Russia: what a shithole of a country.

[Tim Cornelis]

I started to write a paper about fascist involvement in the project of 'Novorossiya', and this obviously brings me to Russian politics as well, and holy shit is it depressing and grim. I knew that Russian political culture was authoritarian-leaning, but the number of far-right and syncretic political groups that have popped up is utterly depressing. The rampant racism, chauvinism, homophobia. Even the Communist Party of the Russian Federation dabbles in these, of course. The centrist and conservatives in Western Europe can be depressing sometimes, but jesus christ, it must be unbelievably depressing to live in Russia as communist.

Russia, due to its unique history, is the only place where the horseshoe political spectrum is somewhat applicable. Communists are almost all chauvinists and social-chauvinists; and have no problem marching with monarchists (against Putin).

And look at these people:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essence_of_Time_(movement))

National-Stalinist Christian Orthodoxy or something.

[Illegalitarian]

It's been this way for a very long time.

It sucks, too, because Russia the country, itself, is actually quite lovely. It's a beautiful country, but like many other beautiful countries, it's political culture trumps its upsides

[Tim Cornelis]

I think influential shady network of businessmen, oligarchs, chauvinists, and nationalists sums it up.

[RedWorker]

The rampant racism, chauvinism, homophobia. Even the Communist Party of the Russian Federation dabbles in these, of course.

'Even'? That's common for Stalinists.

[John Nada]

I was wondering, are many of these rightist groups really gangs? In the US a lot of white gangsters and criminals use fascist symbols, even if they're not fascist boneheads. It's a prison thing, though the relatively nihilistic ones are not cool with boneheads, and vis versa.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Russia looks really similar to America from my perspective so nothing about it's politics or culture really surprises me.

[Tim Cornelis]

As far as I know, US white supremacist gangs aren't really committed to the ideology of white supremacy and Nazism. These various Russian groups, as far as I know, are. There are some 'gangs' in the sense that they attack and kill 'black' (Caucasus) people, but that's their prime objective.

I think the ties of Russian and for example Turkish fascists to organised crime is due to the 'machismo' and ultra-patriarchical character of fascism.


'Even'? That's common for Stalinists.

Depends on the Stalinist. Communist Party of Britain doesn't. The Portuguese Communist Party claims to be patriotic, but isn't chauvinist. Many of the post-Soviet 'Communist' Parties in Eastern Europe are indeed racist, chauvinist, homophobic. But even then, the KPRF out-chauvinists all other Stalinist parties.

[John Nada]

As far as I know, US white supremacist gangs aren't really committed to the ideology of white supremacy and Nazism. These various Russian groups, as far as I know, are. There are some 'gangs' in the sense that they attack and kill 'black' (Caucasus) people, but that's their prime objective.The ones that are just about hustling and protection aren't necessarily fascist or even white supremacist, in fact they're often rivals to the white supremacists. And they would attack minorities, because that's how it is.
I think the ties of Russian and for example Turkish fascists to organised crime is due to the 'machismo' and ultra-patriarchical character of fascism.Well, that and money. They're making a living somehow.

[Chomskyan]

I've heard that it's very racist and hyper-nationalistic in Russia elsewhere.

At the same time, Russia as a government is quite anti-imperialist... well, when it isn't them doing the imperialism.

[motion denied]

How a member of the BRICS can be anti-imperialist?

[Delusional Kid]

Honestly outside of the anti-homosexuality or whatever law I wouldn't mind living in Russia.
Because really, outside of that I don't see it being much worse than where I currently live.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Honestly outside of the anti-homosexuality or whatever law I wouldn't mind living in Russia.
Because really, outside of that I don't see it being much worse than where I currently live.

Well, if you were to move to Russia, your standard of living would probably decrease significantly, and you would probably be much more likely to be beaten up or worse by the far-right. Which is not to say poverty and bonehead extremism don't exist in the US, of course. But you are most likely less in danger of both than you would be in Russia.

[Redistribute the Rep]

Well, if you were to move to Russia, your standard of living would probably decrease significantly, and you would probably be much more likely to be beaten up or worse by the far-right. Which is not to say poverty and bonehead extremism don't exist in the US, of course. But you are most likely less in danger of both than you would be in Russia.

Looks like they aren't living in the US. You're probably still right though

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Looks like they aren't living in the US. You're probably still right though

Every country becomes every other country when you've had enough alcohol. I misread "Ontario" as "Ohio".

[Delusional Kid]

Well, if you were to move to Russia, your standard of living would probably decrease significantly, and you would probably be much more likely to be beaten up or worse by the far-right. Which is not to say poverty and bonehead extremism don't exist in the US, of course. But you are most likely less in danger of both than you would be in Russia.
Hm, didn't think about that. But I didn't say I ever wanted to move there though, just that I don't think it would be that bad.

[Rurkel]

I was wondering, are many of these rightist groups really gangs? In the US a lot of white gangsters and criminals use fascist symbols, even if they're not fascist boneheads.
No, politically organized groups aren't criminal gangs, although of course, there're links between them, non-party rightist grouplets (which usually support ethnic nativist politics) and wider crime/gang culture.

Messianic-imperial nationalists had occasionally expected their displeasure with "Immigrant, go home" people, sometimes even stating that the latter nativist groups are in pay of Western imperialists who want to create internal strife in Russia. Nevertheless, there's significant overlap between them (CPRF is quite anti-immigrant, even its "left" wing published anti-immigration articles, and the black-yellow-white flag is popular among both). In practice most nationalist groups espouse a mixture of "messianism" and "nativism".

During the anti-Putin liberal protests a couple of years ago, some nativists decided to do a Wilders and formulate their arguments in a more liberal-democratic way, making an alliance with liberals against Putin. The events in Ukraine seem to have broken the remains of this alliance. Even the few Russian neo-nazis who went to fight for Kiev are not connected with the liberals.


Russia looks really similar to America from my perspective so nothing about it's politics or culture really surprises me.

I sometimes get the feeling that Russia is just a less influential, more resentful version of the USA. The Mexico/Central Asia labor migration parallels only increase that feeling. Don't expect to find many US-style libertarians in Russia, though, which is a definite plus.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Hm, didn't think about that. But I didn't say I ever wanted to move there though, just that I don't think it would be that bad.

Just not so good if you're a person of colour or gay. Or a political opponent of Vladimir Putin. Or you want to travel through the separatist regions in Ukraine that will soon become part of Russia and you are a woman. Or if you are poor.

So, in other words, if you are a rich white capitalist dude then Russia, like many other places in the world, ain't so bad. And - same old story - if you are a woman, black, asian, gay or poor, you're going to have a tough time.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Should the actual Russian left consider Michael Lind's "radical center" position when it comes to identity-based social issues?

[consuming negativity]

It sucks, too, because Russia the country, itself, is actually quite lovely. It's a beautiful country

#barelyrelevantbutperhapsinteresting

http://www.weather.com/travel/breathtaking-photos-coldest-city-world-20140128



Think we’re having a brutal winter? Winter temperatures in Oymyakon, Russia, average minus 50 C ( minus 58 F). The remote village is generally considered the coldest inhabited area on Earth. Oymyakon is a two-day drive from Yakutsk, the regional capital which has the lowest winter temperatures of any city in the world.


