Tito better then Ceaususcu!!

[Comrade Zeke]

I have opended this debate for every on in this Forum to see who is a better leader:Nicole Ceaususcu or Marshal Tito!!

PLEASE SAY WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT EACH PRESIDENT AND THEN SAY WHAT YOU THINK IS THE BETTER LEADER!!

[redstar2000]

Yes, Tito was not the total piece of shit that Ceausescu was.

That's not saying much.

Question: What difference does it make who was the "better" leader?

Why do you think that communism has anything to do with "great leaders" anyway?

Hasn't the history of 20th century "communism" taught you that all our "great leaders" ever did was land us in the shit?

Do you want to repeat the experience?

Why?

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

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

[Comrade Zeke]

What the fuck Your Supposed to be a Communist supporter her lol. And Fidel Castro and others never landed us in any shit as you would put it. Thier have been good Communist leaders and their have been bad ones......Stalin was bad,Mao was bad but then their are good ones...........Tito,Fidel Castro,Che Guevara,Salvador Allende,Ho Mih Chin,and many others so dont be mean about im just asking a question. :angry:

[redstar2000]

What the fuck. You're supposed to be a Communist supporter here lol.

Does your idea of a "communist supporter" rest on the assumption that "who you flop on your belly for" defines your ideology?

That makes it pretty tough on me; I don't flop on my belly for anyone.

As a matter of fact, I'm of the opinion that "leader-worship" is a lot closer to fascism than it is to communism.


And Fidel Castro and others never landed us in any shit as you would put it.

He's doing it right now. By permitting some Cubans to accumulate substantial amounts of foreign currency that other Cubans have no access to, he is creating a "two-tier" society. That's the material foundation for the restoration of capitalism.


There have been good Communist leaders and there have been bad ones.

What you doing here is defining societies according to your perceptions of their leaders as "good" or "bad".

My point is that communism is not about leaders.


Stalin was bad,Mao was bad but then there are good ones...........Tito, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Salvador Allende, Ho Chi Minh, and many others...

Tito was a "market socialist"...leading the way to the restoration of capitalism. Castro I have already discussed. Guevara blundered in Bolivia. Allende was never a communist and barely even a socialist. The party of Ho is today restoring capitalism in Vietnam.


...so don't be mean...I'm just asking a question.

I'm not trying to be "mean"...I'm trying to get you to understand something about the nature of the "question" that you're asking.

The road to communism is not traveled by "picking the right guide".

The emancipation of the working class must be the work of the workers themselves--Karl Marx

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

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

[Bolshevika]

Tito is a capitalist traitor, atleast Ceaucescu was a fairly faithful comrade.

With "allies" like Tito, who needs enemies!?

I too am a long time fan of Fidel Castro (this is mostly because of my Bolivarian ideology), however I think what he is currently doing today, as Redstar said, is screwing the Cuban people over and leading way to a new ruling class through black marketting, tourism, etc. I am starting to be against Cuban socialism, I am hoping Fidel will fix this up and throw out all hard currency.

Stalin and Mao are two heroes who overshadow Tito by a long shot in advancing the communist cause.

Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Salvador Allende, Ho Chi Minh, all great guys, who followed the ideology that Tito opposed, especially the Stalinists Che and Ho.

People in Rumania miss Ceaucescu, do people in Yugoslavia miss Tito? (if so, prove this).

[Pete]

This better not be like the Trotsky vs Stalin bullshit. If it is, you leninists need to pull your head out of your asses big time.

[commie kg]

As I mentioned in another thread, Tito and Ceaucescu were good buddies. I don't understand the Stalinist obsession with the man, and their hate for Tito. The two were quite involved with each other, Ceaucescu reportedly had plans to side with Tito if the USSR ever invaded Yugoslavia.

[Comrade Zeke]

Listen you guys we are getting of the subject of who is better Communist leader Tito or Ceaususcu,but you have to admit Tito was the most succseful Communist leader after Fidel. For a couples reasons. First Tito was a Communist leader who deffied the Stupid Soveit Union that wished to take over the world the Soveit Union was like an America in the Capitalist world only its a Communist one. In Tito's Yugoslavia every one could choose their jobs unlike in the Soveit Union in which you were ussally drafted into the army or put in a factory or even worsre a collective farm. Tito made Yugosalvia a great nation he didn't betray the Communist cause he was a loyal Communist he just added some refroms so it could make it a better system like just a couple of private buieness and some Tourism. Did any one want Visit Soveit Union for Tourim hell no Ill tell you why because it was this ugely looking place with factoreis that polluted the air. Tito helped 3rd world nations like Fidel Castro and didn't charge a price like the greedy Soveit Union,half the dept on Earth is to Russia right now. Ok now that im done saying why Tito was such a good leader,I can answear Redstar's complaint

