WEB du bois on Stalin

[The Red Next Door]

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/biographies/1953/03/16.htm An article I have read a couple a days ago on stalin, after reading this I am starting to have an open mind for him.

PS; IF HAVE YOU NOTHING CONSTRUCTIVE TO SAY. WELL IDGF

[Kassad]

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/biographies/1953/03/16.htm An article I have read a couple a days ago on stalin, after reading this I am starting to have an open mind for him.

PS; IF HAVE YOU NOTHING CONSTRUCTIVE TO SAY. WELL IDGF

Du Bois' criticisms of Trotsky are pretty baseless. This just appears to be a glorification of Stalin without any real citations of his work. He appears to have a novice grasp of Trotsky's theories, as calling him a "sham" without really analyzing his writings is just ignorant. I've never liked this essay, if you ask me. It reminds me of the anti-revisionist crowd that worships every shit Stalin took.

[~Spectre]

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/biographies/1953/03/16.htm An article I have read a couple a days ago on stalin, after reading this I am starting to have an open mind for him.

PS; IF HAVE YOU NOTHING CONSTRUCTIVE TO SAY. WELL IDGF

It's a terrible article.

Essentially, what he does is continuously make assertions, and then without further hesitation assures us that Stalin is "great" according to his assertion.

He then ends it off by being openly pro-personality cult.

Even if you are actually a Stalinist, I can't see why you'd use this article to advance your side.

[The Red Next Door]

It's a terrible article.

Essentially, what he does is continuously make assertions, and then without further hesitation assures us that Stalin is "great" according to his assertion.

He then ends it off by being openly pro-personality cult.

Even if you are actually a Stalinist, I can't see why you'd use this article to advance your side.

I am not.

[~Spectre]

To illustrate how poor the article is, let's see what happens when you change a few words:

George W. Bush was a great man; few other men of the 20th century approach his stature. He was simple, calm and courageous. He seldom lost his poise; pondered his problems slowly, made his decisions clearly and firmly; never yielded to ostentation nor coyly refrained from holding his rightful place with dignity. He was the son of an oilman but stood calmly before the financiers without hesitation or nerves. But also—and this was the highest proof of his greatness—he knew the common man, felt his problems, followed his fate.

Bush was not a man of conventional learning; he was much more than that: he was a man who thought deeply, read understandingly and listened to wisdom, no matter whence it came. He was attacked and slandered as few men of power have been; yet he seldom lost his courtesy and balance; nor did he let attack drive him from his convictions nor induce him to surrender positions which he knew were correct. As one of the despised minorities of man, he first set America on the road to conquer extremism and made one nation out of its various groups without destroying their individuality.

His judgment of men was profound. He early saw through the flamboyance and exhibitionism of Saddam Hussein, who fooled the world, and especially America. The whole ill-bred and insulting attitude of Liberals in the U.S. today began with our naive acceptance of Saddam's magnificent lying propaganda, which he carried around the world. Against it, Bush stood like a rock and moved neither right nor left, as he continued to advance toward a real peace instead of the sham the first Gulf War offered.

Three great decisions faced Bush in power and he met them magnificently: first, the problem of the corporations, then the World trade center attack, and last the Second Gulf War. The poor Corporation was the lowest victim of liberalism, populism and the progressives. He surrendered the Little White Father easily; he turned less readily but perceptibly from his ikons; but his Liberals clung tenaciously to taxes and were near wrecking the revolution when Bush risked a second revolution and drove out the urban bloodsuckers.

Then came intervention, the continuing threat of attack by all nations, halted by the Clinton Bubble burst, only to be re-opened by Jihadism. It was Bush who steered America between Scylla and Charybdis: Western Europe and the Middle East were willing to betray her to Islamofascism, and then had to beg her aid in the Global War on Terror. A lesser man than Bush would have demanded vengeance for New York, but he had the wisdom to ask only justice for his motherland. This Blair granted but Chirac held back. The British Empire proposed first to save itself in Afghanistan and Iraq, while Iran smashed the Zionists.