How do the locals deal with the cold? “Russki chai, literally Russian tea, which is their word for vodka,” photographer Amos Chapple (http://amoschapple.com/) told weather.com after his visit to the coldest city.

[Palmares]

I've never been to Russia. Largely because the infamous rampant racism I've been told about. I hardly wanna get beaten up or killed just for the sake of being a tourist. This is infact why I've avoided almost all of Eastern Europe, though I was in Czech Republic for a bit. I was planning to go to Slovakia, but as per usual with any verbal intention to travel Eastern Europe, I was highly recommended to reconsider my plans. On that occasion I decided to not go, but despite my fears, I do not wish it to prevent me from ever going.

That said, I think it's interesting people are saying Russia is shit. Perhaps it is. But how do you qualify that? If you look at certain statistics (such as the Social Progress Index)that apparently measure how liveable different countries in the world are, Russia certainly is not high on that list. So by Western standards, it would certainly suck. At the same time, do I understand contextually that the opportunity to live in Russia may appear, or if they are lucky, actually be an opportunity for a better life. They say, there's always somewhere better off, or ... worse off.

So of course there's plenty of places I'd choose over Russia any day, but it's totally not on the bottom of the list. With all the shitholes on the planet, Russia is unlikely the worst.

I still say fuck Russia though, as everywhere is more or less a shithole until we are free. :grin:

On a different but related note, there was there Russian anarchist who was travelling in the US this year and they made some remarks about their experience of the US compared to Russia. One of the things that stood out to them was that in his time in the US he witnessed a much bigger police presence than in Russia and infact he expressed some fear about having in interact with them due to the fact you couldn't bribe them like he was used to back home. And based on this and his other knowledge of the two nations, figured as a general rule, you could get away with alot more in Russian than the US.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Should the actual Russian left consider Michael Lind's "radical center" position when it comes to identity-based social issues?

You means this?

http://www.salon.com/2010/04/20/radical_center_revisited/

Yes, why don't we all adopt anti-immigrant, pro-corporation policies and see what happens? :rolleyes:

[Die Neue Zeit]

Don't be ridiculous. I oppose border controls. On affirmative action, a socialist can point to France on the one hand and point to the possibility of class-based affirmative action on the other in raising mild or serious objections to identity-based affirmative action.

Earlier on this subject: The Second International and social conservatism (http://www.revleft.com/vb/second-international-and-t104481/index.html?t=104481)

It's funny how political developments can turn out, from being open to vulgar "centrism" on sociocultural issues in one period to being, in another period, anti-intolerance for internal conduct but refraining from public policy on such matters.

[Igor]

sitting neatly in the west and calling worse off countries "shitholes" is kind of a smug and assholish thing to do u no

[Tim Cornelis]

No.

(I'm not calling Kenya a shithole because of the lack of infrastructure and underdevelopment or something; I'm calling Russia a shithole because of the influential shady network of oligarchs, ultra-conservatives, fascists, and chauvinists).

[Igor]

i hope you realise those things are very much connected + theres more than enough "oligarhcs, ultra-conservatives, fascists and chauvinists" basically everywhere which makes singling russia out weird

[Tim Cornelis]

Uh no. If you think that Russia is politically and political-culturally pretty much the same everywhere then you are simply ignorant.

[Igor]

yes im saying a lot of the "specialities" of russian political culture come from the disastrous 90s and shit even before that and cant be separated from the economic issues and underdevelopment russia is facing

"russia is so shit" is not an useful narrative and calling it a shithole just reeks of arrogance

[Scheveningen]

yes im saying a lot of the "specialities" of russian political culture come from the disastrous 90s and shit even before that and cant be separated from the economic issues and underdevelopment russia is facing What would you call it, then?
You're blurring the line between understanding a political culture and justifying it.

[Igor]

i dont think im trying to justify anything here and id say that calling a country blankly a shithole isnt an attempt to in any way understand a political culture or ever work towards it improvement

[Comrade Hadrian]

Anyone got any numbers on these fringe elements? What's the Russian version of the Southern Poverty Law Center?

[Tim Cornelis]

I'm not purporting to try and give a theoretical narrative of Russia's political culture. Just casually commenting on it.

[Igor]

it perhaps bothers me more than it should bc of the late political atmosphere of demonising russia to further western political goals and justify actions against russia which ive even see normally agreeable people go along with as opposed to even listening to say groups who do actual resistance in russia

[FSL]

Uh no. If you think that Russia is politically and political-culturally pretty much the same everywhere then you are simply ignorant.


The centrist and conservatives in Western Europe can be depressing sometimes, but jesus christ, it must be unbelievably depressing to live in Russia as communist.


"can be depressing sometimes" is how a supposed communist views capitalism it its last stage, a rapid decrease in the standard of living, constant interventions etc.
Because it's his country and in the end at least it's civilized.
Reeks of chauvinism I would say.

[Dodo]

tbh, its not so much to be fun being a commie in Turkey either. But I guess proper commie groups here have more voice despite their small numbers. unfortunately, the mass of "radical-left" is made up of chauvinistic types who repeats chants from 70s that are mostly anti-imperialist and nationalist in their nature rather than class-struggle oriented.
There is a considerable amount of racism towards Kurdish movements(rather than solidarity) in many left groups as well....when appealing to mass culture, a lot of radical leftists will have a nationalist rhetoric to meet with masses somewhere.
Even those who are "communists" are of course falling into something I hate, the classical dogmatizations of theory...militancy is way bigger than theoretical basis.
Thats 3rd world Marxism for you.

Meanwhile the country is still ruled by corrupt oligarchs....

[Minsk]

My girlfriend is a member of the KPRF, and I've personally visited her branch's headquarters, and they were pretty normal and openly and vigorously discussed revolutionary movements, feminism, anti-imperialism, and other such topics.

On gay rights, they referred to Engels' writings regarding gays and called homosexuality a bourgeois tendency. This is not outside of the Marxist tradition, so I don't see why anyone in the Marxist tradition denounces them for it (perhaps they are backwards, but not anti-Marxist). I am not saying that they are right, but they are not going against Marxism by taking this line.

Also, unlike you guys, I praise Russia for having both a far-right and far-left that is sympathetic towards Communism. Communism itself negates all forms of oppression, so the logical course both the Russian far-right and far-left are taking is towards freedom, equality, and tolerance. You people cannot get out of your shells enough to realize that this is a good thing and not a bad thing...

[Minsk]

Perhaps 10 years ago Russia was full of druggies and hooligans that would mug you, but it is unlikely that you'll run into it anymore. I've been to Russia, and I recommend the country to all of you. I met Chinese students studying there and they said they never witnessed an instance of racism. Russia has the second largest immigrant population in the world. Xenophobia is a natural reaction to immigration in bourgeois-dominated cultures, but Russia fairs far better with this than Europe or America.

[motion denied]

both a far-right and far-left that is sympathetic towards Communism. [...] so the logical course both the Russian far-right and far-left are taking is towards freedom, equality, and tolerance.

I suppose something is terribly wrong then.

[Comrade Hadrian]

On gay rights, they referred to Engels' writings regarding gays and called homosexuality a bourgeois tendency. This is not outside of the Marxist tradition, so I don't see why anyone in the Marxist tradition denounces them for it (perhaps they are backwards, but not anti-Marxist). I am not saying that they are right, but they are not going against Marxism by taking this line.

