Stalinism?

[The Role Of Ideology]

Comrades,

I come would like as a comrade to enquire as to how you can consider 'stalinism' as a) an opposing view or b) as not a form of socialism?

Firstly lets examine some facts... The term of phrase 'stalinism' was first coined by Trotskyists and revisionists such as the traitor Khruschev and his cronies. Stalin never invented any form of ideology and even if you believe he was a ruthless premier, you cannot deny that he was true to Marxism and led the USSR into a period of prosperity unseen before bringing them to rival even the old industrial powers of Great Britain and the USA by 1945.

Another thing; Your beloved Che himself was a great admirer of Stalin and he used 'Stalin II' as his pen name when he first started writing.
There is no real ideology as 'Stalinism' which even most stalinists admit and I was wondering how many people here have read any of Stalin's works?

So here is my brief case for why 'Stalinism' should be removed from the 'opposing views' section. I heartely recommend it, in the name of camradery.

Matt

[The Feral Underclass]

I come would like as a comrade to enquire as to how you can consider 'stalinism' as a) an opposing view or b) as not a form of socialism?

Well that's a tuff question...... :blink:

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

Basically one of the only faults I have with Stalinism, is Stalin. He was a brutal dictator who killed all opposition, and I don't think the party should be run that way, but when it comes to the issues, I do come across somewhat as a "Stalinist" or a "Maoist" but who doesn't on certain issues? Probably over 1/2 of the people here are Stalinist when it comes to something like religion. I don't even like these labels, and I don't think a whole lot of people follow lockstep with any one sub-ideology. The only two legitimate divisions of the Communist movement I would say are the authoritarians and the anarchists. I think that people who sit around on these boards and call people Stalinists and Trots, are just causing trouble for the sake of causing trouble. I have no problem with either group, though the Stalinists are rather irritating when it comes to history discussions, and downright frightening when it comes to supporting fascists such as Miloshevik. I am rather hesisant to go and proclaim solidarity with someone just because they are anti-american.

[Bolshevika]

Welcome to our base comrade, you are an excellent addition to OI (expect to be restricted here soon). Unfortunately comrade, this board is led by a bureaucracy of Anarchists, liberals, apoliticals and Trotskyists, hence there is heavy anti-Stalin "Crimes of Stalin/Stalin was evil" nonesense amongst the teenagers from the western countries heavily influenced by the bombardment of capitalist propaganda (Especially in the USA and Germany).

I do not blame the people on this board for having these ideas in their head, for I too was once like them, believed the liars, the class enemies. Indeed, Stalin did not formulate his own ideology, simply followed the basic principles of Marxism-Leninism. Of course you'll have the delusional Anarchists here tell you Marx was an anarchist (if you read his works from 1870's and on you will realize this).

[The Feral Underclass]

I started a thread to ask for your restriction to be removed....dont spoil it now bolshevika!

[Saint-Just]

I think people here will say that Stalin was not 'true to Marxism'. There is a thread here that raises the question of what do people think Stalinism actually is.

Anyway, I wouldn't disagree with you The Role of Ideology.

The Anarchist Tension, yes I think Bolshevika is a serious person and has many interesting and intelligent posts to make. For example, his board Workers Unite has many good articles on it. I also know him to enjoy researching issues. Perhaps his repartee is a little vexing for others, but thats not unlike most members. He has a good character.

[The Feral Underclass]

You dont have to convince me chairman mao...

[Bolshevika]

Thank you Comrade Chairman Mao and The anarchist Tension I appreciate it :D

[El Brujo]

Originally posted by The Role Of [email protected] 6 2004, 02:29 AM
Comrades,

I come would like as a comrade to enquire as to how you can consider 'stalinism' as a) an opposing view or b) as not a form of socialism?

Firstly lets examine some facts... The term of phrase 'stalinism' was first coined by Trotskyists and revisionists such as the traitor Khruschev and his cronies. Stalin never invented any form of ideology and even if you believe he was a ruthless premier, you cannot deny that he was true to Marxism and led the USSR into a period of prosperity unseen before bringing them to rival even the old industrial powers of Great Britain and the USA by 1945.

Another thing; Your beloved Che himself was a great admirer of Stalin and he used 'Stalin II' as his pen name when he first started writing.
There is no real ideology as 'Stalinism' which even most stalinists admit and I was wondering how many people here have read any of Stalin's works?

So here is my brief case for why 'Stalinism' should be removed from the 'opposing views' section. I heartely recommend it, in the name of camradery.

Matt
You make some excellent points, comrade. Today, "Stalinism" is used by the western bourgeoisie to refer to any "evil dictatorship," completely distorting the facts about Stalin's rule. And of course, the extremely sectarian Trots, liberals and anarchists buy it all up and even go as far as supporting capitalism over "Stalinism." I would be more than willing to set aside differences among other socialists for the common goal but that seems to not be the case with a most liberals.

Concerning Che, he was very much a "Stalinist." He favoured Maoist China in the Sino-Soviet dispute and states that he converted to Marxism when he discovered Stalin.

