Opinion on Gorbachev

[Apoi_Viitor]

What are people's opinions on Gorbachev? Positive? Negative?

[Marxach-Léinínach]

"My ambition was to liquidate communism" - Mikhail Gorbachev

[Rusty Shackleford]

Hes a bastard.

[Conscript]

Liberal who intentionally furthered the demise of socialism not only in the USSR, but across the world.

[The Vegan Marxist]

The negatives outweighed the positives under the leadership of Gorbachev. So, naturally, can't say that I like him very much.

[Scary Monster]

Yeah he intentionally dismantled communism in Russia which led to the country's complete collapse and still-present mass poverty, and pretty much helped to do the same thing everywhere else, all for this idealistic view of capitalism. I dont think anyone likes him.

[Marxach-Léinínach]

He's still alive

[Scary Monster]

He's still alive

Oh. Guess im thinkin about someone else lol

[Marxach-Léinínach]

Is it Yeltsin you're thinking of?

[Sentinel]

"My ambition was to liquidate communism" - Mikhail Gorbachev

Holy shit, he actually said that, right out loud? Not that there is any question that precisely that was his aim all along. :mad:

And that very snake managed to climb through the entire bureaucratic ladder and got himself elected president of the USSR..

How can that even be possible?

[Rusty Shackleford]

Holy shit, he actually said that, right out loud? Not that there is any question that precisely that was his aim all along. :mad:

And that very snake managed to climb through the entire bureaucratic ladder and got himself elected president of the USSR..

How can that even be possible?


Probably because capitalist roaders weren't watched for within the party. This is one reason why "Stalinism" may be preferable to Kruschevism and the whole anti-stalinism thing.

its a "no-bullshit" policy. :lol:

seriously though, form some reason, Soviet politics were pretty good internationally after they started supporting the CPC and stopped backing zionism, but internally, it seems like they just didnt give a fuck about who was in the party.

[Leonid Brozhnev]

Gorbachev was a CIA operative. There, I said it.

[Sir Comradical]

I don't like CIA operatives.

[The Author]

Gorbachev made this television address on the night of December 25, 1991, when the USSR was officially dissolved. If you want an idea of the man, here you go:


Address to the Soviet Citizens by the President of the USSR on 25 December 1991

Dear fellow countrymen! Citizens!

Given the current situation and the formation of the Commonwealth of Independent States, I am ceasing my activities as President of the USSR. I have arrived at this decision for reasons of principle.

I have always spoken out firmly in favor of autonomy and the independence of nations and sovereignty of the republics. But at the same time, I support the preservation of a Union state and the integrity of the country.

Events have taken a different course. A trend towards dismembering the country and the disintegration of the state has prevailed, which I cannot accept.

My position on this issue has not changed after the Alma Ata meeting and the decisions made there.

Furthermore, I am convinced that decisions of such importance should have been made by popular will.

However, I will do everything within my power to ensure that the Alma Ata agreements bring real unity to our society and pave the way out of the crisis, facilitating a sustained reform process.

Addressing you for the last time as President of the USSR, I find it necessary to state my position with regard to the path we have embarked upon since 1985 - especially since controversial, superficial and biased judgments abound.

Fate had decided that, when I became head of state, it was already obvious that there was something wrong in this country. We had plenty of everything: land, oil, gas and other natural resources, and God has also endowed us with intellect and talent - yet we lived much worse than people in other industrialized countries and the gap was constantly widening.

The reason was apparent even then - our society was stifled in the grip of a bureaucratic command system. Doomed to serve ideology and bear the heavy burden of the arms race, it was strained to the utmost.

All attempts at implementing half-hearted reforms - and there have been many - failed, one after the other. The country was losing hope. We could not go on living like this. We had to change everything radically.

For this reason, I never regretted that I did not use my position as General Secretary merely to "reign" for a few years. This would have been irresponsible and immoral.

I understood that initiating reforms on such a large scale in a society like ours was a most difficult and risky undertaking. But even now, I am convinced that the democratic reforms started in the spring of 1985 were historically justified.

The process of renovating this country and bringing about fundamental changes in the international community proved to be much more complex than originally anticipated. However, let us acknowledge what has been achieved so far.