Lenin doesn't seem to comment directly on the issue one way or another. But, there appears to be an indirect reference to homosexuality in a third-party source. It comes from the German Marxist Clara Zetkin.



But active Communist women are busy discussing sex problems and the forms of marriage ‘past, present and future’. They consider it their most important task to enlighten working women on these questions. It is said that a pamphlet on the sex question written by a Communist authoress from Vienna enjoys the greatest popularity. What rot that booklet is! The workers read what is right in it long ago in Bebel. Only not in the tedious, cut-and-dried form found in the pamphlet but in the form of gripping agitation that strikes out at bourgeois society. The mention of Freud’s hypotheses is designed to give the pamphlet a scientific veneer, but it is so much bungling by an amateur. Freud’s theory has now become a fad. I mistrust sex theories expounded in articles, treatises, pamphlets, etc. in short, the theories dealt with in that specific literature which sprouts so luxuriantly on the dung heap of bourgeois society. I mistrust those who are always absorbed in the sex problems, the way an Indian saint is absorbed In the contemplation of his navel.

It seems to me that this superabundance of sex theories, which for the most part are mere hypotheses, and often quite arbitrary ones, stems from a personal need. It springs from the desire to justify one’s own abnormal or excessive sex life before bourgeois morality and to plead for tolerance towards oneself. This veiled respect for bourgeois morality is as repugnant to me as rooting about in all that bears on sex. No matter how rebellious and revolutionary it may be made to appear, it is in the final analysis thoroughly bourgeois. Intellectuals and others like them are particularly keen on this. There is no room for it in the Party, among the class-conscious, fighting proletariat.

[Tim Cornelis]

Minsk, go elsewhere with your terrible politics. The KPRF argues that the motherland is essentially subject to foreign domination, and is therefore an oppressed country. It therefore has no qualms with cooperating with the national bourgeoisie against foreign capital, and it does so clouded in chauvinist rhetoric. The KPRF does its very best to marry the working class to the bourgeoisie. Not only do you support such a social-chauvinistic monstrosity, you also have no problems with various far-right political formations. Based on this it's safe to guess that your politics have very little in common with Marxism and communism. That "both a far-right and far-left that is sympathetic towards Communism" is simply inaccurate. There's a far-right that wants to instrumentally employ Stalinism to stage a national rebirth (palingensis, see palingenetic ultra-nationalism) -- they have no interest in communism.


"can be depressing sometimes" is how a supposed communist views capitalism it its last stage, a rapid decrease in the standard of living, constant interventions etc.
Because it's his country and in the end at least it's civilized.
Reeks of chauvinism I would say.

What asinine nonsense. I am a "supposed communist", says the bourgeois-socialist Stalinist, no doubt a supporter of a 'Communist' Party which conceives of the first-phase of communism as a system based on monetary-commodity exchange facilitated by a state! Laughable, if it weren't so sad that this is the (counter-revolutionary) face of so-called communism today. Capitalism being in its last stage (it has been so since circa 1850 apparently) is overly optimistic if the largest 'anticapitalist' movements in Europe propose the state monopolisation of capital, and not its abolition.

Greece is another story, but there's no rapid decrease in the standard of living here. And neither is the (vast) majority of people depressed, so lamenting me for saying Western Europe can be "depressing sometimes" is simply premised on the counter-factual.

Lastly, my comments were concerned with the political culture of Russia, steeped in the far-right. So where is the chauvinism in recognising that political-culturally Russia is terrible? It seems like a terrible excuse to play on sympathies for infantile anti-Westernism more like.

[John Nada]

Lenin doesn't seem to comment directly on the issue one way or another. But, there appears to be an indirect reference to homosexuality in a third-party source. It comes from the German Marxist Clara Zetkin.
(...)The workers read what is right in it long ago in Bebel. Only not in the tedious, cut-and-dried form found in the pamphlet but in the form of gripping agitation that strikes out at bourgeois society.(...)

Here's what August Bebel thought about sodomy laws:
The number of these persons is so great and reaches so far into all levels of society, that if the police here scrupulously carried out their duty, the Prussian State would immediately be compelled to build two new penitentiaries just to take care of those offenses against Paragraph 175 that are committed in Berlin alone. (Commotion. Hear! Hear! )

That is not an exaggeration, Herr von Levetzow; it has to do with thousands of persons from all walks of life. But then it further raises the question of whether the provisions of Paragraph 175 should apply not only to men, but also to women who on their part commit the same offense. What is just in the case of one sex, is fair for the other. But gentlemen, I'll tell you this: if in this area the Berlin police did their duty all the way — I want to say a word about this — then there would be a scandal such as the world have never known, a scandal compared with which the Panama scandal, the Dreyfus scandal, the Lützow-Ledert and the Tausch-Normann scandals are pure child's play. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why the offense punishable under this Paragraph is treated with such extraordinary laxity on the part of the police. Gentlemen, Paragraph 175 is part of the penal code, and because it is there, it must be enforced. However, if for whatever reasons this part of the criminal law cannot be enforced, or can be enforced only selectively, then the question arises whether this provision of the penal code can equitably be retained. I wish to venture that in this very session — perhaps some of the gentlemen may not yet have taken note of it — we have before us a printed petition signed by me personally, among others, and by a number of colleagues from other parties, and further by people from literary and academic circles, by jurists of the most illustrious standing, by psychologists and pathologists, by experts of the highest rank in this field. The petition, for reasons that understandably I don't wish to go into fully at this moment, advocated a revision of the penal code so as to repeal the relevant provisions of Paragraph 175.Source: http://www.marxists.org/archive/bebel/1898/01/13.htm

And this what Lenin and even Stalin thought of Bebel: http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1913/aug/08.htm http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1910/03/23.htm

Opposing homophobia isn't something new to Marxism. Marxist early on opposed homophobia, with the Soviet Union legalizing homosexual relations way before the US did.

Marx and Engels weren't infallible. You can find them making what's now regarded as sexist, anti-Semitic and racist comments. Does this mean racist, sexist and anti-Semitic programs and laws should be supported? No.

Yes, at the time it was regarded as sexual deviation or a mental illness at best, but in 2014 it's now know to be natural variations, like being left-handed, right-handed or ambidextrous. Homophobia and transphobia is anti-socialist and anti-Marxist bigotry based on religious superstition, patriarchal prejudices, and outdated Western pseudo-science. Marx's and Engels's homophobia was a deviation from their own theories at best.

[prap]

Too bad the majority of russians are too proud to protest their corrupt regime.

[Gulag Simulator 2000]

Lenin doesn't seem to comment directly on the issue one way or another. But, there appears to be an indirect reference to homosexuality in a third-party source. It comes from the German Marxist Clara Zetkin.

thank you for that lenin quote, it sums up quite nicely what s wrong with an immense majority of first world "feminists", trying to justify their decadent idiocies with theory

[Comrade Hadrian]

Here's what August Bebel thought about sodomy laws

Considering Lenin is addressing the German Marxist Clara Zetkin and talking about women in general, I would venture to guess the text Lenin had in mind was Bebel's "Women and Socialism."


Opposing homophobia isn't something new to Marxism. Marxist early on opposed homophobia, with the Soviet Union legalizing homosexual relations way before the US did.

