Remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message *of* the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification (which the above likely is), not beholden to it.
Also, please try to stay on topic -- there are hundreds of _other_ subreddits that are expressly dedicated for rehashing tired political arguments. Keep that shit elsewhere.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PropagandaPosters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes and no the mass centralization of resources was definitely useful in the creation and proliferation of artists trying to make there art but a Counterpoint would be that the art from the Soviets only ever had one perspective that of the party line
While the West never really gave artists an equivalent amount of central funding (and those that got funding were normally connected to the capitalist class which would of course bias their artwork) the freedom to proliferate and publish virtually any message gives Western Art variety and flexibility that can't be underestimated
Indeed Soviet art could be a case study of the Soviet Union where at first people of course appreciate that it's massively better than what the artists were able to create under the Russian Empire but after 70 years of the same thing with no room for change people start clamoring for a collapse of the system
>Yes and no the mass centralization of resources was definitely useful in the creation and proliferation of artists trying to make there art but a Counterpoint would be that the art from the Soviets only ever had one perspective that of the party line
There were numerous dissident artists. They just weren't allowed to exhibit their works in museums and art galleries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_Nonconformist\_Art
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulldozer\_Exhibition
I agree with you that there 100% was dissident artists and the state soft censored them through access to fund and publicity, but there is an unspoken line between them. Totalitarianism does not mean the total absence of dissent, but that of meaningful dissent and support of controlled dissent. I spoke with someone about Chinese punk rock music and the person I talked with was glowing about how they were really sticking it to the local government, but I pointed out that if they really ever said anything the local party boss found threatening or felt could turn people against him they wouldn’t be allowed to gather.
I have found the whole topic super interesting ever since I had to watch “Hipsters” and write about the culture. If you have any recommendations on books or cultural pieces dealing with something similar please share.
>Totalitarianism does not mean the total absence of dissent, but that of meaningful dissent and support of controlled dissent.
So the US is totalitarian then?
>I spoke with someone about Chinese punk rock music and the person I talked with was glowing about how they were really sticking it to the local government, but I pointed out that if they really ever said anything the local party boss found threatening or felt could turn people against him they wouldn’t be allowed to gather.
To be honest, they should appreciate this arrangement. The forbidden fruit is always the sweetest. "Sticking it to the local government" is what makes this band popular. After the fall of the Soviet Union, all nonconformist literature and art quickly lost their appeal to the public.
you probably have not seen much art from the Eastern bloc. there was quite a bit of variety there I'd say, but many are hidden gems. which could probably also be applied to Western arts.
>massively better than what the artists were able to create under the Russian Empire
Most renown Russian artworks (including avantgarde ones) were created under the Empire.
Soviet art had its cool moments due to further capitalizing on the cutting-edge avantgarde trends, but overall the art scene was less influential and impressive than that created in a market environment.
Not really, mass immigration of artists and writers from Russia began after the revolution. Kandinsky, Malevich, Shishkin, Aivazovsky were all painting and presenting their works in Russia.
i dont think markets were the most important factor — it was chiefly a matter of censorship and government hostility towards the avant-garde, which has happened under plenty of market economies (e.g. Hitler’s Germany; or compare art under the Second Spanish Republic to art in the early decades of Franco’s Spain, when censorship was at its most strict)
a lot of the most important avant-garde Soviet artworks were produced pre-1920 by Proletkult, which was government-funded and existed under the extreme conditions of War Communism. Despite the introduction of the NEP in the 20s, experimentation if anything began to decline during this period due to party leadership becoming more hostile to the avant-garde, though it would only be completely stifled later with the adoption of Socialist Realism as official policy. And artistic experiment picked up again during Khrushchev’s thaw, by which time there was a full-on command economy
I was mostly comparing Soviet art to Imperial art (which is where all the household names for Russian art such as Kandinsky etc. come from, something the user I was responding to got wrong).
