The Soviet leaders were omnipotent enough to plunge half of the developed world into 70 years of darkness and decay.
My guess is that the Chinese communist leaders are no less potent, just a bit less self-destructive.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18233152.
Please read a history book.
Mind, it's just an intro. And its not a happy book. But one doesn't need to exaggerate or parrot shallow condemnations of a part of the world that had its triumphs as well as its tragedies.
My understanding (and, yes, my bias) is that those few bright spots in Soviet life weren't worth it. We might disagree if, for instance, Hosking extols the fact that the Soviets were first to feed, clothe and house their entire population, because I don't agree that housing a large fraction of them in prison camps while exiling another is a valid solution to that particular problem.
As an additional example, my thinking is someone, presumably the US, would have been first to launch an artificial satellite in the absence of Sputnik. Someone, again presumably the US, would have educated and encouraged the first female astronaut. It's true that we missed out on those 'firsts'... but how many opportunities did the Soviets miss because the prerequisite researchers and teachers died in a gulag somewhere for purely-ideological reasons?
Am I overlooking any other instances of triumph mentioned by Hosking?