There doesn't actually seem to be any early unified Marxist view of homosexuals. Engels, writing a letter to Marx about the famous homosexual advocate Karl Heinrich Ulrichs and one of his works. Engels just immediately associates Ulrich's "Urning" with pedophilia and child-rape.


The Urning you sent me is a very curious thing. These are extremely unnatural revelations. The paederasts [homosexual paedophiles] are beginning to count themselves, and discover that they are a power in the state. Only organisation was lacking, but according to this source it apparently already exists in secret. And since they have such important men in all the old parties and even in the new ones, from Rosing to Schweitzer, they cannot fail to triumph. Guerre aux cons, paix aus trous-de-cul [war on the ****s, peace to the arse-holes] will now be the slogan. It is a bit of luck that we, personally, are too old to have to fear that, when this party wins, we shall have to pay physical tribute to the victors. But the younger generation! Incidentally it is only in Germany that a fellow like this can possibly come forward, convert this smut into a theory, and offer the invitation: introite [enter], etc. Unfortunately, he has not yet got up the courage to acknowledge publicly that he is ‘that way’, and must still operate coram publico‘ from the front’, if not ‘going in from the front’ as he once said by mistake. But just wait until the new North German Penal Code recognises the droits du cul [rights of the arse-hole] then he will operate quite differently. Then things will go badly enough for poor frontside people like us, with our childish penchant for females. If Schweitzer could be made useful for anything, it would be to wheedle out of this peculiar honourable gentleman the particulars of the paederasts in high and top places, which would certainly not be difficult for him as a brother in spirit.

Perhaps this is what Bebel had in mind with a scandal that would dwarf "the Panama scandal, the Dreyfus scandal, the Lützow-Ledert and the Tausch-Normann scandals" as "pure child's play." In any case, Engel's distaste for homosexuality isn't merely expressed in private correspondce, but probably his most important independent theoretical contribution, his Origins of the Family:


This Athenian family became in time the accepted model for domestic relations, not only among the Ionians, but to an increasing extent among all the Greeks of the mainland and colonies also. But, in spite of locks and guards, Greek women found plenty of opportunity for deceiving their husbands. The men, who would have been ashamed to show any love for their wives, amused themselves by all sorts of love affairs with hetairai; but this degradation of the women was avenged on the men and degraded them also, till they fell into the abominable practice of sodomy [Knabenliebe] and degraded alike their gods and themselves with the myth of Ganymede.

There are a few other quotes in private corresponce, but they are not really worth mentioning. The reference to Ganymede makes the association of homosexuality with pedophilia explicit, as Ganymede was taken up to Olympus by Zeus was see as a reference to pedophilia even among the ancient Greeks. Plato has Socrates deny the association in his Phaedrus, showing that the myth of Ganymede indeed served to normalize pedophilia.

In another thread on the Sparts, the subject of the 1922 removal of age of consent laws came up. This is what I wrote:


This is an interesting narrative. Could you cite some scholarly material on the subject?

To my knowledge, the whole story behind the 1922 Soviet criminal code remains obscure. When the "Left" Socialist-Revolutionaries pulled out of the Justice Commissariat in protest of Brest-Litovsk, the drafting of the new code went primarily to a handful of Bolsheviks who took over the Justice Commissariat and the Institute of Soviet Law. Most of these people were also heavily involved in the 1919 trial of pedophile-priest Bishop Palladii. The original documents under review, written by Kozlovskii, did have references to age of consent and kiddy-rape.


Yes, at the time it was regarded as sexual deviation or a mental illness at best

The early Soviet attitude seems to largely see homosexuality as a mental issue as well. They put the pedophile-priest Bishop Palladii under psychological evaulation before giving him an early release.


but in 2014 it's now know to be natural variations, like being left-handed, right-handed or ambidextrous.

You should read more Queer theory.

[Atsumari]

I normally think incredibly lowly of Russian Marxist-Leninists and most of their leftists in general as simple nationalists, but the Russian Maoist Party seems to break that trend.
They oppose Russian imperialism and nationalism and believe that the country should decolonize its national borders, the Caucasus in particular, and demand that all migrant workers be legalized. They also acknowledge problems of anti-Semitism and Islamphobia, something many Russian "leftist" normally promote rather than condemn. Most surprisingly of all, they believe that feminism and LGBT rights are important for the undermining of capitalism and even put out an article called "Gay Slavs, they also need a Revolution."
From what I also gathered, their stance on Ukraine is also pretty impressive. They condemn Putin's actions as being imperialistic and called out the demagoguery and fear mongering about fascism as an excuse for Russian interests.
This is very impressive for any Marxist-Leninist/anti-Revisionist group, especially one in Russia out of all places.

[Tim Cornelis]

Who would've thought that a Maoist party would be the light of hope in an otherwise bleak and grim political landscape. (Maoists I guess)

[Dire Helix]

Russian Maoist Party consists of just two people - the chairman and his subordinate. The former pens articles on revisionism when he isn't busy visiting anime conventions.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Who would've thought that a Maoist party would be the light of hope in an otherwise bleak and grim political landscape. (Maoists I guess)
I think Maoists are often more strongly attached to a particular, somewhat more coherent theoretical approach (one which I don't really matched with China's governing ideology, but whatever). Stalinists seem more drawn by sheer aesthetics. Hence so many "Marxist-Leninists" jumping to support a bunch of Russian speakers proclaiming a "people's republic" in Donetsk supported by Russian state firepower.

That said, the personality cultishness of many (most? all?) Maoists is more than a little grating. I highly doubt that doesn't extend to the folks in Russia.

[Atsumari]

Russian Maoist Party consists of just two people - the chairman and his subordinate. The former pens articles on revisionism when he isn't busy visiting anime conventions.
lol do tell more
And I had my hopes up for a second

[FSL]

Minsk, go elsewhere with your terrible politics. The KPRF argues that the motherland is essentially subject to foreign domination, and is therefore an oppressed country. It therefore has no qualms with cooperating with the national bourgeoisie against foreign capital, and it does so clouded in chauvinist rhetoric. The KPRF does its very best to marry the working class to the bourgeoisie. Not only do you support such a social-chauvinistic monstrosity, you also have no problems with various far-right political formations. Based on this it's safe to guess that your politics have very little in common with Marxism and communism. That "both a far-right and far-left that is sympathetic towards Communism" is simply inaccurate. There's a far-right that wants to instrumentally employ Stalinism to stage a national rebirth (palingensis, see palingenetic ultra-nationalism) -- they have no interest in communism.



What asinine nonsense. I am a "supposed communist", says the bourgeois-socialist Stalinist, no doubt a supporter of a 'Communist' Party which conceives of the first-phase of communism as a system based on monetary-commodity exchange facilitated by a state! Laughable, if it weren't so sad that this is the (counter-revolutionary) face of so-called communism today. Capitalism being in its last stage (it has been so since circa 1850 apparently) is overly optimistic if the largest 'anticapitalist' movements in Europe propose the state monopolisation of capital, and not its abolition.

Greece is another story, but there's no rapid decrease in the standard of living here. And neither is the (vast) majority of people depressed, so lamenting me for saying Western Europe can be "depressing sometimes" is simply premised on the counter-factual.