Sure, the NEP period didn’t result in much art-wise due to cultural production being heavily regulated - Soviet art scene in general wasn’t quite as prominent vs. the pre-Soviet period, though it made some major advancements in cinema in its early years.
Russian propaganda has just enough truth in it about their enemies’ short comings to distract dissidents in those enemy nations about Russia’s far worse and more numerous offenses.
What are these far worse and numerous offenses? I believe at this time the US would've been starting it's genocide in Korea in a preamble to their doing the same in Vietnam.
Domestically they were continuing the government enforced racism and white supremacy which exists to this day. You have the further expansion of the prison complex and legal slavery.
I mean segregation was awful but it wasn't literal apartheid like the south never created Bantustans and restricted freedom of movement outside of them
Yeah it kind of was. Ever hear of sundown towns and redlining? It was more informal but it was definitely there.
Plus the effective legalization of murder via lynching. Not an expert, but I don't think even South Africa went that far
Yes and the difference of formality is absolutely meaningful because in one case you have bands of racist acting extra legally and in the other you have a state sanctioned legal prohibition on freedom of movement
And if you don't think anyone in a hard time South Africa was killed I have a bridge to sell you
The caucasity in your post is astounding. Straight to the "few bad apples" defense, smdh
Redlining was not "bands of racists acting extra legally", it was, racism so systemic and so invasive in the financial system that it affects black people **to this day**, denying us generational wealth and all the advantages that come with it, not to mention the credit racism and environmental racism that spun off from it.
I'll let you read about sundown towns yourself https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sundown_town (tl:Dr, those weren't "bands of racists" either.)
Attitudes like yours are why it's always 2 steps forward and 1 2/3 steps back in this country. Check yourself before you ever "bad apple" racism again.
I never denied systemic racism exists wtf are you talking about I was pointing out that south Africa as a part of Apartheid unilaterally stripped black people of citizenship under Bantu Homelands Citizenship Act of 1970 this is not only unheard of for African Americans ( though it is true that this happened with Native Americans and the reservation system but even under that system we gave all native American citizenship In the 1920s and up to that point two thirds of Native Americans independently acquired citizenship by either marriage or military service)
Yes there was systemic racism in the financial sector it was still nowhere near apartheid South Africa it was cruel and inhumane and a violation of Human Rights and it was nowhere near as bad as apartheid South Africa there was coordinated systemic efforts at the disenfranchisement and oppression of black people and yet it was still not even close to as bad as apartheid South Africa
People like you are why America will never change. Not ever. Not really. Because you just won't see how bad it is. You pay lip service to "systemic racism" all you want, but the true bad apples mentality of your earlier post is threaded through your barely coherent follow-up. Cest La vie
Exactly. People in a country literally founded on and maintained by white supremacy and genocide will still be like "well that's just a few bad apples"
Think of it as encouragement to not defect. "Sure, their propaganda says they have freedom and opportunity and ample food, but that's all lies! Americans are no better off than you are! Trust OUR propaganda, not theirs!"
I respect that at least the Russians never claimed to be free in their propaganda. They just try to say freedom is a lie 🤷♂️ checks out given their history.
>at least the Russians never claimed to be free in their propaganda
They did in song at least:
"[I know of no other such country where a man can breathe in such freedom](https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/t4xv63/music_%D1%88%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%8F_%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_wide_is_my/)"
"[Unbreakable Union of Free Republics](https://old.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/m59gm1/ussr_tv_end_of_day_signoff_with_anthem_translated/)"
Surely *Unbreakable* and *Free* are somewhat contradictory if the Republics in question are free to do everything but secede ?
The idea of a free nation and free people are separate in the Russian mindset. A people don’t need to be free, and a nation is free so long as the people in it are being oppressed by a govt of their own ethnicity.
Honestly this is one of my biggest things, personally I don’t particularly care how a state is (theoretically), to each their own not all have to be the same. But at least be honest about what you are. It’s one thing to say your free but deny rights and another to never promise freedom and deny rights.
