If Stalinism actually existed...

[Rusty Shackleford]

it would be incarnated as National Bolshevism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ec8HR1JwOY

why do i call this Stalinism? because they make Stalin a demigod for the purpose of nationalism.

Since i have not heard of any major revolutionary theory brought forth by Mr. Stalin, there really is no need to name a political ideology after him. Its like there is a tendency known as Honekerism, Kruschevism, Hoxh....nevermind, Ilism, or Xiaopengism, and so on.

anyways im treading on the ground of tendency flaming.

my point is, if you accuse a Marxist-Leninist of the non trotskyist sort of being Stalinist, then you are calling them a National Bolshevik. Discuss? or trash.

[Sasha]

it would be incarnated as National Bolshevism
6ec8HR1JwOY


that complete political-psychotic video made the anti-germans sudenly look mentaly sane...


Its like there is a tendency known as Honekerism, Kruschevism, Hoxh....nevermind, :lol:

[scarletghoul]

Since i have not heard of any major revolutionary theory brought forth by Mr. Stalin, there really is no need to name a political ideology after him. Its like there is a tendency known as Honekerism, Kruschevism, Hoxh....nevermind, Ilism, or Xiaopengism, and so on.
The Hoxhaism joke is funny and true. As for KJI his surname is Kim, not Il, and he has developed some of his own ideas in the form of Songun and what Kimilsungists might regard as 'the advancement of Juche'. Dengism does exist also. Stalin did have a few original ideas, as did just about every commie leader (even hoxha might have, who knows). Often these isms are just used to refer to the actions and ideas of the leader or their regime, and are not intended to be proper 'tendencies' or subgroups of marxism.

[Rusty Shackleford]

The Hoxhaism joke is funny and true. As for KJI his surname is Kim, not Il, and he has developed some of his own ideas in the form of Songun and what Kimilsungists might regard as 'the advancement of Juche'. Dengism does exist also. Stalin did have a few original ideas, as did just about every commie leader (even hoxha might have, who knows). Often these isms are just used to refer to the actions and ideas of the leader or their regime, and are not intended to be proper 'tendencies' or subgroups of marxism.

ah fuck i forgot it was called Dengism.

also, i dont know much of the works of Hoxha, so just go with the flow.

anyways. my point was, people say Stalinism is a tendency and i say "Stalinism is a tendency? what does it look like?" it looks like NBP idiocy.

im also not criticizing Stalin, there were some good and bad things done. context is important in that issue and i will leave the study of that for later. but if anything were to be given that name 'Stalinist', it would be the NazBols for their infatuation with him.

[Das war einmal]

I made a special video for situations like this, in this case the psychotic nazbol movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXkF2viFDgU

[Angry Young Man]

What? So nobody's going to say it? It's up to me? Hoy

http://surfingbeans.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Cool-Dog-Hey-Cool-story-bro41.jpg

[gorillafuck]

Its like there is a tendency known as Honekerism, Kruschevism, Hoxh....nevermind
:laugh:

[Raúl Duke]

My (lack of) god that movie is fucking delusional and a re-write of fucking history.

[Lord Testicles]

If you want to become a Stalinator... :lol:

[Spawn of Stalin]

Its like there is a tendency known as Honekerism, Kruschevism, Hoxh....nevermind, Ilism, or Xiaopengism, and so on.

Honecker resisted both Glasnost and Perestroika, I'm a big fan.

[Comrade Gwydion]

Every day, before I fall asleep, I pray to Trotsky, Luxemburg, Che, ánd Hercules that one day these people admit they're doing a false-flag action to promote the 'extremism'-theory because really.... they're.... beyond any comprehension

[Il Medico]

..., ánd Hercules ....
Covering all your bases eh? :lol:

[Comrade Gwydion]

Covering all your bases eh? :lol:

If you want something really bad, you'll have to work your ass off praying to anyone you might know.
:thumbup1:

[The Essence Of Flame Is The Essence Of Change]

Well these nazbol types are not much far from the state of most conscious KKE (aka the CPG) members..(/start sectarianism):laugh:

[Bilan]

If Stalinism actually existed the world would be a much shitter place.

