Main Exhibit
Corporatism (essentially upside-down trade unions; bosses sit together and plan how to treat their workers
A ludicrous definition since corporatism doesn't apply to just trade unions and that's not how many modern corporatist systems operate but for the sake of simplicity let's define corporatism as trying to incorporate different sectors of civil society into the state which ostensibly plays a moderating role between them.
The USSR was clearly corporatist:
"Whereas the soviets in revolutionary conditions-and apart from revolution they are impossible-comprise the whole class...the revolutionary party represents the brain of the class. The problem of conquering the power can be solved only by a definite combination of party and soviets or with other mass organisations more or less equivalent to soviets"-Leon Trotsky
"The result of combining state ownership of the means of production with political dictatorship was to create a 'mono-hierachial' system. This term describes an economy in which various economic hierarchies... are ultimately all responsible to Party leadership" (Socialist Planning Third Edition by Michael Ellman page 29)
Sexism
Stalin banned abortion in 1936 and let notorious rapist Lavrenti Beria roam around free.
Nationalism and racism
Something something mass deportations and suppressing Ukrainian language.
While Leninism in the USSR was based on:Public ownership of the economy
The one of the first things the Bolshevik government did was massively increase the scale of private property by privatizing estates. Something Rosa Luxemburg noted in "The Russian Revolution"
A democratic state (via the Soviets)
By 1918 the Soviets had degenerated with the Bolshevik's banning of all other socialist parties.
Promotion of women's and queer rights (until the 1930's, this should be criticized)
This meme again. Just because the USSR overturned all the Tsar's laws, including the ones against sodomy, doesn't mean they were pro lgbt.
promotion of national minorities (Jewish oblast, Volga German republic. The 1940's setback should be criticized
Unsurprisingly the Stalin who was totes okay with ordering the CPUSA to support Japanese internment camps was okay with gulaging ethnic Germans and fabricating the doctors plot.
bonus kush
bonus delusion
edit: should also be noted that almost all the responses on that thread are on the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact and not answering the main question.
Both sides knew it was a diplomatic lie. The Nazis had no plans to adhere to it (obviously), and the Soviets knew they wouldn't. It was essentially the Nazis trying to hide their intentions and the Soviets trying to buy time for themselves. It was not any kind of alliance, as some anti-communists try to paint it
Except the USSR did submit a proposal to join the axis in 1940, after the 1939 Pact
edit2: More keks from a top dialetician
Defining socialism as a road and not a definite mode of production is completely anathema to dialectical materialism. If capitalist modes of production can be used in a "socialist" way Marx's conception of the "riddle of history solved" i.e. socialism is wrong since the means of production in this case are not primarily responsible for society.
ここには何もないようです