You must log in or register to comment.
Thats a W123 Mercedes-Benz.
Yeah, a communist Mercedes Benz W123. Even an AI slop meme would be better than this.
There’s a reason why soviet era technology was infamous for its use of
plywoodstalinium.There’s also a reason why post industrial american technology is infamous for its use of
chinesiumtotally legit made in USA stickers.People are gonna hate this answer but the best products are made in a properly competitive market.
The USSR had state owned OEMS that ultimately relied on deals with foreign manufacturers to jump start their success significantly later than their international counterparts.
The big 3 US OEMs lobbied congress to block foreign imports to protect their inferior product in the home market (multiple times, notably against Japan and recently China).
You can have a competitive market under socialism! The main difference is the profits don’t get hoovered off by a parasitic investor class that don’t actually provide any meaningful labour.
Yeah, exactly. People think capitalism means competition, but that’s not a great definition of it. It means capital gets to call the shots and keep the profits, even when they’re not doing any meaningful work.
You could have any number of companies competing that are worker owned.
People are gonna hate this answer but the best products are made in a properly competitive market.
Yep, that. Protectionism leads to worse results for everyone except a handful of people who profit in the short term. Long-term, even the companies whose immediate profits are being protected will suffer as they make worse quality products that eventually no one wants to buy. Only the people who are in a position to grab some profits and run get any benefit.
Capitalism, socialism, communism, whatever, doesn’t matter.
Small correction, the left is a capitalist-made vehicle. This fine sample is a communist one. These are still in active use in many places 40+ years after production. Cheap and simple to maintain.
A Spectacle for Fools.
I’m just replying here because I want to remember that phrase. That’s probably the best way I have read to describe Musk’s “flying car”.
Eastern Block cars definitely didn’t have the reputation of working well. They were more known to be easy to repair, but they had to be since shit broke constantly lol
Skoda still has that reputation amount older people now, despite them probably being really good.
Meanwhile Alfa Romeo coasting under the radar despite being among the most unreliable pieces of shit out there.
Btw, it’s Eastern Bloc, not block. I’m sure autocorrect is to blame, but it seems like neat trivia regardless.
Why is that? Does it come from a Russian word translation? Does it mean something different?
Nope, it’s a French loan word. In English and French, a bloc is a political group. The original French meaning was a block, like a block of wood or cheese, and that meaning is still used, but came to also mean political group or alliance at some point. When it was imported into English, we only kept the political meaning since we already had block.
That’s the useless, but interesting answer I was looking for. Thanks.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/bloc
Like all quirks of English the French are to blame.
Yes, but for Eastern Europeans especially the Russians, quality IS about being repairable. Both the West and East have different perception of what quality is, but both still strive for quality.
I’m more talking about the OP posts “car that works” than quality. A car that’s constantly having shit breaking isn’t exactly something I’d call a “car that works” even when it’s easier to repair
Plenty of old Western cars are pretty repairable too, while not constantly breaking down. The non-repairabilit, is a more recent trend. Many forget that communism in Europe collapsed almost 4 decades ago. Things changed in general a lot since then.
Yeah, I’m not sure I’d credit the economic system with repairability or blame it for unreliability.
To use WW2 as a measurement point: western allied vehicles tended to be extremely repairable. Eastern allied vehicles were also extremely repairable. Western vehicles tended to have closer tolerances for parts, meaning a part could be damaged easier. Eastern tended to have simpler parts, meaning they could be repaired. Western vehicles were geared towards modular components and ease of replacement, so you could swap an engine in 20 minutes or spend an afternoon building a new tank out of two that had been destroyed, even if one was a different model. The Eastern tanks tended to have a more intensive overhaul process, and less shared components between models.
Nazi machines were a shit show with custom parts, low repairability, and poor workmanship. I have no idea why people give them credit for good engineering. Jets are cool, but useless if you can’t fuel or fix them. Advanced engine systems are great, but you can’t repair them and they explode under stress. Ornate and bespoke parts are cool until they’re produced by slaves who do the minimum to avoid death and it warps, leaving you without hope of replacement, no ability to scrap the damn thing, and an enemy who can repair their tanks by either sufficiently motivating a tree trunk into an axle or by using three cars to build a new tank to factory spec over lunch.You’ve got America turning car manufacturers into weapons builders: stellar. Mass production and modularization with a skilled assembly line.
