Young Socialist

[Tovarisch]

Zdravstvuyte! Russian-American socialist currently living in New York, although spent most of my time in Moscow

Joined here to find other people to discuss Socialism with. 17 years old, very left wing. Don't like Stalin or Zedong, instead I prefer Tito and Trotsky. Any other Tito fans here?

[ColonelCossack]

Welcome, comrade.

[Optiow]

Another young comrade, welcome! I too am 17.

There are some Titoists floating around, with around 2 or 3 that regularly post here (to my knowledge).

[NoOneIsIllegal]

I became interested in socialism at the age of 17 as well.
Glad to have you here.

[Comrade Samuel]

Вы также понимаете русский язык? приветствие товарища!

Hope you enjoy revleft :D

[Spets]

Welcome comrade.

[Ocean Seal]

Welcome. Titoists and Trotskyists don't get along too well.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Welcome to the forum, have a great time and ignore the trolls

[OHumanista]

Welcome comrade! I am a russian-brazilian :D(very mixed up though, there are no "pure" brands here)
17 is a great age to get involved in politics(same age I started going seriously into it, I am 19 now).
I have mixed feelings on Tito, but I am definitely a fan of Trotsky (I still get along FAR better with Titoists than most MLs or Maoists)

[Die Neue Zeit]

Welcome to the board!

[Commissar Rykov]

Welcome to the forum, have a great time and ignore the trolls
He can't ignore the whole board.:lol: Welcome to the forums and enjoy your stay.

[Omsk]

You are Russian and you like Tito?Haha.

[Meditation]

I'm 14
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lswt39GsKr1r0gb54.jpg

[Smyg]

Actually Meditation, he beats you. Hard. [/Ageist]

[El Louton]

Welcome! When did you leave Moscow?

[red1936]

Ugh Yugoslavia

“Despite repeated requests by Tito in 1948 and 1949, the United States refused to include Yugoslavia in the Marshall Plan, therefore limiting its participation with U.S. allies in Western Europe.”
(Joyce P. Kaufman, NATO and the Former Yugoslavia, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., p. 64.)

Tito was a common anti-Communist.


Tito relied more and more on these elements in his struggle against real Communists. The Party had no normal internal life, there was no political discussion, so no Marxist-Leninist criticism and self-criticism; the leaders were not elected but chosen.
Ibid. , p. 22.

no democratic centralism, not a Marxist-Leninist

In 1953, Tito even introduced the right to buy and sell and even to hire agricultural workers.

In the economic field, the socialist measures that Yugoslavia had taken before 1948 were liquidated. Alexander Clifford, the Daily Mail correspondent, wrote about the economic reforms adopted in 1951:
`If it comes off, Yugoslavia looks like ending up a good deal less socialised than Britain’: `price of goods … determined by the market — that is, by supply and demand’; `wages and salaries …\ fixed on the basis of the income or profits of the enterprise’; economic enterprises that `decide independently what to produce and in what quantities’; `there isn’t much classical Marxism in all of that’.
Daily Mail, 31 August 1951. In Klugmann, op. cit. , p. 150.

essentially Titoism is just a a "super-welfare" state. Not at all Socialist.

[OHumanista]

Ugh Yugoslavia

“Despite repeated requests by Tito in 1948 and 1949, the United States refused to include Yugoslavia in the Marshall Plan, therefore limiting its participation with U.S. allies in Western Europe.”
(Joyce P. Kaufman, NATO and the Former Yugoslavia, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., p. 64.)

Tito was a common anti-Communist.


Tito relied more and more on these elements in his struggle against real Communists. The Party had no normal internal life, there was no political discussion, so no Marxist-Leninist criticism and self-criticism; the leaders were not elected but chosen.
Ibid. , p. 22.

no democratic centralism, not a Marxist-Leninist

In 1953, Tito even introduced the right to buy and sell and even to hire agricultural workers.

In the economic field, the socialist measures that Yugoslavia had taken before 1948 were liquidated. Alexander Clifford, the Daily Mail correspondent, wrote about the economic reforms adopted in 1951:
`If it comes off, Yugoslavia looks like ending up a good deal less socialised than Britain’: `price of goods … determined by the market — that is, by supply and demand’; `wages and salaries …\ fixed on the basis of the income or profits of the enterprise’; economic enterprises that `decide independently what to produce and in what quantities’; `there isn’t much classical Marxism in all of that’.
Daily Mail, 31 August 1951. In Klugmann, op. cit. , p. 150.

essentially Titoism is just a a "super-welfare" state. Not at all Socialist.


Great piece of newbie trolling if I ever saw one.:blink:

Read the below if you really want me to comment on what you just posted. But don't derail the thread by turning this into a billion page long useless discussion on the nature of MLism. This is not the place for it and I have no intent(and patience) of participating in such repetitive and fruitless debate right now.


But then again nor was "Marxism-Lenisnm" which should be properly called Stalinism. (since it has zero to do with neither Marx or Lenin)
No ML parties had political discussion, much less criticism or self-criticism and sure it had elections but everyone knew who would be elected.
Nor did they have democratic centralism nor it was socialist. :rolleyes: Essentialy being a nationalist conservative bureaucratic ideology.Alas I am yet to find something more internally (and externally) dead than a ML party. Perhaps the void? You know? Complete lack of matter. Might be the only way to be even more stale than a typical stalinist party.