Stalin's Legacy

[The Feral Underclass]

I live in a commune with people from all over the world. The majority of people come from eastern blcok countires. Hungary, Estonia, Lithuania, Czech and Poland.

When talking about my politics with these people, who are my friends, I notcie one disturbing thing. Their absolute hatred of Communism.

When I meet people in western countries and speak to them about communism I always come against the arguement of "it's a nice idea but it could never work", "what about human nature" etc etc and it is easy to argue the illogicalness of their argument, and sometimes win them over. But when speaking to people who have lived in these countries which where dominated by stalin the argument goes deeper. My friends oppinions do not simply run on the basic theoretical arguement.

They have deep psychological and fatalistic oppinions about humanity. These people have lived under "communism" and it was despicable for them. If you mention communism or anarchism to them, and outline the truth of these social philosophies I am attacked with venom and complete and absolute anger and I can not not sympothise with them. I can not say i understand what it was like, because I can not. They look at me and see someone who is attempting to defend something that ruined their lives.

I have tried to explain that Stalinism was not communism but it to no avail. They saw relatives executed by the stalinist regime. They saw corruption and they lived through poverty and back breaking work which led to nothing. Their argument about human nature is not simply based on western ideas of consumerism but of facts that they saw. Some of these people have said to me that human beings can never be happy - we can never live in a world where we are happy or where we can be free - human beings are inatly domineering and violent.

How can I argue against such a fatalistic view of human beings, and it makes it all the more difficult because to them I believe in something that on the face of it, destroyed their lives and their families lives.

Maybe Stalin has ruined any chance of creating a society we all so desperatly want?

[Bianconero]

Well then, according to your profile, you are 20 years old. Knowing that, I guess people living in your 'commune' might not be much older than you are, am I right? So how on earth did they, your friends, who are about 20 years old, experience Stalin's 'cruelties' when Stalin died in 1953?

I'm sorry, but you don't make any sense. Unless, however, your 'commune' people were all born in the 20s, 30s or early 40s. That would make them quite old, wouldn't it?

[The Feral Underclass]

These friends are raging from 18 to 57...so yes, they were not alive when Stalin was, this however does not negate the fact that Stalin's empire continued right up until 1991 and that the legacy of stalin meant that their lives and their families lives where, as I have said, were very difficult and sometimes horrifying. Which leads me back to the reaon why I started this thread...smart arse!

[Bianconero]

this however does not negate the fact that Stalin's empire continued right up until 1991 and that the legacy of stalin meant that their lives and their families lives where, as I have said, were very difficult and sometimes horrifying.

I disagree that 'Stalinism' was still present after Stalin's death. Post - Stalin 'communists' even denounced him (is there more to say?), just try and read Nikita's famous speach. 'Stalinism' in the Soviet Union was dead the moment Stalin died.

I'm sorry, but you need to do some research on the topic, 'smart arse.'

[The Feral Underclass]

READ CAREFULLY AND UNDERSTAND!

"this...does not negate the fact that Stalin's EMPIRE continued right up until 1991"

Whether or not the leaders of Russia after Stalins death called it Stalinism, these countries were still dominated with the same vileness as they were under stalin, and all in the name of "communism". If you would like to come here and hear some of the stories, be my guest, but until you have, please stop simplifying these peoples experiences. Unless they all conspired to lie to me about their lives under "communism" I do not think it is relevant what the name of the dictator was.

This thread is not about stalinism, it is about the attitudes of people in eastern block countries and how we can change them.

[Bianconero]

Your post is mainly based on a legend, on a fairy tale, that you can't back up with facts. The post - Stalin era can not be said to be 'stalinist' (i.e. socialist), your claim ...


these countries were still dominated with the same vileness as they were under stalin

... is simply not true. Period. After Stalin's death, revisionism took over. The post Stalin era was capitalist, the Stalin era socialist. Knowing that, your friends didn't experience 'Stalin's legacy', but merely a corrupt capitalist regime. Furthermore, I know very well what this thread is about. Your friend's bad experiences with 'communism' are touching, I might even cry a bit for them when I find the time. But before I do, I'll cry for the millions of people who are right now starving under capitalism, a system you and your anarchist kindergarten gang will not be able to destroy.

[The Feral Underclass]

Thank you for your comments :ph34r:

[redstar2000]

You pretty much have to wait for them to die off.

I know that sounds pretty harsh, but let's face it. When they were children, their heads were filled with family "horror stories" (true or not makes no difference). Children are very gullible, otherwise religion would have died out thousands of years ago.

People growing up now in the "eastern bloc" countries are learning about the realities of capitalism and they will learn more as time passes. The old "horror stories" will gradually pass into history and be forgotten...except when the bourgeois media there try to remind people.

But as we have seen in the west, the bourgeois media gradually loses credibility...and so will their stories about the "horrors" of "communism".

The people in your commune "ought" to be willing to make a fair examination of your arguments...but, chances are, they won't do it.