Lastly, my comments were concerned with the political culture of Russia, steeped in the far-right. So where is the chauvinism in recognising that political-culturally Russia is terrible? It seems like a terrible excuse to play on sympathies for infantile anti-Westernism more like.
Don't you know capitalism is in it's imperialistic stage? That practically every part of the economy is controlled by capitalist corporations and that every worker, in your country as much as in any other, has surplus value extratced daily?

And you say there is no depression among the people in your country? How backward and moronic are the people in your country then? They can't understand the situation they're in? Even if they don't feel any sadness for themselves, do they feel any sympathy for all the victims of the dutch capital, millions and millions aroundthe world? It sounds like you're describing the most sheepish, despicable people there. What are their problems? Reality shows I'd imagine.




The political and cultural level is not the result of national backwardness or national progressiveness. That is the chauvinist's point of view who'll start talking about the "white man's burden" etc. It's born out of the base of the society, the economy. And the economy is ran by oligarchs in Russia just as it is ran by oligarchs in the Netherlands. And Russians are relatively comfortable with the heavy-handedness of their oligarchs just as you (a communist!) or other dutch people are relatively comfortable with the heavy-handedness of your capitalists. So comfortable you are now able to ignore it like it isn't even there.

[Tim Cornelis]

Don't you know capitalism is in it's imperialistic stage? That practically every part of the economy is controlled by capitalist corporations and that every worker, in your country as much as in any other, has surplus value extratced daily?

And you say there is no depression among the people in your country? How backward and moronic are the people in your country then? They can't understand the situation they're in? Even if they don't feel any sadness for themselves, do they feel any sympathy for all the victims of the dutch capital, millions and millions aroundthe world? It sounds like you're describing the most sheepish, despicable people there. What are their problems? Reality shows I'd imagine.




The political and cultural level is not the result of national backwardness or national progressiveness. That is the chauvinist's point of view who'll start talking about the "white man's burden" etc. It's born out of the base of the society, the economy. And the economy is ran by oligarchs in Russia just as it is ran by oligarchs in the Netherlands. And Russians are relatively comfortable with the heavy-handedness of their oligarchs just as you (a communist!) or other dutch people are relatively comfortable with the heavy-handedness of your capitalists. So comfortable you are now able to ignore it like it isn't even there.

Learn to read please, firstly.

Secondly, your whole attempt to paint this with the 'chauvinist' brush is pathetic.

[Comrade Hadrian]

Russian Maoist Party consists of just two people - the chairman and his subordinate. The former pens articles on revisionism when he isn't busy visiting anime conventions.

They're probably a satellite of the American Democratic Party.

[FSL]

Learn to read please, firstly.

Secondly, your whole attempt to paint this with the 'chauvinist' brush is pathetic.

You're right, I shouldn't bother you when you're trying to educate nations (other than your own, which is after all not so bad).

[Lord Testicles]

You're right, I shouldn't bother you when you're trying to educate nations (other than your own, which is after all not so bad).

:rolleyes:

I don't think anyone was trying to "educate nations" you fucking boob.

[Tim Cornelis]

You're right, I shouldn't bother you when you're trying to educate nations (other than your own, which is after all not so bad).

I have no idea what motivates you to distort what I've written in this thread, but since it is plainly written in this thread, I don't feel the need to repeat myself. It suffices to say that an observation about the relative backwardness either economically, culturally, socially, or politically of a country is in no way in and of itself an indication of chauvinism. Of course, if you had a clue about my politics you would know how ridiculous this assertion of chauvinism is. Perhaps, as Stalinist, you are projecting your perceived own compatibility of socialism and nationalism/nation-state on me. If you are a member of the KKE, with its history of Greek nationalism, this would make all the more sense.

[Geiseric]

I've heard that it's very racist and hyper-nationalistic in Russia elsewhere.

At the same time, Russia as a government is quite anti-imperialist... well, when it isn't them doing the imperialism.

How much capital has Russia exported lately?

[Lord Testicles]

How much capital has Russia exported lately?

38,783 Million USD in October.

[John Nada]

Considering Lenin is addressing the German Marxist Clara Zetkin and talking about women in general, I would venture to guess the text Lenin had in mind was Bebel's "Women and Socialism."Yeah, I knew that. I just saw that he mentioned Bebel. Don't think Lenin had his speech on sodomy laws on his mind though.
There doesn't actually seem to be any early unified Marxist view of homosexuals. Engels, writing a letter to Marx about the famous homosexual advocate Karl Heinrich Ulrichs and one of his works. Engels just immediately associates Ulrich's "Urning" with pedophilia and child-rape.Yeah, this is unfortunate. Many Communist Parties did have incorrect views on LGBTQ, some still do, there's no denying this. But then again, their doesn't seem to be a unified view on imperialism, then or now.:unsure: Which is ridiculous.:glare:
Perhaps this is what Bebel had in mind with a scandal that would dwarf "the Panama scandal, the Dreyfus scandal, the Lützow-Ledert and the Tausch-Normann scandals" as "pure child's play." In any case, Engel's distaste for homosexuality isn't merely expressed in private correspondce, but probably his most important independent theoretical contribution, his Origins of the Family: Actually, I think Bebel's referring to Oscar Wilde's sodomy trial. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Wilde#Trials This caused a debate on the issue in the SPD.
You should read more Queer theory.Is there anything you'd recommend?
I have no idea what motivates you to distort what I've written in this thread, but since it is plainly written in this thread, I don't feel the need to repeat myself. It suffices to say that an observation about the relative backwardness either economically, culturally, socially, or politically of a country is in no way in and of itself an indication of chauvinism.You don't see how calling someone else country a shithole could be chauvinistic?

[theuproar]

Too bad the majority of russians are too proud to protest their corrupt regime.

A lot of Russians also have a dramatically different definition of what a "good" regime entails, also.

That said, as many times as I've traveled and stayed in Russia (several times a year for many years), I meet a large and varied population every time I go. I'm by no means claiming to be an expert on that country, but the majority of people I encounter are not racist, homophobic, or whatever else, as far as undesirable traits may go.

Do extremist groups exist? Yes. Are there racists and homophobes? Absolutely. But I honestly haven't seen much difference in their behavior than extremist groups in the US. I spent a good amount of time in my 20s as a SHARP, so I've encountered white supremacists directly and sometimes violently many times. Those crimes occur here, as well.

[FSL]

I have no idea what motivates you to distort what I've written in this thread, but since it is plainly written in this thread, I don't feel the need to repeat myself. It suffices to say that an observation about the relative backwardness either economically, culturally, socially, or politically of a country is in no way in and of itself an indication of chauvinism. Of course, if you had a clue about my politics you would know how ridiculous this assertion of chauvinism is. Perhaps, as Stalinist, you are projecting your perceived own compatibility of socialism and nationalism/nation-state on me. If you are a member of the KKE, with its history of Greek nationalism, this would make all the more sense.

Another thing that's funny is that Russia isn't particularly backward in any meaningful way. They're an industrialized economy with regular quasi-open elections, many political groups that are at least semi-tolerated and "civil rights" that at least don't pale in comparison to what we see in most countries. It's not Saudi Arabia or a military government in Latin America.