Society has acquired freedom; it has been freed politically and spiritually. And this is the most important achievement, which we have not fully come to grips with, in part because we still have not learned how to use our freedom. However, a historic task has been accomplished:

- The totalitarian system, which prevented this country from becoming wealthy and prosperous a long time ago, has been dismantled.
- A breakthrough has been made on the road to democratic reforms. Free elections, freedom of the press, freedom of worship, representative legislatures, and a multi-party system have all become realities.
- We have set out to introduce a pluralistic economy, and the equality of all forms of ownership is being established. In the course of the land reform, the peasantry is reviving, individual farmers have appeared and millions of hectares of land have been allocated to the urban and rural population. Laws were passed on the economic freedom of producers, and free enterprise, shareholding and privatization are under way.
- Shifting the course of our economy towards a free market, we must not forget that this is being done for the benefit of the individual. In these times of hardship, everything must be done to ensure the social protection of the individual - particularly old people and children.

We live in a new world:

- An end has been put to the "Cold War," the arms race and the insane militarization of our country, which crippled our economy, distorted our thinking and undermined our morals. The threat of a world war is no more.

Once again, I should like to stress that I have done everything in my power during the transition period to ensure safe control over nuclear weapons.

- We opened ourselves up to the rest of the world, renounced interference in the affairs of others and the use of troops beyond our borders. In response, we have gained trust, solidarity and respect.
- We have become a major stronghold for the reorganization of modern civilization on the basis of peaceful, democratic principles.
- The peoples and nations of this country have acquired genuine freedom to choose their own way towards self-determination. The quest for a democratic reform of our multinational state has led us to the point where we were about to sign a new Union treaty.

All these changes demanded utmost exertion and were carried through under conditions of an unrelenting struggle against the growing resistance from the old, obsolete and reactionary forces - the former Party and state structures and the economic management apparatus - as well as our patterns, our ideological prejudices, our egalitarian and parasitic psychology. The change ran up against our intolerance, a low level of political culture and a fear of change. That is why we have wasted so much time. The old system tumbled down before the new one could begin functioning. And our society slid into an even deeper crisis.

I am aware of the dissatisfaction with today's grave situation, the harsh criticisms of the authorities at all levels and of my personal role. But I would like to stress once again: in so vast a country, given its heritage, fundamental changes cannot be carried out without difficulties and pain.

The August coup brought the overall crisis to a breaking point. The most disastrous aspect of this crisis is the collapse of statehood. And today I watch apprehensively the loss of the citizenship of a great country by our citizens - the consequences of this could be grave, for all of us.

I consider it vitally important to sustain the democratic achievements of the last few years. We have earned them through the suffering of our entire history and our tragic experience. We must not abandon them under any circumstances, under any pretext. Otherwise, all our hopes for a better future will be buried.

I am speaking of this frankly and honestly. It is my moral duty.

Today I want to express my gratitude to all those citizens who have given their support to the policy of renovating this country and who participated in the democratic reforms.

I am thankful to statesmen, political and public leaders and millions of ordinary people in other countries - to all those who understood our objectives and gave us their support, meeting us halfway and offering genuine co-operation.

I leave my post with concern - but also with hope, with faith in you, your wisdom and spiritual strength. We are the heirs of a great civilization, and its revival and transformation to a modern and dignified life depend on all and everyone.

I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to those who stood by my side, defending the right and good cause over all these years. We certainly could have avoided certain errors and done better in many ways. But I am convinced that, sooner or later, our common efforts will bear fruit and our peoples will live in a prosperous and democratic society.

I wish all the best to everyone.

[pranabjyoti]

Probably because capitalist roaders weren't watched for within the party. This is one reason why "Stalinism" may be preferable to Kruschevism and the whole anti-stalinism thing.

its a "no-bullshit" policy. :lol:

seriously though, form some reason, Soviet politics were pretty good internationally after they started supporting the CPC and stopped backing zionism, but internally, it seems like they just didnt give a fuck about who was in the party.
Basically, this bustard showed why purging is necessary from time to time for purification of party. Otherwise, that will end in electing a son of a imperialist whore as the leader of a communist party.

[MellowViper]

hes now saying he wishes the USSR never collapsed

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Basically, this bustard showed why purging is necessary from time to time for purification of party. Otherwise, that will end in electing a son of a imperialist whore as the leader of a communist party.

There is a difference between purging those who openly wish for a regression from Socialism, and executing those whose opinions differ from the 'leadership' but still fall within the realm of Socialism.

[Mannimarco]

Silly question. It's like saying,

What's your opinion on Hitler? Positive? Negative?

