He wouldn't see the USSR as anything other than a state capitalist system.Socialism is a free access moneyless social system based upon, "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs".Russia's Leninist revolution was essentially a capitalist one.It deposed feudalism and enthroned capitalism albeit in the absence of major capitalist enterprises the state had to create those.
I find it amusing that he does not mention socialism at all. The USSR despite having a corrupt bureaucracy (much less so than that of the US) was able to pull itself up from a third-world backwater into being a modern superpower by the 1970s, despite having the major capitalist powers (Britain, France, USA, West Germany) maintain unthinkable amounts of pressure on their borders.
He wouldn't see the USSR as anything other than a state capitalist system.Socialism is a free access moneyless social system based upon, "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs".Russia's Leninist revolution was essentially a capitalist one.It deposed feudalism and enthroned capitalism albeit in the absence of major capitalist enterprises the state had to create those.
The last 30 seconds summarize the proposed answer to the question this presentation raises.
I find it amusing that he does not mention socialism at all. The USSR despite having a corrupt bureaucracy (much less so than that of the US) was able to pull itself up from a third-world backwater into being a modern superpower by the 1970s, despite having the major capitalist powers (Britain, France, USA, West Germany) maintain unthinkable amounts of pressure on their borders.