But it's the fact that it's imperialist and an adversary of european and american imperialism that feeds its negative presentation in some countries and also what motivates you to "write a paper about fascist involvement in the project of 'Novorossiya', and this obviously brings me to Russian politics as well" and then call it a shithole.
If what you were interested in was generally denouncing backwardness perhaps you'd be more inclined to target Somalia or something.


What's worse, that you toe the line of your relatively civilized rulling class or that you aren't remotely aware of it?
You're so much closer to the Putin-loving Russians than you'd like to think. Just born a few miles to the west, that's all.

[Illegalitarian]

Tim clearly didn't mean this in a nationalist way, he was merely pointing out that Russia's entire economy blatantly belongs to only a small handful of people and that it's political culture, even on the most basic social level, is extremely corrupt and very right-wing, more so than most other major industrial nations on earth.

This is objectively true and saying that Russia is "just as bad as any other country" is kind of fucking ridiculous in that regard

[John Nada]

Tim clearly didn't mean this in a nationalist way, he was merely pointing out that Russia's entire economy blatantly belongs to only a small handful of people and that it's political culture, even on the most basic social level, is extremely corrupt and very right-wing, more so than most other major industrial nations on earth.

This is objectively true and saying that Russia is "just as bad as any other country" is kind of fucking ridiculous in that regardI don't know about Russia being among the worst. The US is a de facto two-party country, and the Democrats and Republicans are more like two factions in one party. The Republicans have an openly homophobic and xenophobic platform, cater to racists and Christian extremist, and tolerate fascist elements. I mean their last president, Bush, said that invading Iraq was for God! As did Tony Blair.

The Democrats aren't as bad(still bad), but they support imperialist intervention just as much and provide temped opposition to bigotry at best. They were behind starting the wars in Korea and Vietnam, and were a driving force to enforce neo-liberal "reforms" and the drug war.

What chauvinism means:
1: excessive or blind patriotism — compare jingoism

2: undue partiality or attachment to a group or place to which one belongs or has belonged

3: an attitude of superiority toward members of the opposite sex; also : behavior expressive of such an attitude#2 could apply. Often people pick up prejudices from their community without even realizing it. It just seems similar to the whole "evil Russians" trope built up during the cold war. It helps to be aware of any prejudices one may have, even subconscious ones.

The US and their imperialist allies have an interest in demonizing rival imperialists, as do rival imperialists and their allies the other way. Just look at who's usually the bad guys in movies and video games, who's usually the antagonist? Middle Easterner, Indigenous Americans, Latinos, East Asians, Slavs, and Blacks. The protagonists, usually a White American.

Does this mean a bourgeois regimes or reactionaries of another country, are about criticism? No, though it'd be best with input from someone knowledgeable about the area, and/or with the awareness not to let propaganda, common prejudices and stereotypes cloud their judgement.

[Geiseric]

38,783 Million USD in October.

Thats a fraction of what the US manages. Attempting to put Russia on par as an "imperialist" power is far fetched. Thinking , for a second Russia could beat the US is even more ridiculous. I mean that's like saying Mexico could beat the US in a war.

[Illegalitarian]

America absolutely has problems akin to Russia's, but we can point to only a handful of Russian businessmen who own extremely large swaths of not only Russian business, but Russia itself. The Russian oligarchs are world famous.

Russian nationalism is far more violent and prevalent among its extremists, as well (they have, on average, way more politically and racially motivated crime than most other countries of their stature), and while the Republicans do tote an openly homophobic and racist party line, it is straight up illegal to display any sort of homosexual attitudes in Russia.


I think having a pissing context over whose shitty country is more shitty is ultimately a fruitless endeavor, but again, I can't see how the argument could be made that Russia is just as bad as anywhere else in the sense Tim is referring to.

I don't think this makes it any more or less of a shithole than anywhere else, but is it on the same level as everywhere else, exactly? Nah

[John Nada]

Thats a fraction of what the US manages. Attempting to put Russia on par as an imperialist power is far fetched. Thinking , for a second Russia could beat the US is even more ridiculous. I mean that's like saying Mexico could beat the US in a war.Russia has nukes. They could seriously fuck up the US, though the US would fuck them up too.

Imperialism doesn't mean just the US and their allies. Opposing the US doesn't make them an oppressed nation, it's just means they're a rival imperialist. Here's Lenin's definition:
(1) the concentration of production and capital has developed to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life; (2) the merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation, on the basis of this “finance capital”, of a financial oligarchy; (3) the export of capital as distinguished from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance; (4) the formation of international monopolist capitalist associations which share the world among themselves, and (5) the territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers is completed. Imperialism is capitalism at that stage of development at which the dominance of monopolies and finance capital is established; in which the export of capital has acquired pronounced importance; in which the division of the world among the international trusts has begun, in which the division of all territories of the globe among the biggest capitalist powers has been completed.[quote]All apply to Russia. Monopolies, financial oligarchy, export of capital, associations with other imperialist to share the world with, and territorial division of the world(neo-colonies and internal colonies).

Imperialism is what capitalist strive for. Just because Yeltsin's counter-revolution(which Putin helped with) drove the former soviet nations into the ground doesn't exempt them from the capitalist tendency towards imperials. Italy and Japan weren't even close to the US, yet they were still imperialist. Lenin called Italy the "poor man's imperialist".

And this is what makes the US(NATO) and Russia(SCO) beef so worrying. Because imperialist eventually clash.[quote=Illegalitarian]America absolutely has problems akin to Russia's, but we can point to only a handful of Russian businessmen who own extremely large swaths of not only Russian business, but Russia itself. The Russian oligarchs are world famous.There's a capitalist oligarchy in the US too. The US is imperialist after all. Though the US one's can hid behind the whole, "job creator" and "captains of industry" bullshit. In Russia it's just so blatant because they clearly just got rich off the work of the Soviet people through corruption.
Russian nationalism is far more violent and prevalent among its extremists, as well (they have, on average, way more politically and racially motivated crime than most other countries of their stature), and while the Republicans do tote an openly homophobic and racist party line, it is straight up illegal to display any sort of homosexual attitudes in Russia.Hate crimes are probably under-counted in both the US and Russia, though maybe Russia's worse in that regard, I don't know. I remember reading that over 1000 black people are murdered in the US by cops, security guards and vigilantes.

The hate groups are pretty prevalent in the US too. The SPLC claims there's there's over a thousand hate groups in the US, many of them armed militias.

A lot of Russia's rightist groups were promoted by the US government because they were "poor persecuted dissidents" who opposed the Soviets and late Russia. Russia used to prosecute them and complained that the US was sheltering them in the name of "free speech." Now many of them are useful idiots for the Kremlin.

With the homophobic laws in Russia, homosexuality isn't banned exactly. It some bullshit called "spreading propaganda on unnatural sexual relations to children" It's legal, just don't let the kids know.:rolleyes: It's still bullshit because it's going to be abused if it hasn't already, and it makes it hard for LGBTQ groups to help LGBTQ minors and spread awareness on Queer rights. This law was pushed for by US Christians in contact with the Russian Orthodox Church. They've tried to get similar laws passed in the US, and people are still prosecuted for sodomy to this day, even though the Supreme Court struck down all sodomy laws.
I think having a pissing context over whose shitty country is more shitty is ultimately a fruitless endeavor, but again, I can't see how the argument could be made that Russia is just as bad as anywhere else in the sense Tim is referring to.Yeah, I think it's stupid too. But the thing is the US and NATO are in a propaganda war with SCO countries. Rival imperialist naturally hate each other, and it reflects in the media(including the internet). The whole "Russia suck!" thing is exactly what the rival imperialist want to throw out there. This doesn't mean we should just applaud everyone who opposes "our own" imperialist, just that neither side has the people in mind.