TO Redstar......first off Communism I beailive should be by the people for the people and with the people. But their has only been one Communist country: i dont care what you say, that elected its leader fairly and democratically:Chile. Second of I dont beailive that dictators are right but what can you do you cant change History. Castro will be in Cuba intill the day he dies. Communism can happen but YOU WILL NEVER EVER AHCIVE a UTOPIA OF WHAT KARL MARX STATED IN HIS COMMUNIST MANFESTIO. Their can however be Communist goverments and most Communist goverment turn into Dictatorships. Cuba is really the only nation that has stayed true to the cause. You need just a little Tourism to have an econemy. I think that if a Dictators becomes head of a Communist state but he does good things for his people he is still a good leader. Communism is a great system I think it is alwsome......but it does not work unless it has refroms. And one more thing Im Just asking what leader in your opion did more for the Communist world TITO OR CEAUSUSCU THATS ALL! :D Comrade Zeke

TO Bolshevika Tito never oppsed Communism he just was the smartess Communist leader who saw that the system is to bla and isn't that pratical he made the best reforms and No one ever starved in his country....poor Romania and China. Mao was a womainzer and a glutton, and Communism is for the people!! Not Mao ruling everything with his big fat cheecks. Stalin was a crual man who killed 30,000 people im glad Tito stuck up to him and showed him that all of the Communist world doesn't have to be a slaves to the U.S.S.R. Cuba although it relied hevilay on Soveit Union Prodocts it still was kinda of independet. And Tito held a coutry together....that could have split up and could have started fighting. THe Soveit Union is just like America in a Communist world Corrupt and greedy simple as that. Tito and Castro have done the most for their people and they really never killed their people and put them in Consentration camps. Communism is great and I hope it survives the world....but if a great leaders like Castro and Tito never came along THE PEOPLE OF YUGOSLAVIA AND CUBA WOULD HAVE NEVER SEEN THE LIGHT AND THEIR WOULD HAVE BEEN NO COMMUNIST REVOLTUIONS IN THEIR COUNTRIES SOMETIMES COMMUNISM JUST NEEDS A LITTLE PUSH BY SOME INSPIRING LEADERS LIKE TITO. THANKS YOU Comrade Zeke

[redstar2000]

YOU WILL NEVER EVER ACHIEVE A UTOPIA OF WHAT KARL MARX STATED IN HIS COMMUNIST MANIFESTO.

You have every right to think that if you wish.

But is it not then hypocritical of you to keep using the word communist to describe your favorite "poster guys"?

If your idea of political theory is "the Tito Fan Club", then go right ahead. Lots of fan clubs out there--Trotsky has a bunch and so does Mao. Even Stalin has a few. Why not one more?


Tito made Yugoslavia a great nation.

*Yawns* Just what we needed...more "great nations".


...he didn't betray the Communist cause.

I'm afraid that is not true. In 1948, when Tito and Stalin started feuding, there was a civil war going on in Greece between the Communist Party of Greece and the old monarchy with its British and American supporters.

Supplies for the Greek CP rebels came overland from the USSR, through Yugoslavia, and on to the rebel military bases in the mountains of Greece.

When the feud became public, the Greek CP was challenged to declare allegiance to Stalin or to Tito. The Greeks chose Stalin; Tito closed the borders to Soviet aid...allowing the Greeks to be crushed by the forces of reaction.

Betrayal sounds like a reasonably accurate description.


Communism is great and I hope it survives the world....but if great leaders like Castro and Tito never came along THE PEOPLE OF YUGOSLAVIA AND CUBA WOULD HAVE NEVER SEEN THE LIGHT AND THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO COMMUNIST REVOLUTIONS IN THEIR COUNTRIES. SOMETIMES COMMUNISM JUST NEEDS A LITTLE PUSH BY SOME INSPIRING LEADERS LIKE TITO.

*Sighs*

I really hope that someday you get the chance to actually read some of the works by Marx and Engels...and understand that what you just wrote makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

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

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

[Saint-Just]

I would choose Ceausescu. Tito was to great a revisionist. But I believe both were lesser traitors than Khrushchev and his friends.