It's like expecting a kid raised Catholic to make a "fair" examination of the arguments for atheism. Once in a while, maybe...but usually not.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Xprewatik RED]

redstar2000

Red Star you know nothing of Stalin's purges. Saying that our parents filled our heads is stupid, why would they teach us to hate Stalin, because if I had walked to school and mentioned any of this my parents would have gone to jail. Stalin was a murderor. He purged Ukraine. What about the Hungarian uprising huh? Over 200,000 Hungarians fled West when they had a chance what does that tell you? He put millions in Siberia IN ADDITION to State prisons, which existed in cities. People there ranging from the hated Bourgiosies to the average worker, slaved day in and day out. YOu can call my grandma a liar, I don't care she was the one who was there the one who watched her parents worked to death HELPLESS. Communism is a great system, but Stalin was a murderor I only wish I could have spit in his face. So go back to your Western home and read your Western Stalinist websites and go watch your western TV and feel comforted, but you don't know how we lived so don't try to justify anything. Stalin was a liar, a propogandist, and a murderor, he starved and murderoed my nation, not the Kulaks the Kulaks were nothing compared to the Red Army. The Soviet Union entered Ukraine in 1918 I believe. How do you logically say that the Kulaks starved the Ukrainians, they were a minority, and black famine was for a year so your saying the USSR lost control for one year and for that year over 5 million died? NO he was trying to break the spirit of the peasant so that he would never question him.

[Cassius Clay]

I know I've said this before but I wonder sometimes if this place ought to be renamed 'Goebbels Lives' rather than 'Che Lives'.

Yeah that Stalin was sure responsible for the 'Eastern Bloc' when he didn't even raise the issue of invading Yugoslavia a country which became a full western ally. I mean he only worked for the reunification of Germany because it was part of a master plan.

Sigh.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

What is this commune of yours called? I have never heard of any here in America, and I am curious as to how they operate.

[redstar2000]

Red Star you know nothing of Stalin's purges. Saying that our parents filled our heads is stupid, why would they teach us to hate Stalin, because if I had walked to school and mentioned any of this my parents would have gone to jail.

What time period are you talking about? After 1956 or so, it was perfectly safe to be "critical" of Stalin's "errors". Are you old enough to remember Stalin when he was still alive? (I am, just barely.)

I was speaking of some young people in the "eastern bloc" now...who have little or no first-hand experience with the old regimes but have heard "horror stories" from their families which may or may not be true. Notice I said that...in other words, any particular "horror story" may well be true. Thus your grandmother could be telling the truth as she saw it and I am not calling her a "liar".

Your intemperate remarks concerning Stalin "starving and murdering your nation" suggest that you are a Ukrainian nationalist determined to emphasize the separate existence of a Ukrainian "nation".

That's "ok" with me--I try never to argue with nationalists because, in most cases, it's like arguing with religious fundamentalists. Let there be an independent Ukraine (run by Ukrainian gangsters instead of Russian ones) "forever"...makes no difference to me or to history in general.


So go back to your Western home and read your Western Stalinist websites and go watch your western TV and feel comforted, but you don't know how we lived so don't try to justify anything.

Obviously, you are very new to this site. I'm not a participant in any "Stalinist" web sites and, in fact, reject the entire Leninist paradigm (Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, etc.)...as you would know if you'd been here for a while. I also don't even own a dummyvision and encourage those who do to throw them away...it turns the human brain into oatmeal.

You should really have a look at my own site and see how much I :wub: Uncle Joe.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Jesus Christ]

i wouldnt doubt that their families lives were probably greatly torn apart and fractured by Stalin and his purges, but there is no doubt in my mind that they are stretching the truth greatly
as others have said, Stalins rule was NOT communist, despite what anyone tells you, it was a cruel dictatorship with imperialistic intentions
nothing is as bad as people make it out to be though
and youd think theyd have a little understanding on communism if theyre living in a commune
:blink:

[The Feral Underclass]

It is amazing that people would rather try refute what I have said, than tackle the question at hand. of course Stalin was not a Communist, I know that, the point is, they dont, and refuse to because of what has happened to them...and it salso seems strange that you would automatically assume that these people were "stretching the truth" without having actually seen them or spoken to them. When they were talking to me, they didnt seem to "stretching the truth", in fact they seemed very angry and upset.

Now, to define the word legacy:

2.Something handed down from an ancestor or a predecessor or from the past:[/b] a legacy of religious freedom. See Synonyms at heritage.

Whether you people want to call it revisionism, stalinsm, communism, what ever makes you happy, the truth of the matter is the regime they lived under proclaimed to be communism. None of the leaders post stalin called their party the "Revisionist Party". They didnt change the name of the USSR to the Union of Revisionist Nice Republics did they. They remained the Communist Party and they remained the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics.

And this was the point of this thread. To identify that rightly or wrongly, the people who come from these countries have a deep seated hatred for what they believe to be communism and that in order to build a international movement we first have to over come these fundamental issues.

This is not a thread for you maniacs to attempt to defend the indefensable. If you want to talk about how great stalin was or how misunderstood the period after him was. Start your own thread.

[Kapitan Andrey]

The Anarchist Tension...


Maybe Stalin has ruined any chance of creating a society we all so desperatly want?

Interesting idea!

[Jesus Christ]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 20 2003, 05:19 AM
It is amazing that people would rather try refute what I have said, than tackle the question at hand. of course Stalin was not a Communist, I know that, the point is, they dont, and refuse to because of what has happened to them...and it salso seems strange that you would automatically assume that these people were "stretching the truth" without having actually seen them or spoken to them. When they were talking to me, they didnt seem to "stretching the truth", in fact they seemed very angry and upset.