[GracchusBabeuf]

If Stalinism actually existed... Too bad it never did exist except in the imaginations of liberals.:(

[Q]

Too bad it never did exist except in the imaginations of liberals.:(

These 39 beg to differ (http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=296).

[Honggweilo]

These 39 beg to differ (http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=296).
count the actual IRL activists there (excluding the 3 man internetz sects)

[GracchusBabeuf]

These 39 beg to differ (http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=296).
Stalinism as a historical event was nothing but the implementation of socialism. It is only liberals and anti-communists who hold it to an impossible standard and deny that it was socialist. This is an example of the No true Scotsman logical fallacy.

For example, from the liberal FAQ (http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-socialism.htm):
"For this reason, socialists reject the claim (made by the Soviet Union itself) that the Soviet Union was a socialist country. It was instead a brutal dictatorship over workers. "

"Socialism does not mean government or state ownership. It does not mean a state bureaucracy as in the former Soviet Union or China, with the working class oppressed by a new bureaucratic class. It does not mean a closed party-run system without democratic rights. It does not mean nationalization, or labor-management boards, or state capitalism of any kind. It means a complete end to all capitalist social relations."

"1) The type of dictatorial government practiced by Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union. This system was characterized by totalitarian control not only of society, but the economy as well. Stalinism was not socialist (if it had been, workers would have voted on all government policy), nor was it communist (in which case the state would have disappeared completely). However, Stalin co-opted these terms to describe his rule, and they are still used to describe it today."
Too bad these "socialists" are all reformists who are no better than liberals.

[black magick hustla]

your mum has dinner on the table, she is calling. maybe you should get dinner??????

[GracchusBabeuf]

your mum has dinner on the table, she is calling. maybe you should get dinner??????You're the best example of left communist infantile idiocy here.

[black magick hustla]

cant hear ya. i am the ghost of stalin

[black magick hustla]

in all honestly man you are ridiculous. you have a huge chip on your soldier for absolutely no reason. i think you are the only member i actually actively dislike. i dont get your vendetta against a tiny and almost insignificant current. you are nuts

[GracchusBabeuf]

i think you are the only member i actually actively dislike. Too bad. I love you.:(


i dont get your vendetta against a tiny and almost insignificant current. you are nutsCan't take some political criticism, eh? Going to your 'tiny and insignificant current' defense as usual.:rolleyes: Grow up a little and learn to take criticism. Ironically, you and your cult buddies are never lagging behind in handing out criticism of others.

[black magick hustla]

Can't take some political criticism, eh? Going to your 'tiny and insignificant current' defense as usual.:rolleyes: Grow up a little and learn to take criticism. Ironically, you and your cult buddies are never lagging behind in handing out criticism of others.

oh ive taken plenty of abuse here and i am fine with it. however when i see "thanked by lex luthor" to every reply someone makes to me i find it just a bit bizarre. i mean you can do your thing, i dont really care either way. its just that there has been a few years long saga of the socialist-lexluthor-babeauf triunvate

[bcbm]

Can't take some political criticism, eh?

says the person calling everyone who disagrees with them liberals and reformists

[Jazzratt]

says the person calling everyone who disagrees with them liberals and reformists

That's different man. He's upholding true socialism. You're just too much of a liberal reformy liberal-reformist.

[GracchusBabeuf]

says the person calling everyone who disagrees with them liberals and reformistsNot all of my opponents are liberals or reformists. I have a lot of respect for many Trotskyist and anarchist members of this board.

However some like to be purely disruptive without having any evidence at hand. That is what I don't like.

[bcbm]

why do you hate fun?