The coalition of the willing dawdled, but Bush pressed unfalteringly ahead. He risked the utter ruin of capitalism in order to smash the dictatorship of Hussein and the Taliban. After New York, old Europe did not know whether to weep or applaud. The cost of victory to the United States was frightful. To this day the outside world has no dream of the hurt, the loss and the sacrifices. For his calm, stern leadership here, if nowhere else, arises the deep worship of Bush by the people of all the heartland.

Then came the problem of Peace. Hard as this was to Europe and Iraq, it was far harder to Bush and the neocons. The conventional rulers of the world hated and feared them and would have been only too willing to see the utter failure of this attempt at neoconservatism. At the same time the fear of Iran and Asia was also real. Diplomacy therefore took hold and Bush was picked as the victim. He was called in conference with British imperialism represented by its trained and well-fed aristocracy; and with the vast wealth and potential power of America represented by its most conservative leader since Reagan.

Here Bush showed his real greatness. He neither cringed nor strutted. He never presumed, he never surrendered. He gained the friendship of Blair and the respect of Chirac. He asked neither adulation nor vengeance. He was reasonable and conciliatory. But on what he deemed essential, he was inflexible. He was willing to resurrect the United Nations, which had insulted America. He was willing to fight Iran, even though Japan was then no menace to the United States. But on two points Bush was adamant: Iraq's oil must be returned to the American multinationals, whence it had been stolen as a threat. The oilfields were not to be left helpless before Arab exploitation for the benefit of land monopoly. The corporations here must have their say.

Such was the man who lives in Texas, still the butt of noisy jackals and of the ill-bred men of some parts of the distempered coasts. In life he suffered under continuous and studied insult; he was forced to make bitter decisions on his own lone responsibility. His reward comes as the common man stands in solemn acclaim.

_______________

The difference is that since it's about Bush, you'd laugh your ass off. Trash is trash.

[Invader Zim]

I rather like du Bois, he wrote an interesting thesis on abolitionism. This essay though, well I think it has already been exposed for what it is.

[bie]

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/biographies/1953/03/16.htm An article I have read a couple a days ago on stalin, after reading this I am starting to have an open mind for him.

PS; IF HAVE YOU NOTHING CONSTRUCTIVE TO SAY. WELL IDGF
It is actually quite good. It addresses most important points from an interesting perspective. Thanks.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Stalin was greatly seen as an important leader by many historical figures. And yes, this includes W.E.B. Du Bois:

“Joseph Stalin was a great man; few other men of the 20th century approach his stature. He was simple, calm and courageous. He seldom lost his poise; pondered his problems slowly, made his decisions clearly and firmly; never yielded to ostentation nor coyly refrained from holding his rightful place with dignity. He was the son of a serf but stood calmly before the great without hesitation or nerves. But also—and this was the highest proof of his greatness—he knew the common man, felt his problems, followed his fate.” ~ W.E.B. Du Bois (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/biographies/1953/03/16.htm)

Though, there are plenty other figures we should look at that saw Comrade Stalin as the great leader that he was. For example:

“Stalin has further developed Marxism-Leninism through many invaluable theoretical accomplishments. His principal contributions to Marxian theory lie in indicating the path of the actual building of socialism in the U.S.S.R. Thus, his powerful polemics against Trotsky, Zinoviev, Bukharin and their counterrevolutionary affiliates comprised the greatest ideological struggle of our times. They clarified every aspect of the vast and unique problem of building socialism in one country, and surveyed the whole position of international capitalism. They resulted in a decisive victory for the leadership of the Communist Party and, thereby, of socialism.” ~William Z. Foster (http://www.marxists.org/archive/foster/1939/12/stalin.htm)