Now, to define the word legacy:

2.Something handed down from an ancestor or a predecessor or from the past: a legacy of religious freedom. See Synonyms at heritage.

Whether you people want to call it revisionism, stalinsm, communism, what ever makes you happy, the truth of the matter is the regime they lived under proclaimed to be communism. None of the leaders post stalin called their party the "Revisionist Party". They didnt change the name of the USSR to the Union of Revisionist Nice Republics did they. They remained the Communist Party and they remained the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics.

And this was the point of this thread. To identify that rightly or wrongly, the people who come from these countries have a deep seated hatred for what they believe to be communism and that in order to build a international movement we first have to over come these fundamental issues.

This is not a thread for you maniacs to attempt to defend the indefensable. If you want to talk about how great stalin was or how misunderstood the period after him was. Start your own thread. [/b]
nothing is ever as bad as people try and make it out to be
its called drama for sympathy
but that doesnt mean that these horrible things may have happened to them or their families
nobody here(as of yet) is defending Stalin
he was a horrible dictator, no doubt about it
and your taking things out of context, because nobody is saying Stalin is great

[The Feral Underclass]

Who is a stalinist in this thread?

[Cassius Clay]

Ah the usual rubbish.

'Stalin was not a communist', 'Stalin was a horrible dictator'. All of this has no basis what so ever when real historical fact is seen.

I'm a 'Stalinist' and proud of it. Although I prefer the label Marxist-Leninist. All the lies thrown at Stalin have been proven to be that, lies. Khruschev and his successors may not have declared the USSR to be 'The Revisionist bloc' but they sure as hell came close. Anyone who spoke up in Stalin's name was surpressed (see Georgia 1956 and poem's in favor Stalin banned), the policy of allowing and promoting each republics culture, language and history was surpressed in favor of Great Russian chavaunism. Marxist-Leninists, or 'Stalinists' were murdered and replaced with Nazi war criminalls who were declared to be 'Victims of Stalinism'.

Blaming Stalin for the 'Eastern bloc' has no factual basis what so ever. Stalin was routinly critical of Walter Ulbricht and pointed out the discontent of East German workers. Once again if he was such a Imperialist why didn't the Red Army simply send in the tanks to overthrow Tito in 1948?

In Bulgaria the leader of the Comintern Georgie Dimitroff was elected, in Poland two whole armies of Poles (some 200,000 men) had fought there way from Moscow to Berlin under the banner of Communism. They got 80% of the vote along with other parties. In Czechslovakia the Communists got 38% of the vote. In Albania the partisans liberated the country by them selves. The Red Army was hardly involved, this was the case in the Baltics in 1940 where infact the Red Army was under strict orders not to intervene in the internal affairs of those countries.

Yep some Imperialist was our Stalin.

Frankly your 'friends' views on there countries should not be taken that seriously, there's a great many Vietnamese in America who are fantically anti Ho Chi Minh and in favor of the American war on their country. Dont make them any less wrong does it?

[crazy comie]

Bollocks cassius stalin operated a beuracratic dictatorship over the prolitarian.

the thing we have to wait for as communists is for the pepole who are from the eastern block and brainwashed into thinking stalin was a communist to pass away then we can begin telling them of true socialism.

[The Feral Underclass]

and what is your idea of true socialism?

[YKTMX]

Maybe Stalin has ruined any chance of creating a society we all so desperatly want?

If you are talking about the forseeable future then yes, but I don't think that the legacy of Stalin and 'Stalinism' can last forever. As far as the present moment is concerned, being a Marxist-Leninist goes hand in hand with questions over the nature of "socialism" in the Eastern Bloc, and that is something we simply have to deal with, especially as some people on the left still have a nostalgic vision of 20th century socialism.

[Iepilei]

The anti-communist dissidents are quite welcome here in the US... as they teach our locals about the "horrors" of "communist tyranny." Hence the reason the US is openly trying to embrace anyone and everyone who has even the slightest opinion against Mr Castro. It all plays well into the propaganda game.

Now, I'm not in anyway defending Stalin. However, for every anti-stalinist advocate that has squirreled his way into the United States you will find a pro-stalinist advocate somewhere in Georgia, kissing a statue of Unkie Joe and reliving the "good ol days."

However, in time, both groups of people will fade into the history books that US students never read.

[Cassius Clay]

'Stalin operated a beuracratic dictatorship over the people'

If only I had a penny for every time I've heard that.

Credit where credit's due to Trotsky, he shoved that down (with the help of every right-wing newspaper tycoon there's ever been) everybody's throat so hard that it's now taken as gospel. Ofcourse he sure was offended by Stalin calling him 'The patriach of all beuracrates', if it were me I would of been more offended by everything Lenin said about Trotsky, but hey what you gonna do.

Stalin sure was some beuracrate when he only had one secretary, never heard Trot accuse Lloyd George of all the names under the sun when he had 32 secretaries. Stalin fought against beuracracy and not just in words, read up on Soviet society at the time and you'll see that. In particular Stalin and Zhadnov's campaign for more criticism and self-criticism in the late 30's.

