• halvar@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      My previous comment was very cynical, but when you think about it communism is the historical anomaly. Sure you can point to the Mass killings wikipedia page, but you can also do that with other topics and they also are separated into “XY under communism” and “XY” articles. XY could be stuff like “Economy”, “Urban development”, “Housing” or “Worker’s rights”. It’s just a convention wikipedia seems to adhere to.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        In what way is communism a historical anomaly in a manner that capitalism does not fit into? Both are part of the same historical development process.

        • halvar@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          22 hours ago

          It’s an anomaly in the sense that it was present in high gear for around 70 years in the 20th century and most people (who are likely to read wikipedia) probably don’t live in it right now. That’s my one and only reason for calling it that.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            7 hours ago

            I suppose I can see that logic, but capitalism too is a historical anomaly, and will too become a part of history while socialism and eventually communism becomes dominant. Framing it this way is a viewpoint that sees capitalism more as static and unchanging than anything else.