep introspective works examining the human condition. New forms of art come from egalitarian communities. New ways of expressing existing art forms comes from authoritarian communities.
Comic books find their roots in cartoons, satire, and humor books. They didn’t just manifest out of nothing. Do tell me what “original” or “new” ideas were coming out during that era that don’t find their roots in earlier work.
You’re prepared to be broadly reductive but tell me what Soviet cultural innovations arose? The West had super powered comic book heroes not based on preexisting fairy tales. The West had movies an entire generation before Soviet film developed as a cultural feature. The West had genre defining literature. The West created game shows. There is so much stuff that didn’t exist before and it was the science of the West that powered these innovations. What did the Soviets do that didn’t copy what came before?
What movies, literature, and game shows are you thinking of?
To be clear: they’re not moving the goalposts, they’re correcting a point of misunderstanding.
Moving the goalposts is when someone attempts to redefine a claim after the original claim was proven wrong. If you reread it, @ChicoSuave@lemmy.world’s point from the beginning was a critique of modern-day Soviet apologists, not of the citizens, artists, activists, and workers of the Soviet Union.
Again you talk about cinema and plays and art when that’s not what the topic was to begin with. You’re just shadowboxing my comment. Have fun being disingenuous online I guess.