Right-wing Stalinism

[Black_Rose]

I heard that Joseph Stalin is popular among the hard right in Russia. I presume Stalin is admired because he made the Soviet Union into a superpower, and national interests are a priority among the far-right.

[Deicide]

I thought Stalinism was already right wing :confused:




;)

[electrostal]

Yes, there are all kinds of Stalin-fetishists in different countries.
What is the point of this thread?

[Comrade Trollface]

Yeah seriously. There are some Stalinists all over the world and they're all assholes. The ones in Russia tend to be old farts who miss being in their twenties more than anything else, and don't seem to see the difference between correlation and causation.

[RedHal]

I heard that Joseph Stalin is popular among the hard right in Russia. I presume Stalin is admired because he made the Soviet Union into a superpower, and national interests are a priority among the far-right.

let me guess, you're really an anti M-L troll, with your "Saint Stalin" avatar and this silly thread that will only serve as an anti M-L flamefest

[Ocean Seal]

I'm pretty sure that's true, Mao also suffers from the same thing, as does Lenin, early feminists, James Connolly, and well fuck MLK was even used as a symbol for the tea-party. Its called white-washing and we have a group devoted to that.

[Black_Rose]

let me guess, you're really an anti M-L troll, with your "Saint Stalin" avatar and this silly thread that will only serve as an anti M-L flamefest

I just wanted to know if he is admired by Russian reactionaries.

[electrostal]

No, Russian reactionaries and neo-Black Hundredists admire, I don't know, Nikolai the II, Vlassov and the like.

[MuscularTophFan]

Stalinism is right wing. So is Leninism, Troskyism, Maoism, Jucheism, Hoxhaism, Guevarism, Castroism, Titoism, and any other anti-worker pro-statist authoritarian fucktards. Anyone who idols these men are basically just begging for the state to fuck them over.:thumbdown:

[Drosophila]

Stalinism is right wing. So is Leninism, Troskyism, Maoism, Jucheism, Hoxhaism, Guevarism, Castroism, Titoism, and any other anti-worker pro-statist authoritarian fucktards. Anyone who idols these men are basically just begging for the state to fuck them over.:thumbdown:

I guess you would have to include Marxism in that list as well? Let me know how "libertarian" socialism goes.

[electrostal]

Troskyism
You still haven't learned that Trotsky isn't Totsky or Trosky?
My, my...
But thanks for sharing your opinions with us.

[Property Is Robbery]

You are correct OP

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bolshevik_Party

[roy]

i saw this short documentary about russian neo-nazis and they interviewed a politician who is supportive of the movement and he had a big stalin portrait in his office. despite the reality of stalin, i still think it's weird that his visage would be hanging in a neo-nazi's office, whose agenda is to deport/kill all the immigrants in russia, considering that stalin was georgian and he gets so much hero-worship for leading the SU against nazi germany. oh well, not as weird as mongolian neo-nazis, i guess.

[o well this is ok I guess]

You still haven't learned that Trotsky isn't Totsky or Trosky?
My, my...
But thanks for sharing your opinions with us. You're busting his balls over a typo
What the hell, man?

[l'Enfermé]

i saw this short documentary about russian neo-nazis and they interviewed a politician who is supportive of the movement and he had a big stalin portrait in his office. despite the reality of stalin, i still think it's weird that his visage would be hanging in a neo-nazi's office, whose agenda is to deport/kill all the immigrants in russia, considering that stalin was georgian and he gets so much hero-worship for leading the SU against nazi germany. oh well, not as weird as mongolian neo-nazis, i guess.
He was a Georgian but he is also viewed by some of the far-right as a Great Russian Chauvinist(not without cause) and someone that has recreated the Russian Empire after the evil degenerate Judeo-Bolsheviks broke it up with their lack of patriotism(something that Stalin didn't lack) and just their Jewishness. There's also Stalin's alleged anti-semitism(Doctor's plot, etc) and the fact that he opposed national self-determination(put my entire ethnic group on a uninsulated trains during february on a month-long trip to Kazahstan through Siberia, without food, water or adequate clothes, killing something like 40% of the entire ethnic group, because we weren't fond of living under Russian yoke, for example) and reversed the previous Bolshevik policy of Korenizatsiya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korenizatsiya) and replaced it with Russification. There are many reasons for far-right Russian chauvinists to admire Stalin.

And anyways, how can you blame the idiots? How are they supposed to distinguish between Hitler and Stalin!
vhttp://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/8618714/640/8618714.png

[MuscularTophFan]

You still haven't learned that Trotsky isn't Totsky or Trosky?
My, my...
But thanks for sharing your opinions with us.
So one little typo means everything I said in my post is null and void right?

Oh you....

[roy]

He was a Georgian but he is also viewed by some of the far-right as a Great Russian Chauvinist(not without cause) and someone that has recreated the Russian Empire after the evil degenerate Judeo-Bolsheviks broke it up with their lack of patriotism(something that Stalin didn't lack) and just their Jewishness. There's also Stalin's alleged anti-semitism(Doctor's plot, etc) and the fact that he opposed national self-determination(put my entire ethnic group on a uninsulated trains during february on a month-long trip to Kazahstan through Siberia, without food, water or adequate clothes, killing something like 40% of the entire ethnic group, because we weren't fond of living under Russian yoke, for example) and reversed the previous Bolshevik policy of Korenizatsiya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korenizatsiya) and replaced it with Russification. There are many reasons for far-right Russian chauvinists to admire Stalin.

when you put it like that it makes a lot more sense, but i still would've thought they'd be touchy about wwii and ideological conflicts.