But I've been threw this so many times I really cant be bothered to do so again.

Stalin's 'legacy' wont die, all the major struggles being led today in the world are taking a favorable account of Stalin not just in a historical sense.

[The Feral Underclass]

How sad.....

[Cassius Clay]

Why's that?

[YKTMX]

Anyone who wants a decent account of Russia under Stalin should read 'Russia: Class and Power 1917-2000' by a guy called Mike Haynes. It is a brilliant account of the degeneration, the counter revolution and the resulting repression endured under Stalin.

[Cassius Clay]

Yeah I guess that's why there were elections in 1937 where in the Smolensk region nearly 50% of officials were replaced by candidates nominated by the people.

Gey if it was so 'evilly Authoritarian' then why did Maxim Gorky write a letter to Stalin complaining that Stalin 'shouldn't allow so much criticism in the press because it will only play into the hands of our enemies'.

There are many good books in favor of Stalin, unfournatly the Capitalists prefer to highlight Trotskyite and Anarchist material, from the school books to waterstones. Now why would they do a thing like that?

Keep it coming folks for reasons that are complicated to say the least I'm here for the next 24 hours.

[YKTMX]

There are many good books in favor of Stalin, unfournatly the Capitalists prefer to highlight Trotskyite and Anarchist material, from the school books to waterstones. Now why would they do a thing like that?


To annoy you.

[Cassius Clay]

Yeah sometimes I wonder that that could well be it.

But ofcourse it aint, now comeon why would they do a thing like that. Especially when they are true 'Revolutionary Communists' which sought of means there supposed to be a threat to the system. But for some reason the Times was motivated to buy Trotsky's memoirs for 75,000 pounds (god knows what that is nowdays) and publish them.

Animal Farm is not only available in every book shop but is taught to every school child. Yet when I finally do find a copy of a work of Stalin's it's 40 years old at a orginall price of 7 shillings.

Makes you wonder.

[YKTMX]

Originally posted by Cassius [email protected] 20 2003, 08:17 PM
Yeah sometimes I wonder that that could well be it.

But ofcourse it aint, now comeon why would they do a thing like that. Especially when they are true 'Revolutionary Communists' which sought of means there supposed to be a threat to the system. But for some reason the Times was motivated to buy Trotsky's memoirs for 75,000 pounds (god knows what that is nowdays) and publish them.

Animal Farm is not only available in every book shop but is taught to every school child. Yet when I finally do find a copy of a work of Stalin's it's 40 years old at a orginall price of 7 shillings.

Makes you wonder.
:lol:

Not really, Lev was a brilliant writer and a far more interesting guy. OK, I know you love Uncle Joe so I'm going to write this out for you. Here is a description of a painting written in a Russia art magazine. The painting was called was 'Shurpin's' The Morning of Our Motherland, and was being displayed at a Moscow gallery in celebration of Joe's 70th birthday, you'll like this ;)


"On a bright early morning Comrade Stalin is seen working in the vast collective farms with high voltage transmission lines in the distance, wearing a white tunic with his raincoat over his arm. His exalted face and his whole figure lit with the golden rays of springtime sun. One recollects verses by the poet Dzhambul, "Oh Stalin, the sunshine of springtime is you! He walks triumphantly towards the new dawn. The image of Comrade Stalin is the triumphant march of communism, the symbol of courage, the symbol of the soivet people glory, and a call for new heroic exploits for the benefit of our great motherland. In this imagin are immortalised the features of a wise, majestic and at the same time amazingly modest and unpretentious man who is our beloved leader'.

Fuckin' a! :unsure:

[Cassius Clay]

And what does this proof?

Stalin fought against the 'cult' built up around him by the Revisionists. This has been proven.

I dont 'love' Uncle Joe, just defend him from lies and slanders and regonise that Stalin's life, acheivements and theorys are vitally important to todays struggle against Capitalism, Rascism and Imperialism.

As for Mr Trotsky being a more 'intersting' guy. Well yeah I mean I've read the Trot Issac Deutcher on Trotsky. Who could be interested in Stalin he just led a nation of 'Barbaric Russian savages'.

I mean Trotsky was right all along, they couldn't build Socialism, they needed help from the workers in those countries which hadn't had any revolution. Oh wait a second, those 'backward' Russkies did and Trotsky admitted as such.

I guess all those contradictions do make a interesting read.

[Xprewatik RED]

Originally posted by Cassius [email protected] 20 2003, 10:58 PM


Gey if it was so 'evilly Authoritarian' then why did Maxim Gorky write a letter to Stalin complaining that Stalin 'shouldn't allow so much criticism in the press because it will only play into the hands of our enemies'.




Funny... I got some old News papers at my uncles house and I am yet to find critism. They had no critism and no anti-capitalist items. They had things like "TRACTOR PRODUCTION AT ALL TIME HIGH". Guess it isn't much better than the capitalist trash that gets printed today by the corrupt child killing borgiousies that is in control today.

[YKTMX]

I guess all those contradictions do make a interesting read.

Yes, Cassius, that is the nature of human beings and of Marxists. They have contradictions and hypocricys, unlike Stalin, who was always an evil bastard.