You’ve got the UK having people build machine guns in their basements from simple plans. Wicked little death traps.
You’ve got the soviets dictating material allocation and design priorities.The common factor to the good design is the workers distance to design feedback.
The easier it is for a person doing the work to correct how the work is done, the faster the design will iterate and the better it will get.
That feedback loop can be good or bad regardless of the specific economic model.Hell, duck tape was the result of an ammunition factory worker thinking the tape they were using for ammo boxes was stupid and would get her sons killed, so she wrote the president. He didn’t understand in the least, but gave it to the war production board and told them to Fix The Problem, which they did.
Conclusion: if you want good shit, have the people building it tell you how to fix it. Repeatedly.
And don’t use fucking slave labor, it’s unethical and bad manufacturing.
East block West block, small block big block. Communism and democracy are cars; capitalism and socialism are engines.
Communism or Capitalism don’t make things better or worse. Corruption makes things worse and regulations and oversight make them better.
Endless stories about garbage made on both sides leads to some greedy fucker rigging the system.
I mean we never had communism in the UK, but we built solid reliable council housing from the 60s to the 80s.
Turns out if the government is going to be on the hook for a bad job, they tend to do it right. No point cheaping out on materials if you’re going to be the one coming back to replace the roof in ten years time when it starts to leak.
Can say the same for miljonprogrammet here in Sweden. I live in such a flat, it’s been refreshed, and it’s hella cosy. Built sturdy as hell, think it’d survive a nuke.
We’re facing a housing crisis again, and another one of these would be nice. Buut we all know that won’t happen since housing is an investment, an asset, and the crisis makes it more valuable.
People not having access to housing is making the capitalist class more money.
I’d say one downside with those buildings is that sound travels really easily between neighboring apartments and they often tend to get quite cold in the winter, although I’m not sure how other buildings from the same time period compare.
Definitely beats being homeless though.
I don’t really have that problem with my flat. I can hear the baby downstairs when he cries loudly, but that’s about it. Haven’t heard any other neighbours.
I worry greatly that I’m audible. x3
Both make things worth. If you’ve got a bit of time on your hands, I can thoroughly recommend James Scott’s book Seeing Like A State. Not many more clear eyed views of the recent history of social structures around.
I will second the recommendation.
I hate hypercapitalism as much as anyone, but let’s not pretend capitalism does not produce excellent cars when the real issue is the cost (global cost, not monetary) of producing them.
Ah yes, the good old communist Mercedes W123.
I guess they were looking for a photo of a broken down lada but didn’t find one 🤣
Smh just found another communist Mercedes.
Don’t ask Mercedes what they were doing between 1934 and 1945.
And BMW, and Krupp, Hugo, Bayer, blah, blah…. Yeah. Any industry that could industry produced for the Reich.
I’m not saying that to be “everyone was doing it,” but wondering why the need to point out what historically is well known and definitely not a secret.
well you can, they’re forced by law to acknowledge it.
Or IBM
TIL: Nazis were communists
/S
C’mon man.
Nazi weren’t communists. But you did find a Nazi car
Ok. But far right fascists are trying to convince people that the Nazis, or the “National Socialist German Workers’ Party”, was a leftist socialist party.
Well far-right fascists are wrong and always have been. They might dupe a concerningly large number of people, but most of those people aren’t on the fediverse.
And the sarcasm in that comment seemed to register clearly
but most of those people aren’t on the fediverse.
You’d be surprised.
And the sarcasm in that comment seemed to register clearly
Well, at least 2 of us didn’t catch that. But I get it now.
🤦♂️
Funny how communists didn’t have a problem with that brand, isn’t it?
That is the peak chassis form, you may not like it, but its true.
It’s peak car, tbh.
Was it actually a communist car? Trying to sift through info online it looks like it was made by west Germany, which I associate with the western postwar powers, but I really dont know much about any of this
Anyone know if it was a particularly good car?