[Comrade Samuel]

OP you've pretty much got it right, Nationalists in Russia these days love Stalin because what he did made them powerful a long time ago yet they somehow forget that he was not a Russian nor was he a nationalist in the traditional sense of the word. (we can debate the true meaning of the phrase "socialist nationalism" all night but I'm certan with this crowd we all know where that will end up) All in all Stalin may not have Been the greatest leader of all time but his contributions to Marxist-Leninism, turning a backwards 3rd world country into what may of been the closest thing to socialism the modern world will ever see and victory against the fascists certainly do seem to be overshadowed by western propaganda and dislike from other leftist tendencies.

As for the rest of you.... Maybe it's best I keep my comments to myself.

[Zealot]

Because Stalin has been turned into a nationalist symbol, as have many other radicals, as Lenin said often happens. Hell, Karl Marx's face is now even being printed on bank cards in East Germany (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/15/us-germany-marx-idUSBRE85E0VQ20120615). It isn't because Stalin was a closet right-winger or because a decades old Soviet poster sort of looks similar to a poster of Hitler. Do the anti-Marxists even try anymore? It seems not.

[l'Enfermé]

Contributions to Marxism-Leninism? Marxism-Leninism was invented by Stalin. A ruling parasitic bureaucracy, constant famines, millions dead from political repressions, massive slave labour, ethnic cleansing, allying with Nazi Germany...this, in your opinion, is the closest thing to socialism the modern world will ever see? Are you serious?

Actually, fuck facts, hail Stalin, the Glorious Savior of Mankind!

http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/8618714/640/8618714.png
Wait, which one is Stalin? It's hard to tell which one wasn't an enslaver of mankind who built a monstrous personality cult around himself...

[l'Enfermé]

Because Stalin has been turned into a nationalist symbol, as have many other radicals, as Lenin said often happens. Hell, Karl Marx's face is now even being printed on bank cards in East Germany (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/15/us-germany-marx-idUSBRE85E0VQ20120615). It isn't because Stalin was a closet right-winger or because a decades old Soviet poster sort of looks similar to a poster of Hitler. Do the anti-Marxists even try anymore? It seems not.
I'm not an anti-Marxist. I'm a Communist who bases his politics on the writings of Marx-Engels and Kautksy-Lenin, and is also influenced by Luxemburg and Trotsky. Being a Stalinist, I think you have no right to call anyone an anti-Marxist.

[Zealot]

Contributions to Marxism-Leninism? Marxism-Leninism was invented by Stalin.

Yep, Stalin invented it all. Very smart man he was. Let's just forget that its very name is Marxism-Leninism.


A ruling parasitic bureaucracy, constant famines, millions dead from political repressions, massive slave labour, ethnic cleansing, allying with Nazi Germany...this, in your opinion, is the closest thing to socialism the modern world will ever see? Are you serious?

Another irrelevant rant, not to mention, completely wrong.



Actually, fuck facts, hail Stalin, the Glorious Savior of Mankind!

http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/8618714/640/8618714.png
Wait, which one is Stalin? It's hard to tell which one wasn't an enslaver of mankind who built a monstrous personality cult around himself...

Indeed, "fuck facts"; it's not your strong point. A picture of Stalin pointing out the direction for soldiers to charge and Hitler doing a roman salute is totally the same thing.

[Zealot]

I'm not an anti-Marxist. I'm a Communist who bases his politics on the writings of Marx-Engels and Kautksy-Lenin, and is also influenced by Luxemburg and Trotsky. Being a Stalinist, I think you have no right to call anyone an anti-Marxist.

You're a Kautskyist-soft Trotskyist-nationalist? Fill me in on the soft Trotskyist revolution. You're an anti-materialist, among other things, and thus an anti-Marxist.

Your failed analysis of why Stalin became a nationalist icon for a minority of right-wingers proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt.

[Comrade Samuel]

Contributions to Marxism-Leninism? Marxism-Leninism was invented by Stalin. A ruling parasitic bureaucracy, constant famines, millions dead from political repressions, massive slave labour, ethnic cleansing, allying with Nazi Germany...this, in your opinion, is the closest thing to socialism the modern world will ever see? Are you serious?

Actually, fuck facts, hail Stalin, the Glorious Savior of Mankind!

http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/8618714/640/8618714.png
Wait, which one is Stalin? It's hard to tell which one wasn't an enslaver of mankind who built a monstrous personality cult around himself...

Yes, Stalin just killed people for kicks. He may have tried to stop tsarist, counter-revolutionaries, Nazi spies and other people who stood in the way of socialism and it's quite obvious what he did ended up hurting some innocent people but on purpose or not we sincerely apologize for humans being flawed. Has there been a secret socialist society living underground all of these years or something? because last I checked the world has been dominated by imperialist, bourgeois creatures who have abused the working class far more than the fictional version of Stalin you talk about ever could of dreamed to do.

As if the Hitler- Stalin comparison wasn't absurd enough of the face of it (and that the only thing backing it up is two vaguely similar posters) perhaps it's worth pointing out that there isn't one famous person in history whose story hasn't been distorted by others I guess by yours and every bourgeois historian's logic EVERYBODY has a personality cult.

[shinjuku dori]

Stalin was figurehead of counterrevolution. How can there be "left wing" reactionary??