[Bilan]

Stalinism as a historical event was nothing but the implementation of socialism.

That is the biggest load of shit I have read in a long time. The era of Stalin was nothing more than the intensification of the brutal nature of the Soviet state. To even suggest it had anything to do with socialism is a gross distortion of everything that socialism is.



It is only liberals and anti-communists who hold it to an impossible standard and deny that it was socialist. This is an example of the No true Scotsman logical fallacy.

Bullshit. Anyone who had a basic grasp of socialism would assert that the USSR was not socialist.

[Bilan]

Too bad. I love you.:(

Can't take some political criticism, eh? Going to your 'tiny and insignificant current' defense as usual.:rolleyes: Grow up a little and learn to take criticism. Ironically, you and your cult buddies are never lagging behind in handing out criticism of others.

Where did you make a genuine criticism? You made an inane quip which quoted in an equally inane essay.
How the hell is that a political criticism?

[GracchusBabeuf]

why do you hate fun?
What is "fun" to you may mean something else to others in need of political support against state attack.


That is the biggest load of shit I have read in a long time. The era of Stalin was nothing more than the intensification of the brutal nature of the Soviet state. To even suggest it had anything to do with socialism is a gross distortion of everything that socialism is.

Quote:


Bullshit. Anyone who had a basic grasp of socialism would assert that the USSR was not socialist. Thanks for more empty assertions.:thumbup1: Next time try providing some evidence.

[gorillafuck]

However some like to be purely disruptive without having any evidence at hand. That is what I don't like.
I'm just going to point out that you have a tendency to be extremely disruptive.

[GracchusBabeuf]

I'm just going to point out that you have a tendency to be extremely disruptive.
This is a political forum. One cannot expect to spout empty assertions and get away with them. I try to have evidence with my disruption however. Noone is perfect though.:drool:

[gorillafuck]

This is a political forum. One cannot expect to spout empty assertions and get away with them. I try to have evidence with my disruption however. Noone is perfect though.:drool:
More often than not you're just shouting on about liberals.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I miss the socialist of old. Y'know, the kid with the CNT-FAI avatar, or even the left communist socialist. Now he's just another Stalino-troll.

:(

[GracchusBabeuf]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr8QHonGt6k
:wub:

[Bilan]

What is "fun" to you may mean something else to others in need of political support against state attack.

Thanks for more empty assertions.:thumbup1: Next time try providing some evidence.

Honey pie, I'm not going to write you an essay in chit chat.

[9]

haha.

Also,


I miss the socialist of old. Y'know, the kid with the CNT-FAI avatar, or even the left communist socialist. Now he's just another Stalino-troll.

:(

The only thing I remember about him from when he was 'socialist' the left communist troll was one thread where he lost an argument over Zionism to Yehuda Stern and he was going sort of crazy in this long repetitive back and forth shitstorm. In fact, I think he became a Stalnist after that thread. Maybe it scarred him emotionally. lol

[Os Cangaceiros]

Haha, yeah, I never really liked him all that much actually. I just like to never let him forget that he once had a CNT avatar and praised left communism. :D Where did all that youthful idealism go?

I also found it amusing when red cat claimed recently that Lex Luther was a former communist militant from an undisclosed location who wouldn't let his identity be known after being thrown in prison by the authorities in aforementioned undisclosed location.

[Il Medico]

Wait. GracchusBabeuf is Lex/socialist??? Wondered where he went after his unfortunate return. Tbh I didn't like him much as a left communist troll, kinda of embarassing to have someone like that claim your tendency. But hey, we got ~"the one who won't be named"~ (Marsella for the non-know crowd...oh shit!:lol:). However, she is fairly amusing and not just plain annoying like Lex. Really though, I would have preferred he became some trot troll or what not, because he is especially adept at being a Tankie, kinda like he's king of the tankies. And as everybody knows, tankies are annoying as hell and not even serious members of their own tendency like them.