The Putin clique and their fascist allies needs to be opposed too, but there's not much influence most people posting here can do about Russia. There's probably groups in Russia that are possibly in a better position to fight "their own" imperialist and reactionaries. All I can do is try in my own country, who doesn't give a fuck about the Russian people and would gladly support an even bigger reactionary asshole if they were willing to serve them. And they're willing to go to war for competing imperialist goals, which would not help progressive groups in Russia, the US and their allies.
I don't think this makes it any more or less of a shithole than anywhere else, but is it on the same level as everywhere else, exactly? NahI don't think the US and it's allies are much better. They're all just different types of fucked up shit. Any "freedom" in the US and their allies is negated by the their fucked up foreign policy. Which pisses me off, because I try to think of a country to escape to, but see that they're all fucked up.

[FSL]

Tim clearly didn't mean this in a nationalist way, he was merely pointing out that Russia's entire economy blatantly belongs to only a small handful of people and that it's political culture, even on the most basic social level, is extremely corrupt and very right-wing, more so than most other major industrial nations on earth.

This is objectively true and saying that Russia is "just as bad as any other country" is kind of fucking ridiculous in that regard

"he was merely pointing out that Russia's entire economy blatantly belongs to only a small handful of people"

So... capitalism?


No, Russia isn't objectively worse. Russia is subjectively worse according to people infatuated with the european and american rulling classes and subjectively better according to people infatuated with russian oligarchs.

[FSL]

Thats a fraction of what the US manages. Attempting to put Russia on par as an "imperialist" power is far fetched. Thinking , for a second Russia could beat the US is even more ridiculous. I mean that's like saying Mexico could beat the US in a war.

Why would it need to be "on par"? It's not the strongest imperialist out there but its capitalism is certainly on that stage. The economy is dominated by major companies formed by the fusion of financial and industrial capital and capital that can't find profitable investments in the country is headed elsewhere. Imperialism isn't about military might, it's an economic term. Don't confuse it with waging war simply because a part of imperialism (exporting capital) is often done through force.

[FSL]

America absolutely has problems akin to Russia's, but we can point to only a handful of Russian businessmen who own extremely large swaths of not only Russian business, but Russia itself. The Russian oligarchs are world famous.
They own "russia itself" unlike those holy american multi-billionaire capitalists who would never order the congress to wage wars and pass laws that protect their profits. How much money did oil companies make under Bush or insurance/healthcare/renewable energy companies under Obama? Probably enough to finance centuries of lobbying.


This is a great illustration of my point. Some of you people completely whitewash your rulling classes. This is exactly what Russians or Russophiles who adore Putin do. You are no different and when you say that Russians are on average "more nationalist", you exhibit the same nationalism you accuse them of.

[Ocean Seal]

I think the reason that we find Russia so depressing is that we always assume that there is some real progressive presence there because of the way that people used to live. Now follow me on this, a lot of the shit that we campaign for in the West, was given to people in Russia, immigrants poured into Russia and faced little discrimination in the 60's and 70's, and women's rights were strongly campaigned for. Now the Russian orthodox church is in full swing, Russian workers have very little guaranteed to them, racism has grown to the point where violence is to be expected chronically, etc.

[The Disillusionist]

Revleft.... where according to single-minded "comrades," Russia is bad but North Korea isn't, because one totalitarian "Communist" regime failed, while the other one still exists. :rolleyes:

No offense to the majority of you, I'm only really referring to like 2 or 3 people.

[Rafiq]

I think the reason that we find Russia so depressing is that we always assume that there is some real progressive presence there because of the way that people used to live. Now follow me on this, a lot of the shit that we campaign for in the West, was given to people in Russia, immigrants poured into Russia and faced little discrimination in the 60's and 70's, and women's rights were strongly campaigned for. Now the Russian orthodox church is in full swing, Russian workers have very little guaranteed to them, racism has grown to the point where violence is to be expected chronically, etc.

This is an interesting deduction, but ultimately, it is wrong. It fails to take into account for the fact that Russia and the reactionary politics which thrive in it does not exist in a vacuum. The Russian state, as it did during the 19th century, represents reaction for Europe in general - presently, the battle between different reactionary national-bourgeois classes with the European Union is essentially a battle against global liberalism in general. If there is anything we have learned from the 20th century, it is that capital is more than happy to eat its own bearers (The enlightenment) if this proves necessary for its survival. We condemn Russia not because our expectations for the state which even throughout the 20th century fought vigorously to suppress the remnants of of its reactionary past are high, but because at this present moment Russia is the most reactionary power in all of Europe. Within a greater global context, Russia and China and the rogue states behind it represent a bloc which seeks the world state-apparatus and the establishment of a new, more efficient kind of capitalism which has no need even for formal freedom - in other words, barbarism.

That is not to say Communism in Russia is irrelevant. But that the application of 20th century Russian Communism in today's circumstances is not simply irrelevant, but reactionary. Russian Soviet nostalgia as it exists in a modern context could only ever be reactionary - former 'Communists', after all, are the best bearers of capitalism. Russia's reactionary predispositions did not arise out of nowhere in 1991 - they were present even throughout a good portion of the Soviet Union's existence. By Brezhnev, the historical necessity (necessity only existing in retrospect, of course) of either the destruction or mutation (the attempted coup during the 1990's proves this) of the Soviet state apparatus had become clear (You speak of the Orthodox Church today - but remember that it was well and alive in the Soviet Union by this time).

We cannot speak much of "progressive" states either - because again, it is precisely the western countries we would otherwise deem progressive that are taking the toll of political and ideological degeneracy (most ESPECIALLY in Europe).

[Lord Testicles]

Thats a fraction of what the US manages. Attempting to put Russia on par as an "imperialist" power is far fetched. Thinking , for a second Russia could beat the US is even more ridiculous. I mean that's like saying Mexico could beat the US in a war.

Dear Geiseric,

What do I have to do to be granted access into the "Geiseric Big Boy Imperialist club"?

Love, Vladimir P. XOXO

[Rafiq]

Revleft.... where according to single-minded "comrades," Russia is bad but North Korea isn't, because one totalitarian "Communist" regime failed, while the other one still exists. :rolleyes:


Why don't you provide examples of users on this website who are supportive of the North Korean state but don't harbor any sympathies with Russia (not simply the Russian state - the donetesk rebels and so on). Give us one fucking example. You can't.

While any support of North Korea might be laughable - absolutely nothing is more hilarious than those who prattle of "totalitarianism" - I might burst out laughing now. "Totalitarianism"? What a pathetic demonstration of intellectual weakness. So horrified are you, Lantz, that some states possessed a different (and therefore illegitimate) ideological state apparatus? To talk of totalitarianism is confirmation bias gone mad. I live in the United States. I can tell you now that the sheer gullibility and nativity of many people, the sheer lies and hypocrisy of official ideas, the overwhelming strength of ruling ideas (so powerful that it cannot even be recognized without a careful eye) makes the US, if we are going to talk of "totalitarianism" worse than any Communist state in the 20th century.