[seventeethdecember2016]

There's also Stalin's alleged anti-semitism(Doctor's plot, etc)
Oh yeah, but they ignore the fact this his best friend, Kaganovich, was Jewish and that the Soviet Union was the 2nd country to recognize Israeli.


The fact that he opposed national self-determination(put my entire ethnic group on a uninsulated trains during february on a month-long trip to Kazahstan through Siberia, without food, water or adequate clothes, killing something like 40% of the entire ethnic group
Assuming that you're talking about the Chechens, you are actually wrong. Their trips were well formulated, and the highest estimates for deaths was around 1000(out of the original 400,000) and even that's a Liberal number. Anyway, the Chechens were also accused of aiding the Nazis, so that doesn't actually make sense.


Because we weren't fond of living under Russian yoke, for example) and reversed the previous Bolshevik policy of Korenizatsiya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korenizatsiya) and replaced it with Russification. There are many reasons for far-right Russian chauvinists to admire Stalin.
What? The fact that Russian became the nominal language in the Soviet Union? Don't forget, policies like Ukrainianization were also formulated under Stalin's government.


Wait, which one is Stalin? It's hard to tell which one wasn't an enslaver of mankind who built a monstrous personality cult around himself
Stalin didn't build a cult of personality, rather Bureaucrats built it for him.
It is also immature to compare a political poster depicting Stalin leading the Soviet force to Hitler giving his variation of a Roman solute.

The United States also had a similar solute known as the Bellamy salute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute).

[Omsk]

http://www.freeinfosociety.com/media/images/958.jpg

Lenin - the proto-Nazi, according to Borz. He is just like Hitler!! Gasp!

Because gesticulation is equal to theory and ideological background.


Stop with this silly thread, you comrades should not even reply to their provocations.

[Comrade Trollface]

There's also Stalin's alleged anti-semitism(Doctor's plot, etc) That is like saying that Stalin's mother allegedly gave birth to him. Arg! This stupid Stalinist forum won't let post a link to the Wikipedia article on the Night of the Murdered Poets. Fuck you, stupid Stalinist forum:crying:

[l'Enfermé]

Yep, Stalin invented it all. Very smart man he was. Let's just forget that its very name is Marxism-Leninism. So? The Trotskyists called themselves Bolshevik-Leninists, does that automatically make them Bolsheviks and Leninists?



Indeed, "fuck facts"; it's not your strong point. A picture of Stalin pointing out the direction for soldiers to charge and Hitler doing a roman salute is totally the same thing.
You completely miss the point. The Roman salute and Stalin pointing are completely irrelevant, the point is that both Stalin and Hitler built monstrous personality cults around themselves, portraying themselves as Gods, in this example it's demonstrated in propaganda posters used by the Soviet and Nazi governments.


You're a Kautskyist-soft Trotskyist-nationalist? Fill me in on the soft Trotskyist revolution. You're an anti-materialist, among other things, and thus an anti-Marxist.

Your failed analysis of why Stalin became a nationalist icon for a minority of right-wingers proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Where did you get the "nationalist" part from? Being a Marxist I oppose nationalism and the Great Russian chauvinism and nationalism of the Stalinist regime is another reason why I despise it. Regarding me being an anti-materialist, that's just pathetic.


Oh yeah, but they ignore the fact this his best friend, Kaganovich, was Jewish and that the Soviet Union was the 2nd country to recognize Israeli. Yes. In fact, Stalin supplied the Zionists with weapons through his puppet-regimes in Eastern Europe which were used for ethnic-cleansing purposes against the Palestinians.



Assuming that you're talking about the Chechens, you are actually wrong. Their trips were well formulated, and the highest estimates for deaths was around 1000(out of the original 400,000) and even that's a Liberal number. Anyway, the Chechens were also accused of aiding the Nazis, so that doesn't actually make sense. Actually, NKVD archives recorded at least a 23-24% average death rate for every nationality that was forcefully expelled from the North Caucasus, so that's obviously a lie(and that's based on the 1939 population). Hitler is accused by many Arabs of faking the holocaust so the evil Jews have a pretext to create the State of Israel, so yeah, accusing someone of something doesn't make it true. Anyways, the reason for the deportation was the 1940-1944 Chechen insurgency in which a few thousand Chechens participated, and which, as you call tell from the name, began in 1940, the year when Stalin and Hitler were still allies and were helping each other invade other countries, dividing Europe between themselves and yes, actually invaded a country together - remember that country?, I think Poland is it's name...

Also, about 40% of the Chechen deportees were children, and what the fuck do children have to do with false allegations of Nazi-collaboration?


Stalin didn't build a cult of personality, rather Bureaucrats built it for him.
Stalin wasn't a bureaucrat? You're telling me that a bunch of low-level bureaucrats built an unprecedented and monstrous cult of personality around Stalin and renamed hundreds of streets, villages, towns and cities in his honor, and all without either the permission or approval of Stalin, the most powerful man in Russian history who concentrated literally ALL power into his personal hands? The same Stalin who, according to MLs, could practically bend mountains with his will?

Be serious man. That's just ridiculous.


http://www.freeinfosociety.com/media/images/958.jpg

Lenin - the proto-Nazi, according to Borz. He is just like Hitler!! Gasp!

Because gesticulation is equal to theory and ideological background.