“Throughout this whole struggle, we Black students at the school had been ardent supporters of the position of Stalin and the Central Committee. Most certainly we were Stalinists – whose policies we saw as the continuation of Lenin’s. Those today who use the term “Stalinist” as an epithet evade the real question: that is, were Stalin and the Central Committee correct? I believe history has proven that they were correct.” ~Harry Haywood (http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/2009/12/11/harry-haywood-trotskys-day-in-court/)

“In all spheres of modern life the influence of Stalin reaches wide and deep. From his last simply written but vastly discerning and comprehensive document, back through the years, his contributions to the science of our world society remain invaluable. One reverently speaks of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin—the shapers of humanity’s richest present and future.” ~Paul Robeson (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/biographies/1953/04/x01.htm)

“This day was a day of jubilation and joy in republican Spain. In the cities and villages, at the fronts and at the rear, millions of voices, expressing what their hearts felt, cheered Stalin. In the factories and trenches, the workers and soldiers carved the name ‘Stalin’ on their tools and on their gun-stocks. The most beautiful streets of the cities and the most important localities were called: Soviet Union Avenue. And Stalin’s picture had a place of honor in every home and his name, lived in the hearts of all who fought and worked for a Spain freed from its age-old enemies.” ~Dolores Ibárruri (http://www.marxists.org/archive/ibarruri/1940/01/x01.htm)

“In the so called mistakes of Stalin lies the difference between a revolutionary attitude and a revisionist attitude. You have to look at Stalin in the historical context in which he moves, you don’t have to look at him as some kind of brute, but in that particular historical context . . . I have come to communism because of daddy Stalin and nobody must come and tell me that I mustn’t read Stalin. I read him when it was very bad to read him. That was another time. And because I’m not very bright, and a hard-headed person, I keep on reading him. Especially in this new period, now that it is worse to read him. Then, as well as now, I still find a series of things that are very good.” ~Ernesto Che Guevara (http://www.thechestore.com/Che-Guevara-politics.php#BattleAgainstRevisionism)

“Stalin has died. The ardent heart of the great leader of progressive mankind has ceased to beat. This sad news has spread over Korean territory like lightning, inflicting a bitter blow to the hearts of millions of people. Korean People’s Army soldiers, workers, farmers, and students, as well as all residents of both South and North Korea, have heard the sad news with profound grief. The very being of Korea has seemed to bow down, and mothers who had apparently exhausted their tears in weeping for the children they had lost in the bombing of the [American] air bandits sobbed again.” ~Kim Il Sung (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juche)

“Stalin earned his place among the great classics of Marxism-Leninism with his stern and principled struggle for the defence, consistent implementation and further development of the ideas of Marx, Engels and Lenin. With his keen mind and special ability, he was able to find his bearings even in the most difficult times, when the bourgeoisie and reaction were doing everything in their power to hinder the triumph of the Great October Socialist Revolution.” ~Enver Hoxha (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/stalin/intro.htm)

“Congratulating Stalin is not a formality. Congratulating Stalin means supporting him and his cause, supporting the victory of socialism, and the way forward for mankind which he points out, it means supporting a dear friend. For the great majority of mankind today are suffering, and mankind can free itself from suffering only by the road pointed out by Stalin and with his help.” ~Mao Zedong (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-2/mswv2_24.htm)

[Os Cangaceiros]

I'm sure that the praise Stalin received from individuals like Foster and Haywood had absolutely nothing to do with careerist ambitions within the CP-USA.

[The Vegan Marxist]

I'm sure that the praise Stalin received from individuals like Foster and Haywood had absolutely nothing to do with careerist ambitions within the CP-USA.

Oh, sure. But these are merely quotes. You want an analysis, one would have to endure through various critiques by the vast amounts of historical figures, such as the ones provided above.

