Have I got movement for you!

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

After some thought, I believe I have found a movement most of RevLeft could support.

It was founded in early twentieth-century Russia by moderate socialists and democrats, including close associates and co-thinkers of Kautsky, men (and the odd woman) who had been fighting against Tsarism for decades. It emphasised democracy above all, and denounced every un-democratic action of the Bolsheviks. It also included a lot of anti-imperialist, regionalist and national-liberation groups. Members had a significant presence in the trade unions and the factory committees. They were led by a popular scientific figure. They fought against Bolshevik policies of food requisitioning and one-man management.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Also, I am either an idiot, or the forum software doesn't like me, or both I guess. I, of course, wanted the title to be "Have I got a movement for you!". I would kindly ask any moderator that sees this to change the title, as it currently sounds like something a drunken Russian stereotype might shout at his apolitical friend.

Also, did I mention the emphasis this movement placed on local self-government in opposition to Bolshevik centralism?

[Brutus]

And is this movement Menshevism?

[Per Levy]

And is this movement Menshevism?

do we play leftist jeopardy now? so you get a 100$ in "russian socialist partys/movements of the 20th century" and yeah it can only be the mensheviks. make it more difficult vincent.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

:rolleyes:

[Brutus]

I want it exclusively in coupons for cream cheese.

[human strike]

Not all Mensheviks!

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

do we play leftist jeopardy now? so you get a 100$ in "russian socialist partys/movements of the 20th century" and yeah it can only be the mensheviks. make it more difficult vincent.

Well, you try being clever in the middle of a sugar withdrawal.

In any case, "Mensheviks" (or "right Mensheviks", if you still believe there was a "left") is only partially correct - the part about the unions and factory committees applies to them, but not regionalism (those would be the Siberian Regionalists, Petylura and so on), widespread reliance on local dumas (Esers) and so on. I was talking about Mensheviks, together with Esers, Yedinstvo, Popular Socialists, some Kadet elements - and the scientist, one very popular hydrologist and polar explorer named Kolchak - the White movement.

Now, the point of this thread wasn't simply to see how many r-r-revolutionary socialists would support the Whites if the name wasn't explicitly mentioned, and to point out how an impressionistic, single-track focus on abstract democracy, which is extremely common on RevLeft, leads one to support all manner of reactionary movements, but that the Left has not learned the real lessons of the White movement because the Whites are often portrayed as extreme monarchists and warlords, as if every White was Ungern-Sternberg or Semyonov. But in fact most Whites portrayed themselves as moderate "socialists" who wanted to restore democracy from the evil usurper Bolsheviks - precisely the sort of rhetoric that is music to the ears of every RevLefter that has a special place in their hearts for the Constituent Assembly and so on.

[PhoenixAsh]

For the record I would have thought the right SR movement...but didn't because it didn't completely conform to the premise.

I am wondering how the results would have been if it hadn't been 870 who made the thread and OP.

But I think the lesson 870 gave here should be taken to heart, regardless of the political arguments and conflicts he and I have. He does have a valid point here.

The question of course is whether all organisations which were grouped into the White faction were illegitimate or anti-revolutionary and/or if all of their criticism was unfounded.

[TheWannabeAnarchist]

Let's play Socialist Guess-Who some more!

I want to tell you about a military leader who participated in a popular revolution and a civil war against imperialism. He paid lip service to the people, but actually sided with social elites. After the war was over, he took control of his country without opposition.

Soon, his cult of personality developed. Poets wrote odes to him. Artists painted him as a god among Olympians. Sculptors created gigantic statues of him. Monuments dedicated to him towered over cities around his country. One major city was actually named after him; it is renowned for how it was brutally attacked and nearly destroyed by an evil empire. It persevered, but huge numbers of people died bravely defending it.

Political repression was rampant. This leader passed laws that made it illegal to criticize him. Journalists were thrown in jail when they suggested that he wanted to be a dictator, and some died awaiting trial.

This leader also utilized slave labor. He participated in the bloody oppression and collective punishment of entire ethnic groups. Throughout his life, he contributed to the suffering countless thousands.

And yet, for whatever reason, his people continue to admire him years later. For whatever reason, these feeble-minded, brainwashed victims buy into his propaganda even though he is no longer alive to oppress them.

Can anyone guess who I'm talking about?:)

[motion denied]

Ho Chi Minh?

[Sasha]

maybe we should make a revleft version of the "still a better love story than Twilight" meme.