Stop with this silly thread, you comrades should not even reply to their provocations.
So a photograph of Lenin is somehow similar to a propaganda poster commissioned by the Stalinist government which portrays Stalin as a titan that is a hundred times bigger than us puny, ordinary people?



That is like saying that Stalin's mother allegedly gave birth to him. Arg! This stupid Stalinist forum won't let post a link to the Wikipedia article on the Night of the Murdered Poets. Fuck you, stupid Stalinist forum:crying:
You can't post any links because you haven't reached a certain amount of posts yet, it's an anti spam-bot measure or something. And I wouldn't call this a Stalinist forum, I think in the beginning Stalinists/Maoists were actually banned from posting, and currently the only active Admins I know of are Anarchists/Anarcho-Communists.

[Omsk]

So a photograph of Lenin is somehow similar to a propaganda poster commissioned by the Stalinist government which portrays Stalin as a titan that is a hundred times bigger than us puny, ordinary people?


Yes, the gesticulation is the same, and from the artistic viewpoint, there is little difference between the two.

But that's not the point, it's absurd to link Stalin and Hitler based on a propaganda poster which was designed to have the "Forward!" effect. Just like the Lenin photograph.

And the flag behind him is even bigger than he is, representing the Soviet state and people.

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

That is like saying that Stalin's mother allegedly gave birth to him. Arg! This stupid Stalinist forum won't let post a link to the Wikipedia article on the Night of the Murdered Poets. Fuck you, stupid Stalinist forum:crying:

Really? Using wikipedia as proof?



:laugh:

[Comrade Trollface]

Indeed, "fuck facts"; it's not your strong point. A picture of Stalin pointing out the direction for soldiers to charge and Hitler doing a roman salute is totally the same thing.But turning the state into a total institution, rounding up a sizable portion of the population into concentration camps, imposing a nationalist state-capitalist dictatorship upon the population, invading and mutually carving up Poland, mass murder and various other such little things are commonalities that they share nevertheless. But hey, your quibble about a poster is more important.

[Omsk]

But turning the state into a total institution


What is a total institution state? How did one man turn the USSR into such a thing? When? What was the objective, how was it possible ?



rounding up a sizable portion of the population into concentration camps


What sizable portion? How many people? Under what charges? When? Which camps?

[electrostal]

You can, figuratively, say that "Stalin turned the USSR into a prison" ( although that would be empty and meaningless nonsense ), but you should not misuse scientific terms like that. A total institution can refer to a prison, a mental hospital and so on.

Prove, with concrete evidence, that the Soviet Union was a "total institution".

[seventeethdecember2016]

Actually, NKVD archives recorded at least a 23-24% average death rate for every nationality that was forcefully expelled from the North Caucasus, so that's obviously a lie(and that's based on the 1939 population). Hitler is accused by many Arabs of faking the holocaust so the evil Jews have a pretext to create the State of Israel, so yeah, accusing someone of something doesn't make it true.

I don't know what you read, obviously not the archives, but Grover Furr has well backed up my point(roughly 1000 people died).

You probably read Khrushchev, or something, and thought it was the archives(common mistake by amateur historians).

I also suggest you don't compare Stalin's case to Hitler's case, as that only diminishes your own argument seeing that you have to employ such childish tactics to make a point.

"Hitler behaved in such a way, so that means Stalin did also."
Please explain how that makes rational sense.

Anyways, the reason for the deportation was the 1940-1944 Chechen insurgency in which a few thousand Chechens participated, and which, as you call tell from the name, began in 1940,I was speaking about deportations as a whole, not just this singular case(which I used as an example.) From the cases of the Crimean Tatars to Bulgarians and Greeks, they were deported for aiding the enemy.


the year when Stalin and Hitler were still allies and were helping each other invade other countries, dividing Europe between themselves and yes, actually invaded a country together - remember that country?, I think Poland is it's name...
A revocation of the Brest-Litovsk is not an alliance. A defense pact is not an alliance. That would mean Turkey was an ally of both countries just because they had a non-aggression pact.

The Soviet Union simply stationed troops in land that they had claims on. That is not an invasion nor a carve-up in the case of the Soviet Union.



Also, about 40% of the Chechen deportees were children, and what the fuck do children have to do with false allegations of Nazi-collaboration?
So should the children have been left in Chechnya without parents? You'll go to long lengths to make a point, even if it causes you to not thoroughly think it through.


Stalin wasn't a bureaucrat? You're telling me that a bunch of low-level bureaucrats built an unprecedented and monstrous cult of personality around Stalin and renamed hundreds of streets, villages, towns and cities in his honor, and all without either the permission or approval of Stalin, the most powerful man in Russian history who concentrated literally ALL power into his personal hands? The same Stalin who, according to MLs, could practically bend mountains with his will?

Be serious man. That's just ridiculous.
Sorry, I don't share your twaddle of a view of the Soviet Union. You obviously are new to the topic of Stalin, so I suggest you do a little reading before you make such damning claims against him.
Svetlana Alliluyeva very well proved all your points wrong. She is probably the best source in the world for this matter, as she was Stalin's daughter.


You completely miss the point. The Roman salute and Stalin pointing are completely irrelevant, the point is that both Stalin and Hitler built monstrous personality cults around themselves, portraying themselves as Gods, in this example it's demonstrated in propaganda posters used by the Soviet and Nazi governments.So you're trying to say that you posted two images that had a similar hand-forward gesture, which implied that Stalin and Hitler were similar because of this, and you're trying to tell us that that wasn't the point you were trying to make?
Anyway, I doubt either men personally designed these posters. Hitler, unlike Stalin, did the Roman solute quite a lot, so he can be characterized for what he did in his poster. Stalin's case, on the other hand, can't be, as pointing wasn't a characteristic of his.

