Imagine trying to paint “correctly pointing out that Japan and SK are not remotely representative of the developing world in general” as “moving the goal post”. My god, it is so obvious you people just parrot these phrases after seeing them on Reddit and thinking that they’re magic incantations that make you “win” an argument.
That’s not how you phrased your comment. Try being clearer in your phrasing.
Also try responding to the rest of the contents of my reply instead of deflecting by saying “reddit dumb” and thinking that’s winning an argument. I very clearly demonstrated that a wide variety of developing nations did not show the same stagnation in life expectancy that the SU did.
I’ve looked at some examples for you. Countries like Chad, Mali, Gambia and Gabon show a continuous rise in life expectancy, just like other developing countries do.
Then there’s countries hit by the fall of the Soviets, likely due to a dependence on Soviet trade or support, like Nigeria, Burkina Faso and Lesotho, though these nations do not show the same stagnation that the Soviets showed before 1980.
The only example I could find of a stagnated life expectancy in the same period as the Soviets pre-fall (so 1960-1980) was Rwanda. But that’s likely due to the Hutu revolution in 1959 and the years of Tutsi repression that followed.
I’m sure there may be a handful of other African nations with a similar pattern, but it’s certainly not true that the vast majority of them showed this pattern of stagnation that the Soviets had. Africa taken as a whole also doesn’t show it, it is however dented after 1980 due to the fall of the Soviets. In fact, Rwanda being the counterexample here is kinda a bad look for the Soviets, given the internal conflict that caused the stagnation.
I’ve been talking about the stagnation in the rise of life expectancy between 1960 and 1980. It only started rising again around 2000, after the fall of the Union. Try to keep up.
Developing countries obviously had a lower life expectancy, but one that was still on the rise, indicating improving living conditions. Same goes capitalist nations and many of the more developed nations had passed the SU by a fairly wide margin.
The SU, as one of the very few nations in the world, managed to completely stagnate, which indicates that living conditions weren’t improving, and likely worsening somewhat (as advancements in medicine normally leads to a longer average lifespan).
By the way, you yourself steered towards comparing the Soviet Union with developing nations in Africa, as any other comparison was somehow unfair to you. I compared them with western nations, nations in Asia and now random countries in Africa to play along with your demands. And now that you can’t shift further, you throw in a “Imagine thinking” reddit-like response.
How about you either address the flatlined life expectancy during these 20 years directly then, skip the comparisons. Why didn’t it improve? Or just come up with a country that is a fair comparison to you. Because if you’re not going to seriously engage and just throw out silly soundbites then there’s no point to this.
So, in short, you were using an irrelevant metric to try and force conclusion.
Funny because you were the one who tried to sneakily switch the metric away from live expectancy when you realized that USSRs was much higher than most developing countries
Imagine trying to paint “correctly pointing out that Japan and SK are not remotely representative of the developing world in general” as “moving the goal post”. My god, it is so obvious you people just parrot these phrases after seeing them on Reddit and thinking that they’re magic incantations that make you “win” an argument.
That’s not how you phrased your comment. Try being clearer in your phrasing.
Also try responding to the rest of the contents of my reply instead of deflecting by saying “reddit dumb” and thinking that’s winning an argument. I very clearly demonstrated that a wide variety of developing nations did not show the same stagnation in life expectancy that the SU did.
Why would I bother with the rest of the comment when you’re already descending into bad faith reddit debatelord bullshit in the first paragraph?
No, you didn’t. You cherry picked a single digit number of outliers.
Feel free to name some counterexamples then. Otherwise, don’t bother commenting if you have nothing of substance to contribute.
Feel free to look at the vast majority of African countries for a start
Very specific.
I’ve looked at some examples for you. Countries like Chad, Mali, Gambia and Gabon show a continuous rise in life expectancy, just like other developing countries do.
Then there’s countries hit by the fall of the Soviets, likely due to a dependence on Soviet trade or support, like Nigeria, Burkina Faso and Lesotho, though these nations do not show the same stagnation that the Soviets showed before 1980.
The only example I could find of a stagnated life expectancy in the same period as the Soviets pre-fall (so 1960-1980) was Rwanda. But that’s likely due to the Hutu revolution in 1959 and the years of Tutsi repression that followed.
I’m sure there may be a handful of other African nations with a similar pattern, but it’s certainly not true that the vast majority of them showed this pattern of stagnation that the Soviets had. Africa taken as a whole also doesn’t show it, it is however dented after 1980 due to the fall of the Soviets. In fact, Rwanda being the counterexample here is kinda a bad look for the Soviets, given the internal conflict that caused the stagnation.
Imagine listing a bunch of countries with much lower life expectancies than the USSR and thinking that’s a point against it
I’ve been talking about the stagnation in the rise of life expectancy between 1960 and 1980. It only started rising again around 2000, after the fall of the Union. Try to keep up.
Developing countries obviously had a lower life expectancy, but one that was still on the rise, indicating improving living conditions. Same goes capitalist nations and many of the more developed nations had passed the SU by a fairly wide margin.
The SU, as one of the very few nations in the world, managed to completely stagnate, which indicates that living conditions weren’t improving, and likely worsening somewhat (as advancements in medicine normally leads to a longer average lifespan).
By the way, you yourself steered towards comparing the Soviet Union with developing nations in Africa, as any other comparison was somehow unfair to you. I compared them with western nations, nations in Asia and now random countries in Africa to play along with your demands. And now that you can’t shift further, you throw in a “Imagine thinking” reddit-like response.
How about you either address the flatlined life expectancy during these 20 years directly then, skip the comparisons. Why didn’t it improve? Or just come up with a country that is a fair comparison to you. Because if you’re not going to seriously engage and just throw out silly soundbites then there’s no point to this.
So, in short, you were using an irrelevant metric to try and force conclusion.
Funny because you were the one who tried to sneakily switch the metric away from live expectancy when you realized that USSRs was much higher than most developing countries