Claiming Tito was not a communist is getting kinda weird given the party was called the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
I'm personally closer to social democracy, but relatively on the left of that area, towards market socialism.
Why Tito's market socialism and not SWCC then?
Because I prefer my ideology with less authoritarianism. SWCC is borderline fascist.
SWCC is borderline fascist.
Why do you say that? The electoral structure is almost identical to Cuba, although significantly larger in scale (due to obvious population differences), both systems were derivative of the USSR's system.
What unique structural feature makes you call one fascist over the other? I at least assume you don't consider Cuba fascist. And what exactly is your take on the USSR? You are aware that the electoral system of Yugoslavia under Tito was also extremely similar right? I mention this since you implied you were fond of titoism.
Claiming Tito was not a communist is getting kinda weird given the party was called the League of Communists of Yugoslavia
I'm personally closer to social democracy, but relatively on the left of that area, towards market socialism.
Why Tito's market socialism and not SWCC then?
Because I prefer my ideology with less authoritarianism. SWCC is borderline fascist.
Why do you say that? The electoral structure is almost identical to Cuba, although significantly larger in scale (due to obvious population differences), both systems were derivative of the USSR's system.
What unique structural feature makes you call one fascist over the other? I at least assume you don't consider Cuba fascist. And what exactly is your take on the USSR? You are aware that the electoral system of Yugoslavia under Tito was also extremely similar right? I mention this since you implied you were fond of titoism.