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

The fact that he opposed national self-determination(put my entire ethnic group on a uninsulated trains during february on a month-long trip to Kazahstan through Siberia, without food, water or adequate clothes, killing something like 40% of the entire ethnic group

Hahaha! Do you know who did the research and wrote up the Bolshevik Party's program on "The National Question"? Stalin. His final position was that there should be a "self determination of nations" which Lenin enthusiastically approved of but was criticised by "the left opposition" as giving in to "bourgeois" mentalities. I think you should do some more reading about Stalin and the USSR.

[tradeunionsupporter]

Are there any Socialists Communists and Marxists who view Stalin Stalinism or Stalin's Policies as Right Wing Fascism or just Right Wing ?

[eyeheartlenin]

And anyways, how can you blame the idiots? How are they supposed to distinguish between Hitler and Stalin!
vhttp://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/8618714/640/8618714.png

Commenting on Borz' post, where he reproduces two posters, showing Hitler and Stalin in nearly-identical poses, there is an entire book, Totalitarian Art (1990), by Igor Golomshtok, that shows striking similarities between the political art of the Stalin-era USSR and that of the Third Reich.

There is also a book-long study of the propaganda of the Third Reich and the DDR, that hones in on the verbal similarities between the two tyrannies. I saw that book once, at a public library, but I have been unable to locate it since. But I didn't imagine it. I would think bourgeois apologists (along with anarchists) would get a lot of mileage out of those similarities. (Not that I have anything against anarchism, the stance that most of my friends take).

[l'Enfermé]

I don't know what you read, obviously not the archives, but Grover Furr has well backed up my point(roughly 1000 people died).

You probably read Khrushchev, or something, and thought it was the archives(common mistake by amateur historians).

Nah, NKVD archives. Khruschev has nothing to do with this. It's funny that you think mentioning Grover Furr is helpful for your case, the man is a notorious liar and a charlatan. We're talking about the guy who says the USSR never invaded Poland(even Russian chauvinist historians don't stoop to this level of idiocity!). Please, don't insult our intelligence.


I also suggest you don't compare Stalin's case to Hitler's case, as that only diminishes your own argument seeing that you have to employ such childish tactics to make a point.

"Hitler behaved in such a way, so that means Stalin did also."
Please explain how that makes rational sense.
I don't know how that makes "rational sense", because I never said that.


I was speaking about deportations as a whole, not just this singular case(which I used as an example.) From the cases of the Crimean Tatars to Bulgarians and Greeks, they were deported for aiding the enemy.
No, they weren't. For the Tatars, Bulgarians and the Greeks the Soviet Union was the main enemy. "Aiding the enemy", please. Whose enemy? Certainly it wasn't the Germans who were oppressing them for years, and it wasn't the Germans who deported them. You certainly like to imitate Great Russian chauvinist demagoguery, despite not being a Russian.


A revocation of the Brest-Litovsk is not an alliance. A defense pact is not an alliance. That would mean Turkey was an ally of both countries just because they had a non-aggression pact.

The Soviet Union simply stationed troops in land that they had claims on. That is not an invasion nor a carve-up in the case of the Soviet Union.

A defense pact is an alliance. And Turkey didn't invade countries with Hitler, Stalin did, so why is Turkey relevant?

Simply stationed troops? I guess when Hitler invaded Poland, he wasn't aggressively invading another country, he was just stationing his troops in land that Germany had claims on! I see! When Israel invaded Egypt, Syria and Jordan, it wasn't actually invading them, it was stationing it's troops on land on which it had claims, namely the West Bank, Gaza, the Sinai and Golan Heights. Sure...I guess when Saddam Hussein invaded and annexed Kuwait in August 1990, he was merely stationing his troops there. I see.


So should the children have been left in Chechnya without parents? You'll go to long lengths to make a point, even if it causes you to not thoroughly think it through.
I think you're the one doing an insufficient amount of thinking, and besides I didn't say that. Not only should the children not being deported, no one should have been deported.


Sorry, I don't share your twaddle of a view of the Soviet Union. You obviously are new to the topic of Stalin, so I suggest you do a little reading before you make such damning claims against him.
Svetlana Alliluyeva very well proved all your points wrong. She is probably the best source in the world for this matter, as she was Stalin's daughter.

Of course, anyone being critical of that great leader glorious Comrade Stalin is an ignorant idiot, for anyone that knows anything about him would be incapable of criticizing him! And how is Alliluyeva the best source on this matter? Being a political figure's child somehow makes one an expert on his political career? Is she even a qualified historian? Margaret Thatcher's daughter certainly thinks that her mother is the best thing ever and even writes so in her books, is she a reliable source because she is Thatcher's daughter, and does that make anything she says about Margaret true?

Enough of this stupidity.