[Xprewatik RED]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2003, 03:48 AM

Red Star you know nothing of Stalin's purges. Saying that our parents filled our heads is stupid, why would they teach us to hate Stalin, because if I had walked to school and mentioned any of this my parents would have gone to jail.

What time period are you talking about? After 1956 or so, it was perfectly safe to be "critical" of Stalin's "errors". Are you old enough to remember Stalin when he was still alive? (I am, just barely.)

I was speaking of some young people in the "eastern bloc" now...who have little or no first-hand experience with the old regimes but have heard "horror stories" from their families which may or may not be true. Notice I said that...in other words, any particular "horror story" may well be true. Thus your grandmother could be telling the truth as she saw it and I am not calling her a "liar".

Your intemperate remarks concerning Stalin "starving and murdering your nation" suggest that you are a Ukrainian nationalist determined to emphasize the separate existence of a Ukrainian "nation".

That's "ok" with me--I try never to argue with nationalists because, in most cases, it's like arguing with religious fundamentalists. Let there be an independent Ukraine (run by Ukrainian gangsters instead of Russian ones) "forever"...makes no difference to me or to history in general.


So go back to your Western home and read your Western Stalinist websites and go watch your western TV and feel comforted, but you don't know how we lived so don't try to justify anything.

Obviously, you are very new to this site. I'm not a participant in any "Stalinist" web sites and, in fact, reject the entire Leninist paradigm (Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, etc.)...as you would know if you'd been here for a while. I also don't even own a dummyvision and encourage those who do to throw them away...it turns the human brain into oatmeal.

You should really have a look at my own site and see how much I :wub: Uncle Joe.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas
I said I was a Ukrainian nationaist where?
I like my current government the one that steals from us and are all in the mafia, where?
I like the government that sent Ak-47 bullets over my head when I was 13?
Uhuh...

[Cassius Clay]

YKTMX

So now it's clear all your argument is 'Stalin was a evil bastard'.

That's okay Hitler thought the same thing.

Oh yes and maybe Tractor production was a all time high. There were cases of criticism in the press (that's why Maxim Gorky wrote what he did) and I've shown it a million times before.

And if praising the OUN (Nazi butchers, pulled the guns at Babi Yar and praised Hitler) doesn't make you a Nationalist then I'm not sure what does.

[crazy comie]

Trotsky was right
animmal farms a load of bollocks.

[Xprewatik RED]

Originally posted by Cassius [email protected] 21 2003, 03:55 PM
YKTMX

So now it's clear all your argument is 'Stalin was a evil bastard'.

That's okay Hitler thought the same thing.

Oh yes and maybe Tractor production was a all time high. There were cases of criticism in the press (that's why Maxim Gorky wrote what he did) and I've shown it a million times before.

And if praising the OUN (Nazi butchers, pulled the guns at Babi Yar and praised Hitler) doesn't make you a Nationalist then I'm not sure what does.
OUN I praised OUN? Organization of Ukrainian nationalists? I think you mean UPA but no I never praised them. If Stalin was so open to critism i suggest you go to an archive and watch some of his State movies. So many things are recorded in them that never happened. Get me the name of the newspaper and an article from it where Stalin is critisized and I'll believe you.

[Urban Rubble]

My feelings on Stalin are conflicted. On one hand, he did alot of great things, but on another, he was a bit out of hand.

I think there is alot of confusion on both sides. I don't think Stalin is nearly as bad as he is made out to be, but I also think he was responsible for the death and misery of alot of people. If you think all those people killed, exiled and jailed during the purges were guilty, then you need to realize that you are a member of the personality cult.

Also, as far as him trying to dispell the personality cult around him, he did state that it was to be stopped in many speeches. However, alot of time with Stalin it is a case of "Do as I say, not as I do".

[elijahcraig]

I think there is alot of confusion on both sides. I don't think Stalin is nearly as bad as he is made out to be, but I also think he was responsible for the death and misery of alot of people. If you think all those people killed, exiled and jailed during the purges were guilty, then you need to realize that you are a member of the personality cult.

I don't think anyone (mabye Supernius?) would say all the people were guilty; it is that Stalin was attempting to destroy bourgeois culture (and the Nazi Fifth Column), and had to hit some innocents as well.

I do not like this, but I think it is the sour fact of the truth.



I think this thread is sad because no one has attempted to DEBATE Cassius Clay, only throw insults around.

Anarchist Tension, unless you can argue against Stalin, you should stop insulting.

[elijahcraig]

Trotsky was right
animmal farms a load of bollocks.


And what the hell does ^^^ that mean?

[redstar2000]

I said I was a Ukrainian nationalist where?

The phrase "my country" is usually the give-away. Most lefties are familiar with Marx and Engels' statement that "the working class has no country".

When someone speaks of "my country" and it's not part of a sentence that clearly indicates alienation from that country, one can reasonably assume some nationalist sentiment is present.

Which is kind of ironic in your case. Isn't Kiev where "Russia" began?

In any event, if you are opposed to the current government of the Ukraine, good for you! And as I said, I have no difficulty with the idea of permanent independence for the Ukraine...if that's what folks there want.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[crazy comie]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2003, 01:09 AM

Trotsky was right
animmal farms a load of bollocks.