[RadioRaheem84]

hes now saying he wishes the USSR never collapsed

Link!

[pranabjyoti]

There is a difference between purging those who openly wish for a regression from Socialism, and executing those whose opinions differ from the 'leadership' but still fall within the realm of Socialism.
None in the USSR during Stalin was purged just for having different opinion with the leadership. Those, who were purged, were punished after their guilt had been proved in open court with sufficient proof and witnesses.
If those people, whose opinion "differs" from the leadership, were left alone, the demise of the USSR wouldn't take time upto 1989, but will happen much ahead and probably just with Nazi invasion.

[scarletghoul]

"Oh shi- uhhmm... I, uhh, I meant to do that.. " - Mikhail Gorbachev
fixed

No fucking way did he mean to destroy the USSR, that's the lamest excuse ever. It was the fuck up of the century. But he can be seen as the final form of revisionist ideology which is destined to transform socialist relations into capitalist relations of production.. He was the climax of the degeneration of the Soviet state which began under Lenin and changed the ruling ideology qualitatively to capitalist/revisionist under Khruschev, which went on to qualitatively transform the social relations of production from socialism to capitalism in the 1980s.

[penguinfoot]

He single-handedly brought about the collapse of what had hitherto been a perfectly-functioning socialist society in the USSR. Because that's how Marxists understand history.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

None in the USSR during Stalin was purged just for having different opinion with the leadership. Those, who were purged, were punished after their guilt had been proved in open court with sufficient proof and witnesses.
If those people, whose opinion "differs" from the leadership, were left alone, the demise of the USSR wouldn't take time upto 1989, but will happen much ahead and probably just with Nazi invasion.

Ah, so now it comes out. People whose opinions differ from the leadership deserve a bullet in the skull. That's what I call real Socialism. Imposed from above from the barrel of a gun.

I just pray that the next violent revolution doesn't end up with the same appalling results. As much as the Soviet Union flourished economically under Stalin, there was a ridiculously unnecessary loss of life that I, for one, will do nothing but condemn.

You seem to not understand that no proletarian will support a revolution that is indifferent to the loss of innocent lives. Until you get over this, you'll remain an irrelevant microcosm of political thought, i'm afraid.

[Robocommie]

fixed

No fucking way did he mean to destroy the USSR, that's the lamest excuse ever.

Exactly. Would you rather be known as the man who tried to save the Soviet Union and ended up fucking it up forever, or would you rather be known as the man who valiantly and with great resolve endeavored to end Communist tyranny and get a wink and a nod from all those nice Americans who see you as such a likeable and somewhat tragic figure now?

Not that I like Gorbachev, but I don't buy for a minute that he intended to take it down from the start.

[pranabjyoti]

Ah, so now it comes out. People whose opinions differ from the leadership deserve a bullet in the skull. That's what I call real Socialism. Imposed from above from the barrel of a gun.

I just pray that the next violent revolution doesn't end up with the same appalling results. As much as the Soviet Union flourished economically under Stalin, there was a ridiculously unnecessary loss of life that I, for one, will do nothing but condemn.

You seem to not understand that no proletarian will support a revolution that is indifferent to the loss of innocent lives. Until you get over this, you'll remain an irrelevant microcosm of political thought, i'm afraid.
Problem with people like you is that you will never try to understand. Those people didn't stop with the "different opinions", they went on further and at the end become conspirator against the nation and the working class. They have secretly organized sabotages, bought worthless, useless machinery with high price and made conspiracies to kill party men of their own.
KINDLY NOTE THAT ALL THE GUILTS HAD BEEN PROVED IN OPEN COURT.

[Manic Impressive]

He took a dying dog out back and put a bullet through the back of it's head
(a metaphor not literally before anyone asks for sources:rolleyes:)

[Burn A Flag]

Right, everything about the USSR during the Stalin era was totally just. I agree that there are massive exaggerations, but still, there was a huge loss of life and justice did not always happen. This does not mean that Stalin was a traitor to socialism though. It was partially historically current and partially bad choices made by his administration.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Problem with people like you is that you will never try to understand. Those people didn't stop with the "different opinions", they went on further and at the end become conspirator against the nation and the working class. They have secretly organized sabotages, bought worthless, useless machinery with high price and made conspiracies to kill party men of their own.
KINDLY NOTE THAT ALL THE GUILTS HAD BEEN PROVED IN OPEN COURT.