"I have sworn before a picture of the old and mourned comrade Stalin that I won't rest until I see those capitalist octopuses annihilated." - Che Guevara

[Hoppe]

Economic Left/Right: -9.66
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.83

How come you're so libertarian Bolshevika?

[Bolshevika]

I know, it is fairly odd, I get different results each time I take the thing (I got .84 authoritarian once, but that was the most).

I am of the same philosophy of Engels, Marx Lenin Mao and Stalin and all the greats, freedom for the proletariat, repression for the bourgeoisie and old ideas. I believe we must allow the proletariat to dictate (through the forms of delegations, workers elections, etc) to the bourgeoisie.

Even though I find it sort of silly to base your ideology on some test, I just have it in my sig.

[canikickit]

So here is my brief case for why 'Stalinism' should be removed from the 'opposing views' section. I heartely recommend it, in the name of camradery.

The sub-title under the OI forum is out dated and no longer a policy here at Che-Lives.


Stalin never invented any form of ideology

It doesn't matter, nor does it matter where the phrase originated.
Stalinists are people who support Stalin in his role as the premier of the Soviet Union. Just because you're a Stalinist doesn't mean you're not a Marxist-Leninist. It means you are a Marxist-Leninist.


Another thing; Your beloved Che himself was a great admirer of Stalin and he used 'Stalin II' as his pen name when he first started writing.

I don't give a shit, and I think it would be a pretty sad individual who did - and changed thier opinion of Stalin on that basis. Wasn't it just one letter that he signed with that name anyway?


"I have sworn before a picture of the old and mourned comrade Stalin that I won't rest until I see those capitalist octopuses annihilated." - Che Guevara

I think that's pretty embarassing. He might as well have gotten a bible or a picture of the pope. Sad.

[Soviet power supreme]

Unfortunately comrade, this board is led by a bureaucracy of Anarchists,

:lol: bureaucracy of Anarchists ,but its true. :(


Of course you'll have the delusional Anarchists here tell you Marx was an anarchist (if you read his works from 1870's and on you will realize this).

Yes this is true.The anarchists usually say that it was the Marx who breaked the first internationale and he was stupid etc,etc.

[YKTMX]

Heres a real question for you. Is this thread totally needless. Answer? Yes.

[Bolshevika]

Heres a real question for you. Is this thread totally needless. Answer?

The answer is no, Trot face. If you were being considered an "enemy" by supposed 'communists' I'd think you'd make the same threads.

[YKTMX]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2004, 12:02 AM

Heres a real question for you. Is this thread totally needless. Answer?

The answer is no, Trot face. If you were being considered an "enemy" by supposed 'communists' I'd think you'd make the same threads.
Well, as this site is Maltes, it is his perogative to put anything he likes in OI. If you don't like it, set up your own little pro-Stalin board, where you can discuss Trotskys involvement in Nazism, Imperialism, UFO's and the Higland Clearances till the cows come home.

[RedCeltic]

come would like as a comrade to enquire as to how you can consider 'stalinism' as a) an opposing view or b) as not a form of socialism?

A & b are both correct.

[The Role Of Ideology]

No they aren't :blink:. But anyway can't you just change that word in the descrption?

[The Feral Underclass]

Yes this is true.The anarchists usually say that it was the Marx who breaked the first internationale and he was stupid etc,etc.

It was Marx who had the Internationale transfered to New York to stop the Anarchists from attending. The only problem was no one could attend...you draw the conclusion <_<

[dancingoutlaw]

where is Comrade RAF to defend the Stalinists?

peace

[SonofRage]

EDIT: this post is not accepting my quote tags so I&#39;m killing it

[Xprewatik RED]

a...... stalinism isn&#39;t an idealogy though.....

[Vinny Rafarino]

Why not simply seach the archives for the many threads about this subject. There are many, many posts by several members of this board made in defense of Comrade Stalin. If you are interested in the subject, I suggest reviewing them.

What else can be said? Re-hashing the same debates every month or so is tiresome.




P.S.


I know how much the Trots are going to hate the fact that I will not participate in this debate, however I will have to say too bad boys.

[Guest1]

lol, let me just say there&#39;s no trotskyist conspiracy on che-lives. I know of one or two trotskyists on this board. as for anarchist bureaucracy, it doesn&#39;t exist either. TAT, who is an anarchist himself has just asked for bolshevika to be unrestricted, and I support him on that. RAF was given modship over this forum a while ago, and I&#39;m sure he&#39;ll be reinstated soon. We don&#39;t restrict people for beings stalinists anymore, that&#39;s long over with. in fact, bolshevika, you were never restricted for that, you were restricted for spamming and being generally disrespectful. you&#39;ve changed though, and I commend you on that.

[The Feral Underclass]

Bolshevika

The answer is no, Trot face.

LOL :lol: ...He said trot face&#33;&#33;&#33; :lol:

[Hate Is Art]

HAHA, ahhh I never saw the point in any stupid arguments about Trot and Stalin, they have all been dead at least 50 years, get over it.