It’s a Mercedes, which is pretty much a symbol of German capitalism. I was trying to point out the irony of using this as a talking point to support communism.
The deisel one is well known for being quite reliable and easy to keep running for a very long time. Also known for being very well built.
They were built like tanks. But they drove like tanks too.
They handled better than most contemporary cars, not sporty but safe and comfortable, but most cars back then were rather agricultural compared to today.
Like a tank, but slower!
I lost the gas cap for one. The guy at the parts store laughed at me when I asked for a gas cap for a Mercedes, then he looked through the book said “Oh” and grabbed one from the shelf that had five of them on it. It’s the same cap as tractors use.
Neither capitalism or communism gives you reliable cars. What helps is good regulation for minimum warranty periods, mandatory maintenance and spare parts availability for 15+ years, interdictions of dark patterns (e.g: end user should be able to replace the headlamps, oil filter and such easily with basic tools). And also, industry standards, ODB2 for diagnostics for instance. And now, Cybersecurity and data privacy is super relevant, you don’t want OEMs or bad actors to be able to disable your car remotely.
I need respectable 90s Japanese cars that are competing to destroy the American automotive industry. But with electronic vehicles.
Yea, if only they would build the mid 90’s Camry wagon again, but electric and with 300km real world range in freezing conditions. But we all know they won’t, as that would undermine their own business.
Yeah. Electric vehicles with no computers (beyond microcontrollers for batter chargers and stuff).
There was a period about 15 years ago where you going get a not stupidly expensive electric refit kit for a bunch of cars - someone I know did it with a 90s Rav4 for like $10k. Unfortunately they seem to be stupid expensive now.
Conversions for most cars are pretty lame. Battery placement is rough and mechanical losses from attaching an electric motor to a transmission for an ICE are significant. Conversions are cool but mostly a novelty.
I’d rather see some real bare-bones electrics, like the first Leafs, with the best battery tech we can toss in them.
First person to make the hatchback 90s Honda Civic of EVs is going to print money. I’d fucking do it, but I don’t have the capital required to start it.
Seriously. 200 miles of range for the entry model. Compact, make it a little rowdy, make it cheap, make documentation free and widely available. Let people modify it and break it, make a surplus of replacement parts so they can be put back together. Wait 6 months and then release a performance version.
You would print so much fucking money.
It’s already been made. We just can’t have it here in the US because it would kill our domestic auto makers. Can’t have competition if you’re not competitive, right?
Seems like what Slate is trying to do (probably others yoo). But no idea if it’s vaporware or not.
I lucked the fuck out and got a 12 year old Leaf for 700 bucks (a tree fell on it a little). Only 60 mile range, but it’s JUST enough for the commute.
I wonder if there’s a 10k for 100 mile range, 15k for 200 mile range possibility.
Yeah, for sure. Just gotta find a very large funder…
What’s John DeLorean up to these days?
In Europe we have Renault offering something in this segment with their new Twingo. Barebone simple EV for city driving and daily commute. It’s priced around 13k€ new.
Yeah, the digital dash and stuff is still a pretty huge turn-off. Dunno if it has things like electric door handles and non-mechanical brakes, but those are also disturbing.
So you mean recuperation by non mechanical brakes?
Heh, yeah, that was a bit of a brain fart coming from electrically controlled brakes in ICE cars. I do think there needs to be a mechanical backup though.
Non mechanical brakes? Like fly-by-wire or do you mean something else?
Comp…etition? Now how might we get world market competition?
Let’s order it on Amazon?
Yes /s
Yeah but none of that happens if the corporations that make the cars are the ones writing the laws that regulate them.
I’m confused, there are no 30 year old cars under capitalism?
I get what you’re trying to say, but I don’t think this is a great example to use.
My Honda pilot is 15 years old and it’s just starting to get harder to find parts
My Chevy Volt is 12 years old, and anything that’s not a consumable is quickly becoming unobtanium.
More like…When’s the last time a car commercial bragged about how your grandchildren will be driving your same car?