EDIT:

Maybe it scarred him emotionally.
Thought that was a prerequisite of being a Stalinist. /sectarian joke.

[Q]

Stalinism as a historical event was nothing but the implementation of socialism. It is only liberals and anti-communists who hold it to an impossible standard and deny that it was socialist. This is an example of the No true Scotsman logical fallacy.

For example, from the liberal FAQ (http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-socialism.htm):
"For this reason, socialists reject the claim (made by the Soviet Union itself) that the Soviet Union was a socialist country. It was instead a brutal dictatorship over workers. "

"Socialism does not mean government or state ownership. It does not mean a state bureaucracy as in the former Soviet Union or China, with the working class oppressed by a new bureaucratic class. It does not mean a closed party-run system without democratic rights. It does not mean nationalization, or labor-management boards, or state capitalism of any kind. It means a complete end to all capitalist social relations."

"1) The type of dictatorial government practiced by Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union. This system was characterized by totalitarian control not only of society, but the economy as well. Stalinism was not socialist (if it had been, workers would have voted on all government policy), nor was it communist (in which case the state would have disappeared completely). However, Stalin co-opted these terms to describe his rule, and they are still used to describe it today."

I'm not sure why you quote a liberal faq for any other reason than to find some ground holding your argument that "it is only liberals and anti-communists" that use the word. Let's quote a more relevant faq, that of the Marxist Internet Archive (http://marxists.org/glossary/terms/s/t.htm#stalinism):


Stalinism

In contemporary parlance, the word “Stalinism” has come to embody a range of ideologies, specific political positions, forms of societal organization, and political tendencies. That makes getting at the core definition of “Stalinism” difficult, but not impossible.

First and foremost, Stalinism must be understood as the politics of a political stratum. Specifically, Stalinism is the politics of the bureaucracy that hovers over a workers' state. Its first manifestation was in the Soviet Union, where Stalinism arose when sections of the bureaucracy began to express their own interests against those of the working class, which had created the workers' state through revolution to serve its class interests.

Soviet Russia was an isolated workers' state, and its developmental problems were profound. The socialist movement–including the Bolshevik leaders in Russia–had never confronted such problems. Chief among these was that Russia was a backward, peasant-dominated country, the “weakest link in the capitalist chain,” and had to fight for its survival within an imperialist world. This challenge was compounded by the defeat of the revolution in Europe, particularly in Germany, and the isolation of the Soviet workers' state from the material aid that could have been provided by a stronger workers' state. But the pressures of imperialism were too great.

From a social point of view, then, Stalinism is the expression of these pressures of imperialism within the workers' state. The politics of Stalinism flow from these pressures.

The political tenets of Stalinism revolve around the theory of socialism in one country–developed by Stalin to counter the Bolshevik theory that the survival of the Russian Revolution depended on proletarian revolutions in Europe. In contradistinction, the Stalinist theory stipulates that a socialist society can be achieved within a single country.

In April 1924, in the first edition of his book Foundations of Leninism, Stalin had explicitly rejected the idea that socialism could be constructed in one country. He wrote: “Is it possible to attain the final victory of socialism in one country, without the combined efforts of the proletarians of several advanced countries? No, it is not. The efforts of one country are enough for the overthrow of the bourgeoisie. This is what the history of our revolution tells us. For the final victory of socialism, for the organization of socialist production, the efforts of one country, especially a peasant country like ours, are not enough. For this we must have the efforts of the proletariat of several advanced countries. Such, on the whole, are the characteristic features of the Leninist theory of the proletarian revolution.”

In August 1924, as Stalin was consolidating his power in the Soviet Union, a second edition of the same book was published. The text just quoted had been replaced with, in part, the following: “Having consolidated its power, and taking the lead of the peasantry, the proletariat of the victorious country can and must build a socialist society.” And by November 1926, Stalin had completely revised history, stating: “The party always took as its starting point the idea that the victory of socialism ... can be accomplished with the forces of a single country.”