[l'Enfermé]

Hahaha! Do you know who did the research and wrote up the Bolshevik Party's program on "The National Question"? Stalin. His final position was that there should be a "self determination of nations" which Lenin enthusiastically approved of but was criticised by "the left opposition" as giving in to "bourgeois" mentalities. I think you should do some more reading about Stalin and the USSR.
Yes, Stalin wrote Marxism and the Nationalism Question in 1913, which says nothing of his views in the 1920s, 30s, 40s and 50s. In 1913, Mussolini was a Socialist one of the leaders of the Maximalists within the Italian PSI(Partito Socialista Italiano) who opposed the Reformists, and he was the editor of the PSI's main organ, the Avanti!, but in 1922 he was the fascist Prime Minister of Italy.

And please, don't tell me to read more about Stalin and the USSR, I've read all of his major works, including Marxism and the National Question(the only sensible thing he wrote, and that's only because Lenin edited it for him), The Principles of Leninism, Leninism and Trotskyism, Dialectical and Historical Materialism, Economic Problems of Socialism...and I've read most more than once. I've read more works written by Stalin than 95% of "Marxist-Leninists" here, there's only 1 Stalinist that I know of, on Revleft, who is more familiar with Stalin's writings than me and he's Ismail. So please, don't tell me to read more, why don't you read more and read works from credibly sources, instead of Stalinist apologists(who are as credibly as the various holocaust deniers that pretend to be real historians)

[electrostal]

It's funny that you think mentioning Grover Furr is helpful for your case, the man is a notorious liar and a charlatan.
Says who.


We're talking about the guy who says the USSR never invaded Poland(even Russian chauvinist historians don't stoop to this level of idiocity!).
Where did he say that?


A defense pact is an alliance.
Defense pact =/= nonaggression pact. The USSR also had non-aggression pacts with Turkey, Italy and ther countries in the 30s...

[l'Enfermé]

I'm not even going to bother with you, you're defending the guy even though you haven't familiarized yourself with his body of work. But more importantly; why was Have3333 banned?

Edit: http://www.revleft.com/vb/admin-actions-ii-t148828/index25.html He was banned for being racist towards Palestinians, apparently.

[electrostal]

I'm not even going to bother with you, you're defending the guy even though you haven't familiarized yourself with his body of work.
I'm not "defending" anyone, I just asked you to provide a source for your claim because I'm interested in reading about the author's justifications for what he wrote.
No need to be so aggressive.

[Crux]

I heard that Joseph Stalin is popular among the hard right in Russia. I presume Stalin is admired because he made the Soviet Union into a superpower, and national interests are a priority among the far-right.
Well, many of the russian stalinists are nationalist anti-semite homophobes. It's easy to see how that might overlap with the far right. Oh no I am "anti-ML"-bashing with the truth!

[hatzel]

This isn't a new thing. Nor even a Russian thing. There were non-Russian (quasi-)fascists loving Stalin already in the 40's, c'mon, and something tells me they didn't much care for the glory of Mother Russia, so let's not pretend this is all about cranky old farts pining for a lost Golden Age...

[Lither]

Hitler once praised Stalin as slowly turning Russia into it's own form of Nazism. Perhaps this has something to do with it?

[Comrade Samuel]

Hitler once praised Stalin as slowly turning Russia into it's own form of Nazism. Perhaps this has something to do with it?

When did he ever say anything like that? Do you have the actual quote?

[MuscularTophFan]

Is there any real major difference between Stalinism, Maoism, or Hoxhaism? They all just seem like same kind of fascism with different gods that the population worships.

[Sea]

Is there any real major difference between Stalinism, Maoism, or Hoxhaism? They all just seem like same kind of fascism with different gods that the population worships.
Please please pretty please get an understanding of what fascism is and what the ideologies you listed above are before you compare them like this. I know you're young (you reek of young) and there's nothing wrong with that, but it's no excuse for posts like yours.

[eric922]

Is there any real major difference between Stalinism, Maoism, or Hoxhaism? They all just seem like same kind of fascism with different gods that the population worships.
Look, I have no use for any of the three ideologies you mentioned, but they aren't fascist. I do think they are antithetical and counterproductive to actually building socialism, but they aren't fascist.

Now,to actually answer your question. As far as I know Hoxhaism doesn't really separate itself in any theoretical way from Marxist-Leninism, but is used to signify strict opposition to what they consider the Revisionism that they say occurred after Stalin's death. One of the mods, Ismial I think is his name, is a Hoxaist so he would probably be a better person to ask.

Maoism is also considered a form of Marxist-Leninism, but was adopted to China by Mao. I'm no expert on it, but my advice is looking up the terms "New Democracy' and "Bloc of Four Classes." I think those are the main differences from standard Marxist-Leninism. Keep in mind, I am no expert on any of these ideologies so I may be mistaken.

[MuscularTophFan]

Look, I have no use for any of the three ideologies you mentioned, but they aren't fascist. I do think they are antithetical and counterproductive to actually building socialism, but they aren't fascist.

Now,to actually answer your question. As far as I know Hoxhaism doesn't really separate itself in any theoretical way from Marxist-Leninism, but is used to signify strict opposition to what they consider the Revisionism that they say occurred after Stalin's death. One of the mods, Ismial I think is his name, is a Hoxaist so he would probably be a better person to ask.

Maoism is also considered a form of Marxist-Leninism, but was adopted to China by Mao. I'm no expert on it, but my advice is looking up the terms "New Democracy' and "Bloc of Four Classes." I think those are the main differences from standard Marxist-Leninism. Keep in mind, I am no expert on any of these ideologies so I may be mistaken.
Marxist Leninism is a right wing deviation from Marxism. It's authoritarian in nature. Libertarian socialists where the first ones persecuted after the bolshevik revolution. Lenin was one of the biggest enemies of socialism of all time.