And what the hell does ^^^ that mean?
i think it is obvious

[elijahcraig]

You praised trot and then slandered the trot book animal farm, what the HELL does that mean?

[Scottish_Militant]

But for some reason the Times was motivated to buy Trotsky's memoirs for 75,000 pounds (god knows what that is nowdays) and publish them.

Trotsky's books were bought by a book company in the US who overpriced them away above any working peoples budget. Ever listen to RATM - "they dont gotta burn the books they just remove em"

very true indeed. However, Esteban Volkov (trotsky's grandson) has won the rights to Trotsky's writtings and with the help of the In Defence of Marxism website (http://www.marxist.com) the Leon Trotsky project (http://www.marxist.com/appeals/new_trotsky_project.html) will see Trotsky's works printed in their entirity over the next few years.


Gey if it was so 'evilly Authoritarian' then why did Maxim Gorky write a letter to Stalin complaining that Stalin 'shouldn't allow so much criticism in the press because it will only play into the hands of our enemies'.

Where was the critiscism Clay? No one can find any in any soviet newspapers, I seem to remember a similar scenarion in Orwell's 1984 But all together now kids..

(in best primary school class of 40 young children voice)

"that was trotskyite propoganda"

Very good class, now once more, this time a little louder

"that was trotskyite propoganda"

Ok, one more time and we're done....

"that was trotskyite propoganda"

Excelent children, now remember to practice this with mummy and daddy at home tonight because we're going to take the test tommorow....

[Scottish_Militant]

Animal Farm is not only available in every book shop but is taught to every school child. Yet when I finally do find a copy of a work of Stalin's it's 40 years old at a orginall price of 7 shillings.

Has it ever occured to you its simply because they are shit?



"On a bright early morning Comrade Stalin is seen working in the vast collective farms with high voltage transmission lines in the distance, wearing a white tunic with his raincoat over his arm. His exalted face and his whole figure lit with the golden rays of springtime sun. One recollects verses by the poet Dzhambul, "Oh Stalin, the sunshine of springtime is you! He walks triumphantly towards the new dawn. The image of Comrade Stalin is the triumphant march of communism, the symbol of courage, the symbol of the soivet people glory, and a call for new heroic exploits for the benefit of our great motherland. In this imagin are immortalised the features of a wise, majestic and at the same time amazingly modest and unpretentious man who is our beloved leader'.

LOL, Lenin would have loved that!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Xprewatik RED]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2003, 04:12 AM

I said I was a Ukrainian nationalist where?

The phrase "my country" is usually the give-away. Most lefties are familiar with Marx and Engels' statement that "the working class has no country".

When someone speaks of "my country" and it's not part of a sentence that clearly indicates alienation from that country, one can reasonably assume some nationalist sentiment is present.

Which is kind of ironic in your case. Isn't Kiev where "Russia" began?

In any event, if you are opposed to the current government of the Ukraine, good for you! And as I said, I have no difficulty with the idea of permanent independence for the Ukraine...if that's what folks there want.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas
The phrase, "my country", implies im a nationalist :D really, is my understanding of English that bad?
If I would have said my country when ukraine in the soviet union would that be nationalist?
Yeah we do want independance, whether it be Communist socialist..etc.... people are sick of being listed under empires.

[Bodyguard]

It really does not matter if Stalin was a "true" communist or not. He seized power and assumed the mantle of communism. He controlled the state by the brutal use of violence.....that violence was done in the name of communism. Cassius keeps defending Stalin and says he is the subject of lies and rumors. I am new here and dont quite understand how one can take such a position in the face of facts and reality. I have noticed many slandered on here...if you say you hated Stalin, you are accused of being a Nazi! How rediculas is that? Stalin was evil incarnate and so was Hitler....there are far more similarities between them than differences. Dictators that murdered for power and pleasure.......The Soviet Union was far from sweetness and light even after Stalin's death! True change did not happen untill Gorbachov assumed power.......he really blew it when he let a little freedom into the USSR....it simply could not be stopped and the Reds fell. Listen folks... A is A.....things are what they are, no amount of lying about history can change them. In another thread I argued that a man is a sum of his life. Either he did more good than evil or he did not. Stalin and Hitler will go down as two of the most evil disgusting dictators in human history. If Stalin did any good in his life it is FAR outweighed by the death, poverty, misery, pain, suffering and evil caused by him. If Cassius will admitt this then his arguments can at least be intellectually honest. If he is indeed a "Stalinist" he should admitt to being for murder and repression. I am not a communist but even I can see communism was given a black eye by one such as "The Man of Steel"

[elijahcraig]

It really does not matter if Stalin was a "true" communist or not. He seized power and assumed the mantle of communism. He controlled the state by the brutal use of violence.....that violence was done in the name of communism.

HE didn’t seize the state; the COMMUNIST PARTY seized the state.

Brutal violence is some times necessary.

Cassius keeps defending Stalin and says he is the subject of lies and rumors. I am new here and dont quite understand how one can take such a position in the face of facts and reality.

There are many different versions of “historical reality”.


True change did not happen untill Gorbachov assumed power.......he really blew it when he let a little freedom into the USSR....it simply could not be stopped and the Reds fell.