Leon Trotsky, in The Third International After Lenin, called the Stalinist concept of “socialism one country” a “reactionary theory” and characterized its “basis” as one that“sums up to sophistic interpretations of several lines from Lenin on the one hand, and to a scholastic interpretation of the 'law of uneven development' on the other. By giving a correct interpretation of the historic law as well as of the quotations [from Lenin] in question,” Trotsky continued, “we arrive at a directly opposite conclusion, that is, the conclusion that was reached by Marx, Engels, Lenin, and all of us, including Stalin and Bukharin, up to 1925."

Stalinism had uprooted the very foundations of Marxism and Leninism.

From “socialism in one country” flow the two other main tenets of Stalinist politics. First is that the workers' movement–given the focus on building socialism in one country (i.e., the Soviet Union)–must adapt itself to whatever is in the best interests of that focus at any given moment. Hence we find the Stalinists engaged in “a series of contradictory zigzags” (Trotsky, The Revolution Betrayed), from confrontation with imperialism to détente and from seeming support for the working-class struggle to outright betrayal of the workers. In other words, Russia's own economic development comes first, above an international policy of revolution–which was the Bolshevik perspective. The second is the idea of revolution in “stages” –that the “national-democratic revolution” must be completed before the socialist revolution takes place. This, too, runs contrary to Marxism. But because of this theory and as the expression of imperialism within the workers' state–and, by extension, within the world workers' movement–we find the Stalinists assigning to the national bourgeoisie a revolutionary role.

The case of Indonesia in 1965 affords an ideal illustration of the bankruptcy and treachery of the “two-stage theory.” As class tensions mounted among the workers and the peasantry, and the masses began to rise up against the shaky regime of President Sukarno, the Stalinist leadership in Beijing told the Indonesian masses and their mass organization the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI) to tie their fate to the national bourgeoisie. In October, as many as 1 million workers and peasants were slaughtered in a CIA-organized coup led by General Suharto, which swept aside the Sukarno, crushed the rising mass movements, and installed a brutal military dictatorship.

The “two-stage theory” has also propelled the Stalinists into “popular fronts” with so-called“progressive”elements of the bourgeois class to “advance” the first revolutionary stage. Examples include Stalinist support (through the Communist Party, USA) to President Roosevelt 1930s. And, taking this orientation to its logical conclusion, the Communist Party in the United States consistently supports Democratic Party candidates for office, including the presidency.

The theory of “socialism in one country” and the policies that flowed from it propelled a transformation of Soviet foreign policy under Stalin. The Bolshevik revolutionary strategy, based on support for the working classes of all countries and an effort through the Communist International to construct Communist Parties as revolutionary leaderships throughout the world, gave way to deal-making and maneuvers with bourgeois governments, colonial “democrats” like Chiang Kai-shek in China, and the trade union bureaucracies.

In his 1937 essay “Stalinism and Bolshevism,” Trotsky wrote: “The experience of Stalinism does not refute the teaching of Marxism but confirms it by inversion. The revolutionary doctrine which teaches the proletariat to orient itself correctly in situations and to profit actively by them, contains of course no automatic guarantee of victory. But victory is possible only through the application of this doctrine.” At best, one can say that the Stalinist orientation has not been one of orienting “correctly."

In terms of the organization of a state, Stalinist policies are quite clear: democratic rights threaten the position of the bureaucracy, and hence democracy is incompatible with Stalinism. In basic terms on a world scale, the forces of Stalinism have done everything in their power to prevent socialist revolution.


Too bad these "socialists" are all reformists who are no better than liberals.
Yeah, Stalinists are like that wherever in power, sad really.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I like Marsella. She (assuming that Marsella is a she...from my understanding there's been some speculation over that) was one of the people who was nice to me when I first started posting and was kind of an idiot. She also has a very solid political foundation, and you can tell that she's actually very intelligent when she posts seriously.