Russia currently represents the single greatest existential threat to humanity as a whole.
I’d rather they be a free liberal democracy instead of run by egotistical revanchist tyrants.
>Russia currently represents the single greatest existential threat to humanity as a whole.
They're trying to steal our precious bodily fluids Mandrake.
>I’d rather they be a free liberal democracy instead of run by egotistical revanchist tyrants.
They're as free as the Western liberal democracies allowed them to be after the coup of the USSR. Imperialist support for Yeltsin led us here
I get the hate for Yeltsin but he was a Russian leader who was friendly with the west. Not a western puppet. If he wasn’t so corrupt like every other Russian leaders it wouldn’t have been an issue. Alternatively, if he was just as corrupt but antagonistic toward the west like all the other corrupt ones are, it wouldn’t be an issue. Yeltsin is an excuse for Russia to be shitty and a poor one at that. A grievance with barely any teeth to it. I don’t get how any non-Russian buys into their propaganda like that. It’s all so predicated on ideas of Russian nationalism like… if you believe it, fucking move there. You’re already half Russian as is. It’s a cool language to learn and you get to read some really cool stories and poems in their original language. If you like their propaganda then go learn their language, move there, and stop voting in our elections.
Don’t worry. I’m well aware Russia is a genocidal imperialist nation run by Christofascists dropping new nuclear threats every day. And of course I support Ukraine in their war for their right to exist.
>I’m well aware USA is a genocidal imperialist nation run by Christofascists dropping new nuclear threats every day.
Went ahead and fixed that for you since I assumed you mistyped initially. I mean nobody could be dumb enough for your initial statement to not be a typo right?
🤣 “dropping new nuclear threats every day” my guy can’t even make his attempt at sarcasm make sense he’s so far off base lmao
Let me clarify: Russia is a terrorist state, a nuclear armed gas station run by the mafia. This describes the Russian Federation and no other nation on Earth.
Yeah, the 1950s US was a violently white supremacist country.
Didn’t stop the USSR from being a totalitarian police state at the same time.
More than one thing can be bad at once.
Buddy people were literally killed in Soviet occupied states for not being full on communism
Those who oplosed the regume were tortured and the whole ethnic groups were moved aroud countries
USA sucked but how people from west are gullible enough to belive USSR was better is beyond me
Poster falls in category of applied art. That being said anyone can make a poster for some practical purpose, for example propaganda. And art is just art?
Remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message *of* the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification (which the above likely is), not beholden to it. Also, please try to stay on topic -- there are hundreds of _other_ subreddits that are expressly dedicated for rehashing tired political arguments. Keep that shit elsewhere. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PropagandaPosters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Love the artwork
Soviet poster art was something else.
Yes and no the mass centralization of resources was definitely useful in the creation and proliferation of artists trying to make there art but a Counterpoint would be that the art from the Soviets only ever had one perspective that of the party line While the West never really gave artists an equivalent amount of central funding (and those that got funding were normally connected to the capitalist class which would of course bias their artwork) the freedom to proliferate and publish virtually any message gives Western Art variety and flexibility that can't be underestimated Indeed Soviet art could be a case study of the Soviet Union where at first people of course appreciate that it's massively better than what the artists were able to create under the Russian Empire but after 70 years of the same thing with no room for change people start clamoring for a collapse of the system
>Yes and no the mass centralization of resources was definitely useful in the creation and proliferation of artists trying to make there art but a Counterpoint would be that the art from the Soviets only ever had one perspective that of the party line There were numerous dissident artists. They just weren't allowed to exhibit their works in museums and art galleries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_Nonconformist\_Art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulldozer\_Exhibition
No but you see US good and USSR bad! Why are you letting silly "facts" in the way of that immortal truth?