That’s just pathetic.


Listen folks... A is A.....

A Randian uncloaked!


hings are what they are, no amount of lying about history can change them. In another thread I argued that a man is a sum of his life. Either he did more good than evil or he did not.

And WHO defines GOOD and EVIL?


Stalin and Hitler will go down as two of the most evil disgusting dictators in human history.

Maybe. But Orwell, for once, taught us something good: History is told from the point of view of those in power, in this case: our enemy, the Capitalist Class.


If Stalin did any good in his life it is FAR outweighed by the death, poverty, misery, pain, suffering and evil caused by him.

Like giving the Russian proletariat and peasentry power? Awful.


If Cassius will admitt this then his arguments can at least be intellectually honest. If he is indeed a "Stalinist" he should admitt to being for murder and repression. I am not a communist but even I can see communism was given a black eye by one such as "The Man of Steel"

Given a black eye by Stalin or by those who slander him?

[Bodyguard]

The Communists indeed siezed the State...and Stalin then controlled the Party to his own ends...how can you deny this simple truth?

I assume you justify brutal violence in all forms? I mean if it is necessary for one then it just may be necassary for all....Talk about perspective!

Facts and Truth have very little in common sometimes. It is a FACT that Stalin ordered the death and inprisonment of millions.

I followed the fall of the USSR very closely...I am not sure how old you are but I was in my mid -20s at the time and was facinated by it. The history of it was not to be disputed......the more Gorbachav gave freedoms the more were demanded......if you call that "revolution" pathetic then I cannot change that.

There is no "un-cloaking" I am indeed an Objectivist

Good and Evil are need no defining...they are what they are. If someone has to be shown the difference, then they are indeed not very perceptive.

Because history is being told by "Capitalists" that makes Hitler and Stalin any less evil? Does being a Communist mean you cant see what fact is? How you percieve something does not change the FACT of it.

Ok you say Stalin gave the masses power....that is a bald faced lie. Communism may have had that as its goal but he enlsaved millions in factories and collective farms. (This is not an arguement for or against Commuism) The deaths and misery of MILLIONS of innocent human beings is justification for him? Come on.......any any rational person really believe this? I have read many posts saying that if one just new the facts of Communism one must admitt the truth....can you not do the same about Stalin?

There is now way to slander such a man as Josef Stalin.........my point is that if you are a Stalinist then you should have the honesty to admitt what he really was...not what you want him to be.

[synthesis]

Good and Evil are need no defining...they are what they are. If someone has to be shown the difference, then they are indeed not very perceptive.

Great logic. :rolleyes:

[elijahcraig]

The Communists indeed siezed the State...and Stalin then controlled the Party to his own ends...how can you deny this simple truth?

Who says it is truth? Stalin did not “control” the party, he was the leader, but he was not a dictator. As Cassius has shown.


I assume you justify brutal violence in all forms? I mean if it is necessary for one then it just may be necassary for all....Talk about perspective!

There is no such thing as ME justifying ALL forms of violence? What the hell does that even mean?


Facts and Truth have very little in common sometimes. It is a FACT that Stalin ordered the death and inprisonment of millions.

Really? Care to provide PROOF for the FACT?


I followed the fall of the USSR very closely...I am not sure how old you are but I was in my mid -20s at the time and was facinated by it. The history of it was not to be disputed......the more Gorbachav gave freedoms the more were demanded......if you call that "revolution" pathetic then I cannot change that.

Yes, carrying the Capitalist banner high! I WANNA SEE A LITTLE REVOLUTION MOTHERFUCKER!


here is no "un-cloaking" I am indeed an Objectivist

Rationale Tom, sat on a log
Where did he go? Into the fog.

BLaaah


Good and Evil are need no defining...they are what they are. If someone has to be shown the difference, then they are indeed not very perceptive.

That is RIDICULOUS. Good and Evil DO NOT EXIST: and are relative moral concepts invented by man to justify his subjective will to power.

This sort of Platonic logic you have is pah-thet-hic.


Because history is being told by "Capitalists" that makes Hitler and Stalin any less evil? Does being a Communist mean you cant see what fact is? How you percieve something does not change the FACT of it.

NO, this is what I am saying: under the dictatorship of the capitalist class, they work against all enemies of their dictatorship; ie stalin. They slander and propagandaize the man until he is nothing but a stain in history. And guess what? The SUCCESS of the socialist Stalin era is downed the drain by their lies.


Ok you say Stalin gave the masses power....that is a bald faced lie.

As Clay has said many times on this board, 48% of officials in region were recalled by the MASSES. TENS OF THOUSANDS of People’s Instructions were sent in and nearly half of the constitution written by those demands. Also, on ballots, the workers elected workers and used People’s Instructions. And they had trade unions, workers councils, etc etc etc, which gave power to the workers.


Communism may have had that as its goal but he enlsaved millions in factories and collective farms. (This is not an arguement for or against Commuism)

Collectivization was going at a rate of 60% at a time when the Party had estimated 20%--this WILLING collectivization by the poor peasants is not “enslavement”. The Kulaks rebelled against the collectivization and fought hard and petitly with the poor peasants.