The second step is to muzzle the intelligent
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/movies/articles/explosive-elon-musk-film-hit-003620107.html
“fascinate fools and muzzle the intelligent, by emotional excitement on the one hand and terrorism on the other.” - Bertrand Russel
This comparison is just head-up-ass silly without statistics.
There are 75+ year-old Ford F-1s running around, with their original engine blocks:
https://classiccars.com/listings/view/2115325/1948-ford-f1-for-sale-in-prescott-arizona-86305
https://classiccars.com/listings/find/all-years/ford/f1
brought to you by capitalism!
Even without that, any old car can be made to work if you throw parts and labor at it. This idea that “communism made a car that ran for 30 years” is completely worthless with a single example. What matters is how many were manufactured and how many of those are still functional at 5, 10, 15, 20+ years. One sample is bad statistics.
Capitalism also produced the world’s most reliable and repairable pickup truck - the Toyota Hilux. If you were going to make a comparison just on lifetime operating hours vs. maintenance cost, Toyota would win globally no problem. If you were going to make a comparison based on operating hours in harsh conditions, Toyota would also win that.
That’s a capitalist car btw. Mercedes from West Germany
you’re making too much sense for some neomarxist kiddie dimwits here.
The Lada Riva. That symbol of communism.
Was just a rebadged Fiat 124.
It was originally a capitalist invention that the commies took credit for.
If you haven’t seen already most if not all of USSR technology was stolen, and I wouldn’t be surprised if tradition continued to Russia
Learning is not stealing… That aside. There were a bunch of FIAT license cars in the socialist states.
Getting help from your buddy to figure something out in class isn’t the same as copying their answers. There is nothing inherent in that design that makes it more reliable, so why do the two cars look exactly the same?
Learning is not stealing, but stealing is also not learning.
The USSR officially licenced FIAT’s cars, so much so that FIAT engineers planned and helped build the production line in Tolyati itself. Also the Soviet version had some stronger bits in order to withstand the bad roads in the rural areas. They were also exported and sold outside of the Eastern bloc incliding Canada. Incl markets where FIAT was present.
In general one cannot merely copy a car design and mass produce it at scale and up to quality. Half if not most of the know-how for mass producing a car that actually runs and lasts is within the manufacturing processes. From exact metal alloys, specifics of forging processes, machining processes, the actual tooling for all those, to coating materials, paints, etc.
That wasn’t even the first such deal. In the 30s they got Ford to licence car and truck tech and assist in building the GAZ auto plant:
In May 1929 the Soviet Union signed an agreement with the American Ford Motor Company.[3] Under its terms, the Soviets agreed to purchase $13 million worth of automobiles and parts, while Ford agreed to give technical assistance until 1938 to construct an integrated automobile-manufacturing plant at Nizhny Novgorod. The factory was founded and production started on 1 January 1932. At the time the factory was known as Nizhny Novgorod Automobile Plant, short NAZ (Nizhegorodskiy avtomobilny zavod), full name Nizhny Novgorod Automobile Plant named after V. M. Molotov (Nizhegorodskiy avtomobilny zavod imeni V. M. Molotova), after the Soviet minister Vyacheslav Molotov.[4] In 1932 the plant produced its first automobiles, GAZ-AA (originally known as NAZ-AA, as they were manufactured before Nizhny Novgorod became Gorky) truck and GAZ-A passenger car (manufactured after Nizhny Novgorod became Gorky). The cars were based on the Ford Model AA and Ford Model A, respectively.
I particularly enjoy the “stolen technology” line about Russia and China, because it’s a tacit admission that capitalism works by keeping people deliberately poor and miserable so that a profit can be extracted from them.
TVs made to soviet design famously caught fire, this was before this all printed circuit board deal was perfected. they just used cardboard-like material for that, it was flammable, absorbed water over time, and there were too closely spaced traces with high voltage on them
People just don’t remember shit that broke down quickly
TVs were hugely dangerous in the early days. People used to get electrocuted all the time. They had hugely high voltage and exploded sometimes.
fr4? that’s still the cheapest pcb material around. great for prototyping.
tvs were made before fr4 was a thing
true, but fr4 is also a nema-designation and the material existed before that.