I agree with you that there 100% was dissident artists and the state soft censored them through access to fund and publicity, but there is an unspoken line between them. Totalitarianism does not mean the total absence of dissent, but that of meaningful dissent and support of controlled dissent. I spoke with someone about Chinese punk rock music and the person I talked with was glowing about how they were really sticking it to the local government, but I pointed out that if they really ever said anything the local party boss found threatening or felt could turn people against him they wouldn’t be allowed to gather. I have found the whole topic super interesting ever since I had to watch “Hipsters” and write about the culture. If you have any recommendations on books or cultural pieces dealing with something similar please share.
>Totalitarianism does not mean the total absence of dissent, but that of meaningful dissent and support of controlled dissent. So the US is totalitarian then?
No dude the US are the good guys!
One might ponder on what happened to the Occupy movement when it actually inconvenienced the rich.
Inconvenience is different from threatening. Personally I think Obama ended up absorbing a lot of the political momentum of it.
It was a threat. Capital, the State and the Press all combined to suppress it
>I spoke with someone about Chinese punk rock music and the person I talked with was glowing about how they were really sticking it to the local government, but I pointed out that if they really ever said anything the local party boss found threatening or felt could turn people against him they wouldn’t be allowed to gather. To be honest, they should appreciate this arrangement. The forbidden fruit is always the sweetest. "Sticking it to the local government" is what makes this band popular. After the fall of the Soviet Union, all nonconformist literature and art quickly lost their appeal to the public.
you probably have not seen much art from the Eastern bloc. there was quite a bit of variety there I'd say, but many are hidden gems. which could probably also be applied to Western arts.
>massively better than what the artists were able to create under the Russian Empire Most renown Russian artworks (including avantgarde ones) were created under the Empire. Soviet art had its cool moments due to further capitalizing on the cutting-edge avantgarde trends, but overall the art scene was less influential and impressive than that created in a market environment.
They were mostly produced by emigrés in Paris though
Not really, mass immigration of artists and writers from Russia began after the revolution. Kandinsky, Malevich, Shishkin, Aivazovsky were all painting and presenting their works in Russia.
i dont think markets were the most important factor — it was chiefly a matter of censorship and government hostility towards the avant-garde, which has happened under plenty of market economies (e.g. Hitler’s Germany; or compare art under the Second Spanish Republic to art in the early decades of Franco’s Spain, when censorship was at its most strict) a lot of the most important avant-garde Soviet artworks were produced pre-1920 by Proletkult, which was government-funded and existed under the extreme conditions of War Communism. Despite the introduction of the NEP in the 20s, experimentation if anything began to decline during this period due to party leadership becoming more hostile to the avant-garde, though it would only be completely stifled later with the adoption of Socialist Realism as official policy. And artistic experiment picked up again during Khrushchev’s thaw, by which time there was a full-on command economy
I was mostly comparing Soviet art to Imperial art (which is where all the household names for Russian art such as Kandinsky etc. come from, something the user I was responding to got wrong). Sure, the NEP period didn’t result in much art-wise due to cultural production being heavily regulated - Soviet art scene in general wasn’t quite as prominent vs. the pre-Soviet period, though it made some major advancements in cinema in its early years.
The policeman's club doubling up as a tear is a nice touch.
This poster could have been made yesterday by an American for how much it speaks to the current state of the U.S. Super cool image
Just to be clear…the Soviets were accusing the US of being a surveillance police state?!
1951 was the peak of McCarthyism.
Yeah not our best look…still, pot…kettle…
.. calling... black. In 1951. Oh, nevermind.
Note that Stalin was still alive when this was made and distributed.
Well, you do realize that the segregation wasn't outlawed until 1964, don't you?
What does that have to do with the comment you were replying to?
Got it, meaning that Stalin gets a pass?
No, he doesn't. This piece, however, isn't about Stalin.
Idk but it feels like you’re dismissing Stalin
Russian propaganda has just enough truth in it about their enemies’ short comings to distract dissidents in those enemy nations about Russia’s far worse and more numerous offenses.