Believe me, i've made every effort to understand. Indeed, at the time, i'd have almost definitely supported the economic policy of the Politburo led by Stalin than the likes of Trotsky, Bukharin et al.

The point is, whatever angle I have come at this from, and however i've tried to find a reasonable justification for what happened 1937-38 and to the CC members and party delegated to the 1934 Congress, I cannot. The simple fact is that this period involved murder, that was almost explicitly sanctioned from the very top of the state.

I may have had more sympathy if Stalin had come out with some intellectual disarming of the supposed Trotskyite-centre, and then, on the back of proof that these guys were indeed damaging Socialism, expelled them from the party or sent them to Siberia. However, calling these guys fascists, Nazis, Capitalists, Imperialists is preposterous. Anybody who has studied this period can surely see this. Indeed, it would almost be funny to call Trotsky et al german Nazi-Fascist-Capitalist-Imperialist anti-Socialist conspirators if it hadn't led to such a grave loss of life.

You are doing your cause no end of harm by continuing to peddle this ridiculous, defensive and wholly un-truthful line. Please just step back and accept that what happened was wrong and that J. Stalin should bear at least some blame. You do not have to repudiate Stalin as a Communist or his period of rule to do this, just recognise that this particular episode of Soviet history was ugly and un-warranted.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Also, just quickly, nothing was proven in court. You'll note that not many people accept self-declarations of guilt that have been wilfully procured under torture (re: the Stalin memo of 1939 which said that torture had been used for at least the past two years in NKVD interrogations). Aside from these confessions, there is no proof of a plot to kill Stalin nor any other Politburo or CC member.

[pranabjyoti]

Also, just quickly, nothing was proven in court. You'll note that not many people accept self-declarations of guilt that have been wilfully procured under torture (re: the Stalin memo of 1939 which said that torture had been used for at least the past two years in NKVD interrogations). Aside from these confessions, there is no proof of a plot to kill Stalin nor any other Politburo or CC member.
If you continuously want to deny eye-witness accounts and descriptions of other people like Engineer John D Littlepage, I DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE ARGUMENT WITH YOU. Can you give us any source of this STALIN MEMO?
What you are saying is just repeating the words of the commission set by the bustard Gorbachev and that at the end "proved" that those people convicted in Moscow trial weren't "guilty" at all.
In open court before the eye-witnesses, Visinski placed one after another proofs and witnesses and at the end, the convicts had nothing to do but to confess.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Here is the link to the Stalin memo:

http://marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1939/01/10.htm

I've never read a single word of any Gorbachev commission, but nice try with that little tu quoque there; you know full well i'm as anti-Gorbachev and anti-Capitalist as anyone here.

Vyshinski placed some evidence of wrecking. As far as I know, he never linked Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev and the other top ranking former CC members and party delegates to Nazism, Capitalism or Imperialism. I don't believe you can show me a scrap of evidence to the contrary.

[pranabjyoti]

Here is the link to the Stalin memo:

http://marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1939/01/10.htm

I've never read a single word of any Gorbachev commission, but nice try with that little tu quoque there; you know full well i'm as anti-Gorbachev and anti-Capitalist as anyone here.

Vyshinski placed some evidence of wrecking. As far as I know, he never linked Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev and the other top ranking former CC members and party delegates to Nazism, Capitalism or Imperialism. I don't believe you can show me a scrap of evidence to the contrary.
Kindly read The Great Conspiracy Against Russia by Albert Kahn and Michael Sears. Have you gone through any of the books that I have repeatedly mentioned?

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Like I said, i've read a wide source of material, a lot of it coming from the likes of Stalin himself. To give the guy credit, he's a more interesting read than I thought.

If I find time i'll try to read Kahn and Sears. I'm a busy person, as we all are.

As i've said, though, i've read material from the left and right, from the M-L to the Trotskyite. I've come to the conclusion that what happened in 1937-38 was unacceptable. You should really just accept that people who are against the purges and murders of the late 1930s (not even talking about opposition to Stalin here, just to the events of this period) are not all idiots, Capitalists, Fascists or people who are unable to think for themselves.

[pranabjyoti]

Like I said, i've read a wide source of material, a lot of it coming from the likes of Stalin himself. To give the guy credit, he's a more interesting read than I thought.

If I find time i'll try to read Kahn and Sears. I'm a busy person, as we all are.