[Comrade Samuel]

Marxist Leninism is a right wing deviation from Marxism. It's authoritarian in nature. Libertarian socialists where the first ones persecuted after the bolshevik revolution. Lenin was one of the biggest enemies of socialism of all time.

Right wing? We fight against all forms of class oppression and strongly advocate revolution just the same as you. If what you mean when you say "authoritarian in practice" is the deaths related to "communism" in the last century I would advise you not to count revisionists regimes, listen to bourgeois "historians" or read so much George Orwell. Im fairly certan the first people persecuted by the bolsheviks where tsarists but I suppose killing a bunch of protohippies was higher up on their to do list than secureing their independence from a tyanical king. I don't think Lenin was by any means an enemy to socialism; matter of fact being a socialist who dislikes Lenin probably makes you the minority but being one who reviles him and makes him out to be a mindless murder makes you a lone nut who is probably very misinformed.

[Delenda Carthago]

http://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/8618714/640/8618714.png
Wait, which one is Stalin? It's hard to tell which one wasn't an enslaver of mankind who built a monstrous personality cult around himself...

The one with the awesome aisthetics.FU.

[MuscularTophFan]

Right wing? We fight against all forms of class oppression and strongly advocate revolution just the same as you. If what you mean when you say "authoritarian in practice" is the deaths related to "communism" in the last century I would advise you not to count revisionists regimes, listen to bourgeois "historians" or read so much George Orwell. Im fairly certan the first people persecuted by the bolsheviks where tsarists but I suppose killing a bunch of protohippies was higher up on their to do list than secureing their independence from a tyanical king. I don't think Lenin was by any means an enemy to socialism; matter of fact being a socialist who dislikes Lenin probably makes you the minority but being one who reviles him and makes him out to be a mindless murder makes you a lone nut who is probably very misinformed.
If you definition of socialism is establishing an authoritarian single party dictatorship that kills millions of people than I want no part in your version of "socialism." There is nothing leftist about Lenin. He's an enemy of socialism

[Mass Grave Aesthetics]

The one with the awesome aisthetics.FU.
awesome aesthetics?:rolleyes:
Who could have known this thread would turn into a nice flame fest?!

[hatzel]

If you definition of socialism is establishing an authoritarian single party dictatorship that kills millions of people than I want no part in your version of "socialism." There is nothing leftist about Lenin. He's an enemy of socialism

And if your definition of fascism is just anything you don't like very much then yeah whatever that's not good enough to actually function as a worthwhile definition of a word that actually refers to something quite specific. Might as well just call it a cauliflower, because I hear that's pretty unpopular, too...

"That Lenin guy was a fucking cauliflower, man!" - MTF.

[Crux]

Haha. Stalinists are so defensive. That being said I think it is wrong to say that stalinism, in any of it's flavours, is the same as fascism. It isn't and I am not going to pretend to agree with someone who calls Lenin the greatest enemy of socialism ever because that shit is ridiculous. Anyhow people, let's at least try to keep this train on track here. The question being posed was not wheter stalinism is fascist or stalin was a fascist but wheter there is support for stalin on the russian far right, and I think "ML's" and non-"ML's" alike would do well to remember that.
//Mod

[l'Enfermé]

Marxist Leninism is a right wing deviation from Marxism. It's authoritarian in nature. Libertarian socialists where the first ones persecuted after the bolshevik revolution. Lenin was one of the biggest enemies of socialism of all time.
Yeah, the "libertarian socialists" were persecuted for no reason at all, yeah, it didn't have anything to do with the fact that they stood on the side of the reaction and against the Proletarian Revolution or maybe the fact that they were lobbing grenades left and right at Bolsheviks...I guess Makhno wasn't a warlord either and the whites were very kind to Jews and didn't hurt any of them at all. At all.

[MuscularTophFan]

Yeah, the "libertarian socialists" were persecuted for no reason at all, yeah, it didn't have anything to do with the fact that they stood on the side of the reaction and against the Proletarian Revolution or maybe the fact that they were lobbing grenades left and right at Bolsheviks...I guess Makhno wasn't a warlord either and the whites were very kind to Jews and didn't hurt any of them at all. At all.
Every single Marxist-Leninist state that has ever exist has been an abysmal failures. Name one just one Marxist-Leninist state that didn't turn into an authoritarian shit hole during it's exist.

Number of people killed under Marxist-Leninist regimes - over 200,000,000
Number of people killed under anarchism - 0

And you have the nerve to call me "idealistic"

[l'Enfermé]

Every single Marxist-Leninist state that has ever exist has been an abysmal failures. Name one just one Marxist-Leninist state that didn't turn into an authoritarian shit hole during it's exist.

Number of people killed under Marxist-Leninist regimes - over 200,000,000
Number of people killed under anarchism - 0

And you have the nerve to call me "idealistic"
You've probably exaggerated the death toll, maybe remove a zero. It's probably a few dozen millions. But what do Marxist-Leninist states have to do with what I said? What does Lenin have to do with it? There was no "Marxism-Leninism" before he died. And what do the Bolsheviks have to do with? In 1917, the year the Bolsheviks lead the October Revolution, the Bolshevik party was lead by 26 members of the central committee, of these 26 persons 9 died before 1927, of the remaining 17, 13 were murdered by the "Marxist-Leninist" government and only 4 survived: J. Stalin, A. Kollantai, M. Muranov, and E. Stassova, and with the exception of Stalin none of the 3 played any sort of important role in the "Marxist-Leninist" state. So yeah, what do the Bolsheviks and Lenin have to do with "Marxism-Leninism", "Marxism-Leninism" is in fact the complete rejection of the Leninist and Bolshevik legacy.