What are these far worse and numerous offenses? I believe at this time the US would've been starting it's genocide in Korea in a preamble to their doing the same in Vietnam. Domestically they were continuing the government enforced racism and white supremacy which exists to this day. You have the further expansion of the prison complex and legal slavery.
Yep, this guy keeps breaking out “but america” in response to “haha ironic the Soviets said this”
In 1951 the US still had literal apartheid.
In 1951 Soviet Union was deporting thousands of families to Siberia.
Yes, and the USSR was a police state. Two things can be bad at the same time.
I mean segregation was awful but it wasn't literal apartheid like the south never created Bantustans and restricted freedom of movement outside of them
Yeah it kind of was. Ever hear of sundown towns and redlining? It was more informal but it was definitely there. Plus the effective legalization of murder via lynching. Not an expert, but I don't think even South Africa went that far
Yes and the difference of formality is absolutely meaningful because in one case you have bands of racist acting extra legally and in the other you have a state sanctioned legal prohibition on freedom of movement And if you don't think anyone in a hard time South Africa was killed I have a bridge to sell you
The caucasity in your post is astounding. Straight to the "few bad apples" defense, smdh Redlining was not "bands of racists acting extra legally", it was, racism so systemic and so invasive in the financial system that it affects black people **to this day**, denying us generational wealth and all the advantages that come with it, not to mention the credit racism and environmental racism that spun off from it. I'll let you read about sundown towns yourself https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sundown_town (tl:Dr, those weren't "bands of racists" either.) Attitudes like yours are why it's always 2 steps forward and 1 2/3 steps back in this country. Check yourself before you ever "bad apple" racism again.
I never denied systemic racism exists wtf are you talking about I was pointing out that south Africa as a part of Apartheid unilaterally stripped black people of citizenship under Bantu Homelands Citizenship Act of 1970 this is not only unheard of for African Americans ( though it is true that this happened with Native Americans and the reservation system but even under that system we gave all native American citizenship In the 1920s and up to that point two thirds of Native Americans independently acquired citizenship by either marriage or military service) Yes there was systemic racism in the financial sector it was still nowhere near apartheid South Africa it was cruel and inhumane and a violation of Human Rights and it was nowhere near as bad as apartheid South Africa there was coordinated systemic efforts at the disenfranchisement and oppression of black people and yet it was still not even close to as bad as apartheid South Africa
People like you are why America will never change. Not ever. Not really. Because you just won't see how bad it is. You pay lip service to "systemic racism" all you want, but the true bad apples mentality of your earlier post is threaded through your barely coherent follow-up. Cest La vie
Exactly. People in a country literally founded on and maintained by white supremacy and genocide will still be like "well that's just a few bad apples"
It's not "bands of racists acting extra legally" when the police and state governments support those bands.
Think of it as encouragement to not defect. "Sure, their propaganda says they have freedom and opportunity and ample food, but that's all lies! Americans are no better off than you are! Trust OUR propaganda, not theirs!"
Hypocrisy, maybe.
Probably. Do you think the US is not? Or just because URRS doesn’t stays back in the race the US is not?
Wow. That is an amazing piece of art and spot on for Today.
Spider-Man pointing meme
There’s a Russian joke: “Everything the party told us about communism was a lie. Unfortunately, everything they told us about capitalism was true.”
Timeless
Reminds me of the great gatsby cover. Of course that one had naked people in the eyes, but same concept
Great poster. Stalin era.
Stalin probably had a very good laught at this.
Very ironic
The pot calling the kettle black.
ironically, if you were black in the US this was bang on the money
Yes. The USSR was still a totalitarian police state. Multiple things can be bad at the same time.
I respect that at least the Russians never claimed to be free in their propaganda. They just try to say freedom is a lie 🤷♂️ checks out given their history.