As i've said, though, i've read material from the left and right, from the M-L to the Trotskyite. I've come to the conclusion that what happened in 1937-38 was unacceptable. You should really just accept that people who are against the purges and murders of the late 1930s (not even talking about opposition to Stalin here, just to the events of this period) are not all idiots, Capitalists, Fascists or people who are unable to think for themselves.
Instead of differentiating between ML and trot like that, you better read some neutral observers who weren't connected to left movement but was present during the Moscow trials. Kahn and Sears weren't ML historians.
You have said that you have read a lot of ML and trot sources, but all the sources you have given are from www.marxist.org, a purely trot website. STRANGE!

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Instead of differentiating between ML and trot like that, you better read some neutral observers who weren't connected to left movement but was present during the Moscow trials. Kahn and Sears weren't ML historians.
You have said that you have read a lot of ML and trot sources, but all the sources you have given are from www.marxist.org, a purely trot website. STRANGE!

They have material from J. Stalin himself on marxists.org, I didn't realise he was a trot source...:thumbup1:

[Delenda Carthago]

Simple questions:

A.Can a man single handidly destroy an economical and political system?Can Barack Obama destroy capitalism?(since the fuckin morons of the tea party call him a marxist and all...)
B.Was it socialism what excisted in USSR?USSR fell on the 1/1/90 if I recall well.On Xmass 1989 was it socialism/communism?
C.If B answer is "NOT",when did USSR stoped being socialist?
D.If it was not socialism,was it a bad thing that it got destroyed?Would it be good for the revolutionaries worldwide to still have them excisting and further more claiming "communism"?


The winner gets a night with a russian prostitute,brought to the balkans after USSR's collapse by the white slavery mafia.

[Marxach-Léinínach]

Simple questions:

A.Can a man single handidly destroy an economical and political system?Can Barack Obama destroy capitalism?(since the fuckin morons of the tea party call him a marxist and all...)
B.Was it socialism what excisted in USSR?USSR fell on the 1/1/90 if I recall well.On Xmass 1989 was it socialism/communism?
C.If B answer is "NOT",when did USSR stoped being socialist?
D.If it was not socialism,was it a bad thing that it got destroyed?Would it be good for the revolutionaries worldwide to still have them excisting and further more claiming "communism"?


The winner gets a night with a russian prostitute,brought to the balkans after USSR's collapse by the white slavery mafia.

A. The fact that the USSR had already been on the road to collapse for years helped Gorby out quite a bit, but even then it's undeniable that Perestroika played quite a huge part in the collapse
B. No, it was not socialist in 1989
C. The USSR stopped being socialist after the Kosygin reforms during the late-60s/early-70s. After that, it was basically a radical social democracy.
D. Radical social democracy is clearly still quite a bit better than straight-up capitalism as evidenced by the state eastern Europe and central Asia are in now. As for the second part, the USSR played a reactionary role in the world communist movement from 1956 onwards but they at least made a good counter-balance to the USA

[Nanatsu Yoru]

At risk of being OT, I'm no great fan of Gorbachev (hell, I'm no great fan of the Soviet Union post-Lenin) but no matter which way I look at it I can't find myself able to disagree with freedom of worship. Religion isn't great, but is outlawing it any better?

[Delenda Carthago]

As for the second part, the USSR played a reactionary role in the world communist movement from 1956 onwards but they at least made a good counter-balance to the USA
Great dialectics!Just put "Third Reich" in the place of "ussr" and you understand that communists should have a party for USSR collapse...

[Marxach-Léinínach]

Great dialectics!Just put "Third Reich" in the place of "ussr" and you understand that communists should have a party for USSR collapse...

Are you comparing the USSR to the Third Reich?

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

At risk of being OT, I'm no great fan of Gorbachev (hell, I'm no great fan of the Soviet Union post-Lenin) but no matter which way I look at it I can't find myself able to disagree with freedom of worship. Religion isn't great, but is outlawing it any better?

Freedom to worship privately, or whatever is decided upon by the people, is all good and well.

But when freedom of worship is presented as part of a liberal-bourgeois 'human rights' package, then you start to have problems, as this liberal agenda will inevitably include the whole 'free and fair multi-bourgeois party democracy', 'freedom from abuse by evil, baby-eating, communist totalitarians' and so on. I'm being purposely extreme in my examples but you get the picture. Liberal notions of 'rights and liberties' run at a tangent to the idea of class war and revolution.