On these collective farms, peasants were taught the laws of economics, science, aviation, and most anything else. They even got to the point where peasants flew planes to the plants to get grain and supplies.

Read “The Stalin Era” by Anne Louise Strong.

[BuyOurEverything]

I'm with Urban Rubble on the Stalin issue. I'm not a supporter of a lot of what he did but he acomplished a lot of good too and I'll defend him any time against lies and propagandha.



Stalin was evil incarnate and so was Hitler....there are far more similarities between them than differences.

Spew your pseudo-religious rhetoric elsewhere.


Facts and Truth have very little in common sometimes.

No, facts are truth. I suggest you consult a dictionary.


It is a FACT that Stalin ordered the death and inprisonment of millions.

Even if that is true, it's not neccessarily a bad thing. Do you think that governments don't have the right to imprison citizens? Should we just allow criminals to freely commit crimes without punishment or rehabilitation or any form of confinement? Also executions are sometimes neccessary. If it weren't for executions, Cuba would still be under Batista and many other countries would be ruled by imperialist dictators too.


That is RIDICULOUS. Good and Evil DO NOT EXIST: and are relative moral concepts.

Good to see we're not all brainwashed puppets of religious right wing bullshit propagandha.

[Bodyguard]

Mans PERCEPTON of something (like good and evil) or lack of have no bearing on their existance! Just because you dont see or understand something does not mean it is not REAL.

You need more than a dictionary to define that fact and truth are not always the same.

Its not a bad thing that millions were torn from their families and murdered for "views"? The Red Army purges of the late 1930's showed Stalin at his paranoid best......by sacking and shooting the best of the Red Army, he almost doomes his country to defeat by Hitler........Oh go ahead and say it did not happen..........there goes that Capitalist media again........

OHHHHHHHH Cassius has shown Stalin was not a dictator????? Gee then I am convinced! OPEN YOUR EYES! I thought this would make for some thought provoking debate with intelectually honest people. Then somebody actually has the balls to say that Stalin was not a dictator! I stand awed by your logic.

But elijah, you saw revolution.....you just could not believe it came from the people.....the true people, not the commisars.


Also, on ballots, the workers elected workers and used People’s Instructions. And they had trade unions, workers councils, etc etc etc, which gave power to the workers


Power to the workers, my proletarian ass. The "candidates" on the ballots were selected by the commisars and higher ups in the party....often times there was only ONE person on the ballot! Any tries of true democracy were stamped out buy the sending of the "dissidents" to the gulags....but I am sure you justify it by saying they deserved it by protesting against the State.


Collectivization was going at a rate of 60% at a time when the Party had estimated 20%--this WILLING collectivization by the poor peasants is not “enslavement”. The Kulaks rebelled against the collectivization and fought hard and petitly with the poor peasants.

On these collective farms, peasants were taught the laws of economics, science, aviation, and most anything else. They even got to the point where peasants flew planes to the plants to get grain and supplies

The Kulaks lived on those lands for hundereds of years and were forced at the point of a gun to give up the thing that meant the most to them. I find it really funny that many sceam about the native americans the colonists to North America displaced but dont give a crap about the Kulaks. If the Soviet economic plan worked so well why did the USSR have to IMPORT food in many years? Could it have been that workers work harder for things they get to keep instead of having to slave away on a collective farm for a few beets?

If one proclaims oneself a "Stalinist" then you do not stand for anything but power politics. You may delude yourself otherwise but a dictatorship is a dictatorship.....no matter from the left or the right.

[synthesis]

I stand awed by your logic.

Unfortunately, the words preceding this attempt at a sarcastic comment would completely validate the literal meaning of the words.

If we can prove that Stalin did not kill as many people that you say he did, then it is fully within our ability to claim complete victory over your circular reasoning and cultish logic. "Just because" is a bullshit argument.


OPEN YOUR EYES!

You, my friend, are the one stumbling about in a dream-world of denial and flat-earthery.

[Bodyguard]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2003, 06:29 AM

I stand awed by your logic.

Unfortunately, the words preceding this attempt at a sarcastic comment would completely validate the literal meaning of the words.

If we can prove that Stalin did not kill as many people that you say he did, then it is fully within our ability to claim complete victory over your circular reasoning and cultish logic. "Just because" is a bullshit argument.


OPEN YOUR EYES!

You, my friend, are the one stumbling about in a dream-world of denial and flat-earthery.
I should have indeed place my sarcastic comment in a better place for more impact! :o

I am not sure what you mean by "cultish logic" If I am assumed to be in a cult because I consider that the unjust murder and imprisonment wrong and to use the dreaded word "evil" then ok I am a cultist. I think I would be in a rather larger than average cult however! Does it really matter if Stalin murder 1 or 5 million? The point is that he did indeed do it and cannot be justified (at least to me and many non-communists) for ANY reason.

I am in denial? Give me a history of Soviet Russia not written by a Communist and I will consider some other view of Stalin. Now you are going to say that no fair account was written by a non-Communist right? Then that is a circular arguement that we are both trapped in. I just find it hard to see people defend such a person as Stalin....even as I find it hard to believe that people sometimes defend Hitler! They are two peas in a pod! Stand up for what is right and say both hurt their countries far more than they helped them!

[crazy comie]

wasn't animal farm orwells book