Unfortunately she's also a little insane in the membrane.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I'm not sure why you quote a liberal faq for any other reason than to find some ground holding your argument that "it is only liberals and anti-communists" that use the word. Let's quote a more relevant faq, that of the Marxist Internet Archive (http://marxists.org/glossary/terms/s/t.htm#stalinism):


Liberal hogwash!

[GracchusBabeuf]

Wait. GracchusBabeuf is Lex/socialist??? Wondered where he went after his unfortunate return. Tbh I didn't like him much as a left communist troll, kinda of embarassing to have someone like that claim your tendency. But hey, we got ~"the one who won't be named"~ (Marsella for the non-know crowd...oh shit!:lol:). However, she is fairly amusing and not just plain annoying like Lex. Really though, I would have preferred he became some trot troll or what not, because he is especially adept at being a Tankie, kinda like he's king of the tankies. And as everybody knows, tankies are annoying as hell and not even serious members of their own tendency like them.

EDIT:

Thought that was a prerequisite of being a Stalinist. /sectarian joke.


Haha, yeah, I never really liked him all that much actually. I just like to never let him forget that he once had a CNT avatar and praised left communism. :D Where did all that youthful idealism go?

I also found it amusing when red cat claimed recently that Lex Luther was a former communist militant from an undisclosed location who wouldn't let his identity be known after being thrown in prison by the authorities in aforementioned undisclosed location.


haha.

Also,



The only thing I remember about him from when he was 'socialist' the left communist troll was one thread where he lost an argument over Zionism to Yehuda Stern and he was going sort of crazy in this long repetitive back and forth shitstorm. In fact, I think he became a Stalnist after that thread. Maybe it scarred him emotionally. lol
Are you liberals going to send me to the gulag next?:(

[Robocommie]

What's a tankie?

[Il Medico]

Are you liberals going to send me to the gulag next?:(
Will you go away if I say yes? *Hopeful anticipation* :D

[Q]

What's a tankie?

Urbandictionary (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tankie):


A hardline Stalinist. A tankie is a member of a communist group or a "fellow traveller" (sympathiser) who believes fully in the political system of the Soviet Union and defends/defended the actions of the Soviet Union and other accredited states (China, Serbia, etc.) to the hilt, even in cases where other communists criticise their policies or actions. For instance, such a person favours overseas interventions by Soviet-style states, defends these regimes when they engage in human rights violations, and wishes to establish a similar system in other countries such as Britain and America.

The term is used to distinguish the rare individuals with these kinds of beliefs from communists more broadly (including Communist Party members), whose adherence to Soviet doctrine and attachment to existing "socialist" states is somewhat weaker.

It is always more-or-less abusive in the sense that those termed tankies do not use the term themselves, but it doesn't have any particular bite (unlike, say, Trot).

The term derives from the fact that the divisions within the communist movement first arose when the Soviet Union sent tanks into communist Hungary in 1956, to crush an attempt to establish an alternative version of communism which was not embraced by the Russians. Most communists outside the eastern bloc opposed this action and criticised the Soviet Union. The "tankies" were those who said "send the tanks in".

The epithet has stuck because tankies also supported "sending the tanks in" in cases such as Czechoslovakia 1968, Afghanistan 1979, Bosnia and Kosovo/a (in the case of the Serbian state), and so on (whereas the rest of the communist movement has gravitated towards anti-militarism).

[Robocommie]

:thumbup1:

I do want to say though, Georgiy Zhukov was cool.

[black magick hustla]

red cat is pretty bad too. lex is worse though. i am glad there are a few people that agree with me. tbh i think lex just clicks on left communist profiles and reads where did they post because every time i fucking post something either lex replies or i read "thanked by lex" for someone who tried to counter me. then these people whine when i troll them when i am being trolled 24/7.