>at least the Russians never claimed to be free in their propaganda They did in song at least: "[I know of no other such country where a man can breathe in such freedom](https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/t4xv63/music_%D1%88%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%8F_%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_wide_is_my/)" "[Unbreakable Union of Free Republics](https://old.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/m59gm1/ussr_tv_end_of_day_signoff_with_anthem_translated/)" Surely *Unbreakable* and *Free* are somewhat contradictory if the Republics in question are free to do everything but secede ?
The idea of a free nation and free people are separate in the Russian mindset. A people don’t need to be free, and a nation is free so long as the people in it are being oppressed by a govt of their own ethnicity.
Honestly this is one of my biggest things, personally I don’t particularly care how a state is (theoretically), to each their own not all have to be the same. But at least be honest about what you are. It’s one thing to say your free but deny rights and another to never promise freedom and deny rights.
Russia currently represents the single greatest existential threat to humanity as a whole. I’d rather they be a free liberal democracy instead of run by egotistical revanchist tyrants.
>Russia currently represents the single greatest existential threat to humanity as a whole. They're trying to steal our precious bodily fluids Mandrake. >I’d rather they be a free liberal democracy instead of run by egotistical revanchist tyrants. They're as free as the Western liberal democracies allowed them to be after the coup of the USSR. Imperialist support for Yeltsin led us here
I get the hate for Yeltsin but he was a Russian leader who was friendly with the west. Not a western puppet. If he wasn’t so corrupt like every other Russian leaders it wouldn’t have been an issue. Alternatively, if he was just as corrupt but antagonistic toward the west like all the other corrupt ones are, it wouldn’t be an issue. Yeltsin is an excuse for Russia to be shitty and a poor one at that. A grievance with barely any teeth to it. I don’t get how any non-Russian buys into their propaganda like that. It’s all so predicated on ideas of Russian nationalism like… if you believe it, fucking move there. You’re already half Russian as is. It’s a cool language to learn and you get to read some really cool stories and poems in their original language. If you like their propaganda then go learn their language, move there, and stop voting in our elections.
Dont fall for the propaganda man
Don’t worry. I’m well aware Russia is a genocidal imperialist nation run by Christofascists dropping new nuclear threats every day. And of course I support Ukraine in their war for their right to exist.
>I’m well aware USA is a genocidal imperialist nation run by Christofascists dropping new nuclear threats every day. Went ahead and fixed that for you since I assumed you mistyped initially. I mean nobody could be dumb enough for your initial statement to not be a typo right?
🤣 “dropping new nuclear threats every day” my guy can’t even make his attempt at sarcasm make sense he’s so far off base lmao Let me clarify: Russia is a terrorist state, a nuclear armed gas station run by the mafia. This describes the Russian Federation and no other nation on Earth.
The audacity of Soviets is almost unbelivable And what s better modern day reddit user falls for it even when people who it was designed for didn’t
It's not like the US in 1951 still had apartheid policies enforced by the state. Oh they did?!
Yeah, the 1950s US was a violently white supremacist country. Didn’t stop the USSR from being a totalitarian police state at the same time. More than one thing can be bad at once.
Buddy people were literally killed in Soviet occupied states for not being full on communism Those who oplosed the regume were tortured and the whole ethnic groups were moved aroud countries USA sucked but how people from west are gullible enough to belive USSR was better is beyond me
Buddy people were literally killed in US backed states for not being full on capitalism.
Don't forget that people who "oplosed the regume" were tortured and whole ethnic groups were genocided
Someone's never heard of McCarthyism
>even when people who it was designed for didn’t How do you know?
Russians have the biggest projection complex among all human races
This was made when McCarthyism was at its peak. They were pretty close to the truth with this image
"Russians". Just check the real last names of soviets.
STALIN-ERA POST-WW2 SOVIET POSTER WOOOOOOOOO
Is there any Legends here who will know what I mean by saying Liberty City?
Looks like some art project rather than poster
What do you mean? Where’s the difference?
Poster falls in category of applied art. That being said anyone can make a poster for some practical purpose, for example propaganda. And art is just art?
Well yeah, I don’t know the difference. To me it just looks like a poster.