>>4612053>Since you yourself said this means "most but not all" to you, then you largely agree empires are better than republics, yes?Oh god, are you really this stupid? It's literally the other way around.
>Actually, it does. I came to these conclusions by comparing the Empire phase and the Soviet phase of your nationWhat the hell are you fucking talking about? Dude. I know your mind is occupied with all this shit, but come on, pay attention. Here:
>It doesn't. I don't really know how you come to these conclusions.By "these conclusions" I refer to what I was quoting right there:
>Within that context, it means you have a fascination for empires and disdain for republics, which means that you do genuinely think empires are better than republics.I.e., to be absolutely sure you fucking idiot understand what we are talking about, I mean that I don't know how you come to the conclusion that I have a fascination for empires and disdain for republics.
>and as far as progress and quality of life goes, the Soviet has beaten literally every other country on the Earth in regards to these two criteria.Lol, okay mate, whatever you say. Quality of life, now that's what the Soviet Union was known for!
>But empires are evil BECAUSE they invade and loot territoryYes, but 1) they don't always do so, 2) they can be fighting against a greater evil, 3) they can also develop the territories they control.
>Do you use that to describe the Dictatorship of the Proletariat? You yourself already knows it acts like the US's congressYou probably mean the central comitee, or the congresses of the soviets, not the "dictatorship of the proletariat"? Anyway, you're one fucking deluded commie if you think that SU was democratic.
>Oh it's simple, the republic of the Soviet Union wins in that regard. Here's pic-related as proof.It wasn't. Your pic related is not proof of how well people lived, you dunce. I know hundreds of people who lived there, I think I have a vague understanding.