[Il Medico]

red cat is pretty bad too. lex is worse though. i am glad there are a few people that agree with me. tbh i think lex just clicks on left communist profiles and reads where did they post because every time i fucking post something either lex replies or i read "thanked by lex" for someone who tried to counter me. then these people whine when i troll them when i am being trolled 24/7.
bah. They're troll and trolls will be trolls for all time. And they will troll and troll and troll because they are trolls. It is best to ignore them, rather than trying to compete with professionals.

[Q]

bah. They're troll and trolls will be trolls for all time. And they will troll and troll and troll because they are trolls. It is best to ignore them, rather than trying to compete with professionals.
This really. Just reply to the useful posts instead of lowering yourself to the mud of this forum.

[GracchusBabeuf]

Will you go away if I say yes? Sorry, I am not your slave to act according to your wishes. you, Ass-kisser No. 1, or that other Marsella sockpuppet.:rolleyes:

Also, maldoror, you're developing quite a persecution complex there. Better get your head checked out.

[black magick hustla]

Sorry, I am not your slave to act according to your wishes. you, Ass-kisser No. 1, or that other Marsella sockpuppet.:rolleyes:

Also, maldoror, you're developing quite a persecution complex there. Better get your head checked out.

someone forgot to take his meds

[gorillafuck]

Will someone please explain to me who this Marsella person was?

[Il Medico]

Will someone please explain to me who this Marsella person was?
A troll. Albeit an amusing one. Used to be a forum member. Got herself banned and has made numerous sockpuppets and has been rather successful at getting at sensitive info from the CC and mod forums. She has a blog or what have you, or some other nonsense.

[Il Medico]

Sorry, I am not your slave to act according to your wishes. you, Ass-kisser No. 1, or that other Marsella sockpuppet.:rolleyes:
.
Are you implying that I am a Marsella sock puppet or are you referring to someone else?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Urbandictionary (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tankie):

It's wrong with the first sentence. The Soviets weren't "hardline Stalinists."

[9]

Are you implying that I am a Marsella sock puppet or are you referring to someone else?

I imagine he is referring to me. People seem to be unaware that the literate female world population does, in fact, exceed '1'.

[Os Cangaceiros]

:laugh:

[Il Medico]

I imagine he is referring to me. People seem to be unaware that the literate female world population does, in fact, exceed '1'.
It's ridiculous either way.

[AK]

If Stalinism existed it would be called Marxism-Leninism :lol:

[Q]

If Stalinism existed it would be called Marxism-Leninism :lol:

Which in turn would be a misnomer if not outright lie, as the state ideology of the USSR had little in common with the ideas of Marx or Lenin.

[Ravachol]

that complete political-psychotic video made the anti-germans sudenly look mentaly sane...

:lol:

Haha that was awesome. I mean, the French revolution 'leftist' in nature. For people (nazbols) claiming to be 'Bolsheviks', they sure know awfully little about the class nature of the French revolution's vanguard. I love how they put Lenin next to the Combat18 logo and the 'antifascistische aktion' together with Saddam Hussein :laugh:

On a more serious note, however, when we look at some ridiculous anti-impie positions supporting Hussein and the Taliban for example, we can discern a similar populist-nationalist line of thought. The inclusion of Hussein in the video (who was on the far right side of Ba'athism, a populist nationalist movement with both 'leftist' and rightist influences) does make sense as the Nazbol love for leftist rethoric (note: rethoric, not actual political positions, obviously) stems mainly from the vision of the 'volksgemeinschaft' as a mass of 'common people' as opposed to other fascist tendencies which are highly aristocratic and elitist in nature (Evola's disciples and the Nouvelle Droite to name two) and hence appeal to the traditional 'national elite' as opposed to the 'national masses'. Whatever the motivations, however, their homogenic nationalism is bound to be corporatist in nature and is anathema to the proletarian movement.

[Bright Banana Beard]

Well, Stalinism actually exist even today. What's the point?