The white's, still better politics than stalinism.

[Brotto Rühle]

If only my democracy communisms had taken power as opposed to the Bolsheviks! Then we'd have communisms todays! :crying:

Yeah, it's absurd for anyone to think that if some group, BESIDES THE WORKING CLASS, comes to power that things will be "the right way".

[TheWannabeAnarchist]

Ho Chi Minh?

Nah, I was talking about George Washington:laugh:

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~CAP/ROTUNDA/apoth_1.html

http://m.sodahead.com/living/wasis-george-washington-zeus/question-3473297/

http://www.history.com/news/5-things-you-might-not-know-about-the-washington-monument

http://www.legendsofamerica.com/ah-august4.html

http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/01/1-the-alien-and-sedition-acts-top-10-mistakes-by-us-presidents/

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Kinda relevant, I'm thinking of creating an anti-imperialist fantasy football league. Each player will receive 5 oppressed states and 1 oppressor state. Each week players will tally up news stories relevant to their roster to determine points. Instances of revolutionary nationalism reported from the opressed states will give points according to some kind of scale based on casualty figures and the number of western supporters the action is able to mobilize, while instances of imperialism on the part of the oppressor state will cause players to lose points. In addition to the oppressed/oppressor category each player will receive one "wildcard" nation that can either play the role of oppressed or oppressor based on how the player's opponents decide to the frame the debate, which will allow players to steal points from one another. This is just a rough outline, but if enough people are into it I'll make a group and we can hammer out the rules in detail.

[motion denied]

Nah, I was talking about George Washington:laugh:


When I read he got a town with his name I immediately thought of Chi Minh. :(

You got me there.

[Rafiq]

After some thought, I believe I have found a movement most of RevLeft could support.

It was founded in early twentieth-century Russia by moderate socialists and democrats, including close associates and co-thinkers of Kautsky, men (and the odd woman) who had been fighting against Tsarism for decades. It emphasised democracy above all, and denounced every un-democratic action of the Bolsheviks. It also included a lot of anti-imperialist, regionalist and national-liberation groups. Members had a significant presence in the trade unions and the factory committees. They were led by a popular scientific figure. They fought against Bolshevik policies of food requisitioning and one-man management.

Kautsky sided with the Bolsheviks against the Mensheviks before his renege.

Try harder. The distinguishable characteristics of the Mensheviks (as opposed to the Bolsheviks) was hardly that they were more democratic.

[Rafiq]

The likes of Chomsky and other "democratic socialists" are a close modern emulation of menshevism, often petty bourgeois socialism.

[The Red Star Rising]

maybe we should make a revleft version of the "still a better love story than Twilight" meme.

The white's, still better politics than stalinism.
We could always do one better and go for Nazism if we want something everyone agrees is the worst thing since...well actually I can't say "sliced Hitler" for this one...worst thing since Serfdom in a can then?

[Tim Cornelis]

Still better than Sparts.


lol
http://www.indymedia.ie/cache/imagecache/local/attachments/migration/img_up/up_3/460_0___30_0_0_0_0_0_37123_1.jpg

[Sasha]

also, should probably closed and infracted as this intended as an flame thread.
but since me and 870 are such great palls i'll leave that decision to the rest of the BA....

[Ele'ill]

bowel movements heh

[Hagalaz]

Let's play Socialist Guess-Who some more!

I want to tell you about a military leader who participated in a popular revolution and a civil war against imperialism. He paid lip service to the people, but actually sided with social elites. After the war was over, he took control of his country without opposition.

Soon, his cult of personality developed. Poets wrote odes to him. Artists painted him as a god among Olympians. Sculptors created gigantic statues of him. Monuments dedicated to him towered over cities around his country. One major city was actually named after him; it is renowned for how it was brutally attacked and nearly destroyed by an evil empire. It persevered, but huge numbers of people died bravely defending it.

Political repression was rampant. This leader passed laws that made it illegal to criticize him. Journalists were thrown in jail when they suggested that he wanted to be a dictator, and some died awaiting trial.

This leader also utilized slave labor. He participated in the bloody oppression and collective punishment of entire ethnic groups. Throughout his life, he contributed to the suffering countless thousands.

And yet, for whatever reason, his people continue to admire him years later. For whatever reason, these feeble-minded, brainwashed victims buy into his propaganda even though he is no longer alive to oppress them.

Can anyone guess who I'm talking about?:)

Obviously Stalin.