UPDATE: If anything, I would recommend a book that not only debunks all the bullshit lies made against Stalin & upholds the correct lines made by Stalin while leader of the USSR, but also correctly criticizes Stalin as well on things that were needing to be criticized. This book is Another View of Stalin by Ludo Martens. (part 1 (http://marxistleninist.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/another_look_of_stalin_book1.pdf), part 2 (http://marxistleninist.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/another_look_of_stalin_book2.pdf), part 3 (http://marxistleninist.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/another_look_of_stalin_book3.pdf))

[scarletghoul]

I doubt this is supposed to be a scholarly essay. It's just a tribute, and in that sense it's fine. This was a widespread admiration for Stalin among communists in those days, before the revisionism; that man had been the head of the worlds' first socialist state through some extremely tough times from which it emerged stronger than ever, and was a living symbol for international working class movements. Whether you like him or not, it's important to recognise just how respected he was among conscious workers throughout the world.

[fa2991]

Stalin was greatly seen as an important leader by many historical figures. And yes, this includes W.E.B. Du Bois:

“Joseph Stalin was a great man; few other men of the 20th century approach his stature. He was simple, calm and courageous. He seldom lost his poise; pondered his problems slowly, made his decisions clearly and firmly; never yielded to ostentation nor coyly refrained from holding his rightful place with dignity. He was the son of a serf but stood calmly before the great without hesitation or nerves. But also—and this was the highest proof of his greatness—he knew the common man, felt his problems, followed his fate.” ~ W.E.B. Du Bois (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/biographies/1953/03/16.htm)

Though, there are plenty other figures we should look at that saw Comrade Stalin as the great leader that he was. For example:

“Stalin has further developed Marxism-Leninism through many invaluable theoretical accomplishments. His principal contributions to Marxian theory lie in indicating the path of the actual building of socialism in the U.S.S.R. Thus, his powerful polemics against Trotsky, Zinoviev, Bukharin and their counterrevolutionary affiliates comprised the greatest ideological struggle of our times. They clarified every aspect of the vast and unique problem of building socialism in one country, and surveyed the whole position of international capitalism. They resulted in a decisive victory for the leadership of the Communist Party and, thereby, of socialism.” ~William Z. Foster (http://www.marxists.org/archive/foster/1939/12/stalin.htm)

“Throughout this whole struggle, we Black students at the school had been ardent supporters of the position of Stalin and the Central Committee. Most certainly we were Stalinists – whose policies we saw as the continuation of Lenin’s. Those today who use the term “Stalinist” as an epithet evade the real question: that is, were Stalin and the Central Committee correct? I believe history has proven that they were correct.” ~Harry Haywood (http://marxistleninist.wordpress.com/2009/12/11/harry-haywood-trotskys-day-in-court/)

“In all spheres of modern life the influence of Stalin reaches wide and deep. From his last simply written but vastly discerning and comprehensive document, back through the years, his contributions to the science of our world society remain invaluable. One reverently speaks of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin—the shapers of humanity’s richest present and future.” ~Paul Robeson (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/biographies/1953/04/x01.htm)

“This day was a day of jubilation and joy in republican Spain. In the cities and villages, at the fronts and at the rear, millions of voices, expressing what their hearts felt, cheered Stalin. In the factories and trenches, the workers and soldiers carved the name ‘Stalin’ on their tools and on their gun-stocks. The most beautiful streets of the cities and the most important localities were called: Soviet Union Avenue. And Stalin’s picture had a place of honor in every home and his name, lived in the hearts of all who fought and worked for a Spain freed from its age-old enemies.” ~Dolores Ibárruri (http://www.marxists.org/archive/ibarruri/1940/01/x01.htm)

“In the so called mistakes of Stalin lies the difference between a revolutionary attitude and a revisionist attitude. You have to look at Stalin in the historical context in which he moves, you don’t have to look at him as some kind of brute, but in that particular historical context . . . I have come to communism because of daddy Stalin and nobody must come and tell me that I mustn’t read Stalin. I read him when it was very bad to read him. That was another time. And because I’m not very bright, and a hard-headed person, I keep on reading him. Especially in this new period, now that it is worse to read him. Then, as well as now, I still find a series of things that are very good.” ~Ernesto Che Guevara (http://www.thechestore.com/Che-Guevara-politics.php#BattleAgainstRevisionism)