[Drosophila]

Every single Marxist-Leninist state that has ever exist has been an abysmal failures. Name one just one Marxist-Leninist state that didn't turn into an authoritarian shit hole during it's exist.

Number of people killed under Marxist-Leninist regimes - over 200,000,000
Number of people killed under anarchism - 0

And you have the nerve to call me "idealistic"

I'm not a Marxist-Leninist, but it's ridiculous to taunt how no one has died under anarchism, considering anarchism has never existed beyond a short period of time.

By the way, I'd like to know where you learned that 200,000,000 died in ML states.

[Ostrinski]

If we're gonna be ridiculous, you might as well throw a few more zeros on that sucker.

[SirBrendan]

Bakunin predicted the inevitability of Stalin almost a century before he took power. He is what murdered the Soviet Union. Stalin beats Hitler for the world's greatest kill count. He is scum of the first division.

Stalin is who vindicates anarchism.

[Comrade Samuel]

Bakunin predicted the inevitability of Stalin almost a century before he took power. He is what murdered the Soviet Union. Stalin beats Hitler for the world's greatest kill count. He is scum of the first division.

Stalin is who vindicates anarchism.

Do YOU even believe this?

I may not agree with anarchists on much but I think even they would say this post is completely insane.

[Conscript]

I've recently been thinking that M-Ls seem awfully vulnerable to nationalism, and I think this is owed to their ties to what I'd call a new nation-state in the form of a union (the USSR). Rather than being 'a-national' or even 'anti-national' like an internationalist revolution, I think the USSR and the 'soviet' identity was an attempt at a 'supra-national' identity and culture, building off of the previous, constituent nations which were never allowed to flourish like nation-states were allowed nominally liberal parts of the west, and instead oppressed by ultra-reactionary tsarism and its empire.

The USSR and its 'right to national self-determination', preservation and cultivating of nation-constituents' national culture within their respective republics, and binding of them to the greater union and its 'soviet' identity (and perhaps, the Russian nation which was granted the status of federative republic), is to me the fulfilling to the fullest extent the bourgeois-democratic revolution and its progressive relation to the nation-state. That is, there is nothing more 'modern' and 'progressive' (at least according to historical materialism) for a society to do, and it should be admired as such, but conceded to be within the realm of bourgeois ideas. I think this is the basis for the 'right wing stalinism', 'left wing of capital', and nationalist 'soviet patriots', to even exist, and it especially does so within the realm of ML.

I understand there are ML comrades that are quite a bit more ideologically 'mature' and aren't prone to crap like that (they instead value ML as a method and, in their eyes, proper marxism), so I'd like to hear what they think of this 'right-wing' within ML, who put so much emphasis on things like patriotism and soviet nostalgia.

[l'Enfermé]

National self-determination and the preservation and cultivating of national culture of national minorities, etc, etc was a Bolshevik thing, it was almost completely abandoned by the Stalinist regime. It was replaced with Great Russian chauvinism, which peaked in the 40s. Eventually this crap subsided and efforts were made to reverse it, but even in the 80s Russians were the dominant nationality even where they were a minority(in my native Chechnya for example, in schools most of the teachers were Russians even though there were plenty of qualified Chechens, Chechen pupils were discriminated against in favor of Slavic pupils, the Chechen language was shunned and not taught except for in the remote villages and settlements, etc - in Bolshevik times the government actually tried to revive native langauges that have been falling out of use and created Latin alphabets for languages that weren't written and tried to popularize them)

[Comrades Unite!]

What's with this Anti-Authoritarianism?

How can one wish for a Revolution (The most authoritarian thing in nature where one class subdues another) yet be an Anti-Authoritarian?

When the proletariat wins political power, there is authoritarianism to the highest degree, who is being subdued changes but is it not still authoritarian?

Authority is gone once the classes have been withered away and the proletariat state dies down.

I dislike Stalin, I am a Maoist but I read only some of his writings, On the National Question and on anarchism are the main ones I like from him, I agree completely with Borz though.

[Omsk]

I'd like to hear what they think of this 'right-wing' within ML, who put so much emphasis on things like patriotism and soviet nostalgia.

Such activity is of course, the negative side of Stalin's popularity in some countries and these groups, like the KPRF are counter-revolutionary and are full of reactionaries. They don't uphold ML principles, they don't value the works of Lenin and Stalin and they are not ML's. Such groups can only be described as a group of nostalgic, opportunistic and nationalist former party apparatchiks who want some influence and money by promoting their party, gaining support and having a picture of Stalin somewhere to draw the older people to their side. (This is mainly about the KPRF, a reactionary party which uses the image of Iosif Stalin.)

[Sea]

Name one just one Marxist-Leninist state that didn't turn into an authoritarian shit hole during it's exist.Can the circular logic.

during it's exist.No.

Marxist-Leninist stateDouble no.

Number of people killed under anarchism - 01) What does it mean to be under anarchism?
2) revolution = at least some piles of bodies here and there, so no.


By the way, I'd like to know where you learned that 200,000,000 died in ML states.I don't think you do.. some parts of the body are best left covered.