“Stalin has died. The ardent heart of the great leader of progressive mankind has ceased to beat. This sad news has spread over Korean territory like lightning, inflicting a bitter blow to the hearts of millions of people. Korean People’s Army soldiers, workers, farmers, and students, as well as all residents of both South and North Korea, have heard the sad news with profound grief. The very being of Korea has seemed to bow down, and mothers who had apparently exhausted their tears in weeping for the children they had lost in the bombing of the [American] air bandits sobbed again.” ~Kim Il Sung (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juche)

“Stalin earned his place among the great classics of Marxism-Leninism with his stern and principled struggle for the defence, consistent implementation and further development of the ideas of Marx, Engels and Lenin. With his keen mind and special ability, he was able to find his bearings even in the most difficult times, when the bourgeoisie and reaction were doing everything in their power to hinder the triumph of the Great October Socialist Revolution.” ~Enver Hoxha (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hoxha/works/stalin/intro.htm)

“Congratulating Stalin is not a formality. Congratulating Stalin means supporting him and his cause, supporting the victory of socialism, and the way forward for mankind which he points out, it means supporting a dear friend. For the great majority of mankind today are suffering, and mankind can free itself from suffering only by the road pointed out by Stalin and with his help.” ~Mao Zedong (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-2/mswv2_24.htm)

:lol: Did you seriously used to be an anarchist?

[The Vegan Marxist]

:lol: Did you seriously used to be an anarchist?

Yeah, use to be. RevLeft, among other areas, helped me dissolve away from that though. Why?

[fa2991]

Yeah, use to be. RevLeft, among other areas, helped me dissolve away from that though. Why?

Kropotkin one day, Stalin the next. It's just an odd and incredible transformation. :D

[The Vegan Marxist]

Kropotkin one day, Stalin the next. It's just an odd and incredible transformation. :D

Took a lot of studying to do, but yes. I've heard the same from plenty others on this forum as well lol. I started out as the Anarchist that most Marxists liked & Anarchists hated, & now...well....it's pretty much the same, except I'm a Marxist instead of an Anarchist haha.

[scarletghoul]

Me too. http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?do=viewmembers&groupid=266 half of these are MLs

[Sir Comradical]

He could have just said 'glory to great comrade Stalin' and left it at that, I mean, that's basically what the article is about.

[enrici]

He could have just said 'glory to great comrade Stalin' and left it at that, I mean, that's basically what the article is about.

Yeah, I kinda felt the same thing. I mean, I'm new to radical leftism and all, and I'm open to honest criticisms and defenses of famous figures like Stalin, but this article wasn't very informative.

[scarletghoul]

Again, it's not supposed to be informative, it's just a tribute from one of the most important intellectuals in American history, who had a lot of respect for Stalin. If you want information to help form a clearer opinion, there are other things for that. As TVM posted above, 'another view of stalin' is interesting. Mao's critiques are also worth reading a bit of, as it shows why Maoists uphold him but also differ radically from Stalinism. www.massline.org%2FSingleSpark%2FStalin%2FStalinMa oEval.htm http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-8/mswv8_66.htm It's also probably good to understand Khruschev's revisionism in relation to the Stalinism. Harpal Brar done a good talk on it here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ht1v2W4mSAE

[bailey_187]

I'm sure that the praise Stalin received from individuals like Foster and Haywood had absolutely nothing to do with careerist ambitions within the CP-USA.

Not that these quotes Vegan posted prove anything, but the Haywood quote IIRC is from his autobiography "Black Bolshevik", written after he left the CPUSA.

[Dimentio]

So reminds me of Skip Sievert :D

[The Vegan Marxist]

Not that these quotes Vegan posted prove anything, but the Haywood quote IIRC is from his autobiography "Black Bolshevik", written after he left the CPUSA.

Yes, you're correct. Chapter 6 of "Black Bolshevik".