Why? In Communist states, the state was conscious about spreading propaganda, and so were the people. People were equipped with the mechanisms to understand ruling ideas for what they were. Communist states were precisely not ideological enough, evidently, all ideas were taken seriously by them, no matter where those ideas came from (i.e. even if they didn't come from "experts") even if met with great hostility. Sounds like an infinitely more "democratic" model of ideology to me.

But this is unsurprising coming from someone who believes ideology exists only in self-identified ideology, coming from someone who thinks we live in a society free from any ruling ideology - where music is just "music" which bears no real content. Ideology in music for Lantz can only mean intended messages or ideology - like some kind of conspiracy. For someone so ignorant yet so confident as Lantz there exists space outside of ideology in our society. You want to talk about laughable?

[Illegalitarian]

There's a capitalist oligarchy in the US too. The US is imperialist after all. Though the US one's can hid behind the whole, "job creator" and "captains of industry" bullshit. In Russia it's just so blatant because they clearly just got rich off the work of the Soviet people through corruption.

Right, but it's still far more blatant. It's not like it's worse because DAMMIT THIS IS MURICA AND WE AIN'T LIKE THEM RUSKIES, I think it has more to do with the fact that their capitalist model is still a baby (Yeah yeah the USSR was capitalist state capitalism blah blah blah blah, but there was still a clear difference between the USSR's state capitalism and capitalism in non-'socialist' nations). Their economy is kind of like how ours was in the late 19th and early 20th century, when only a handful of famous titans of industry had so much power and such huge monopolies over production and land (men like Ford, Morgan, the political machines in the heart of industrial America, etc).

If capitalism survives another 100 years Russia won't be much unlike the US in this regard, but there's still a huge difference. Wealth is way more concentrated in far fewer hands over there, and maybe the US is just as corrupt and just better at hiding it, but I'm not so sure.




Hate crimes are probably under-counted in both the US and Russia, though maybe Russia's worse in that regard, I don't know. I remember reading that over 1000 black people are murdered in the US by cops, security guards and vigilantes.

The hate groups are pretty prevalent in the US too. The SPLC claims there's there's over a thousand hate groups in the US, many of them armed militias.


The last I checked hate crimes were more prevalent there, but it wasn't a stark contrast.


A lot of Russia's rightist groups were promoted by the US government because they were "poor persecuted dissidents" who opposed the Soviets and late Russia. Russia used to prosecute them and complained that the US was sheltering them in the name of "free speech." Now many of them are useful idiots for the Kremlin.

With the homophobic laws in Russia, homosexuality isn't banned exactly. It some bullshit called "spreading propaganda on unnatural sexual relations to children" It's legal, just don't let the kids know.:rolleyes: It's still bullshit because it's going to be abused if it hasn't already, and it makes it hard for LGBTQ groups to help LGBTQ minors and spread awareness on Queer rights. This law was pushed for by US Christians in contact with the Russian Orthodox Church. They've tried to get similar laws passed in the US, and people are still prosecuted for sodomy to this day, even though the Supreme Court struck down all sodomy laws.


Well see the thing is, on top of its anti-LGBT (propaganda) laws, which do go after PDA and other open displays of homosexuality (you're not gonna find any gay pride parades in the region, I don't think), it's more a back a lack of laws protecting these people than anything else. There is very, very little in Russia in the way of laws protecting employer and legal discrimination against LGBT people, and there little is literally zero hate crime laws.

If there were a similar lack of laws in the US, it's possible we too would see just as if not higher levels of open discrimination, but it's hard to say. Fuck, if I were a better man I'd say that most southern businesses would still deny service to minorities if they were allowed.

Do you have any articles or anything I could read about US missionaries and other US influences promoting far-right agendas and anti-homosexuality in the country? I've been reading a lot lately on how Uganda's vicious anit-gay laws were inspired by US missionaries in the country, this would be in line with that I would say



Any "freedom" in the US and their allies is negated by the their fucked up foreign policy. Which pisses me off, because I try to think of a country to escape to, but see that they're all fucked up.

There are a lot of countries that aren't as fucked up as the US. Canada still clearly has its issues, but no where many as we do (I'd love to live in BC!). Europe would be tough without being great in whatever field you work in, or having a lot of cash.


I'd settle with living in Washington or Oregon, honestly. Even those places are far better than the south east.

[Illegalitarian]

"he was merely pointing out that Russia's entire economy blatantly belongs to only a small handful of people"

So... capitalism?


No, Russia isn't objectively worse. Russia is subjectively worse according to people infatuated with the european and american rulling classes and subjectively better according to people infatuated with russian oligarchs.

If you think this is some nationalist issue you've not been paying attention.

Wax on all you want, the concentration of capital and the levels of corrupting in business and politics in Russia are far greater than they are in the US. That doesn't mean our billionaires are "holy" (fuck you), it just means that Russia's capitalism is younger, and thus more outwardly vicious.

[The Disillusionist]

Why don't you provide examples of users on this website who are supportive of the North Korean state but don't harbor any sympathies with Russia (not simply the Russian state - the donetesk rebels and so on). Give us one fucking example. You can't.

While any support of North Korea might be laughable - absolutely nothing is more hilarious than those who prattle of "totalitarianism" - I might burst out laughing now. "Totalitarianism"? What a pathetic demonstration of intellectual weakness. So horrified are you, Lantz, that some states possessed a different (and therefore illegitimate) ideological state apparatus? To talk of totalitarianism is confirmation bias gone mad. I live in the United States. I can tell you now that the sheer gullibility and nativity of many people, the sheer lies and hypocrisy of official ideas, the overwhelming strength of ruling ideas (so powerful that it cannot even be recognized without a careful eye) makes the US, if we are going to talk of "totalitarianism" worse than any Communist state in the 20th century.

Why? In Communist states, the state was conscious about spreading propaganda, and so were the people. People were equipped with the mechanisms to understand ruling ideas for what they were. Communist states were precisely not ideological enough, evidently, all ideas were taken seriously by them, no matter where those ideas came from (i.e. even if they didn't come from "experts") even if met with great hostility. Sounds like an infinitely more "democratic" model of ideology to me.

But this is unsurprising coming from someone who believes ideology exists only in self-identified ideology, coming from someone who thinks we live in a society free from any ruling ideology - where music is just "music" which bears no real content. Ideology in music for Lantz can only mean intended messages or ideology - like some kind of conspiracy. For someone so ignorant yet so confident as Lantz there exists space outside of ideology in our society. You want to talk about laughable?

:rolleyes:

[Rafiq]

:rolleyes:

Excuse me, perhaps if these totalitarian countries espoused long discredited Malthusian reactionary drivel, they would have appeared more "open minded" to you.

How is it that I am yet again proven right? Remember when I attacked Lantz for his dismisal of ideology in music, everyone? Well surprise surprise, the same philistine logic that disallows him to see ideology in music, disallows him to see ideology in "science": http://www.revleft.com/vb/most-important-right-t191293/index.html?p=2803118#post2803118

This is why a comprehensive understanding of ideology is necessary. This is why Marxists do not regard anything simply for "what it is" - it's why so-called analytical philosophy is garbage. It's no surprise you can't even form a semblance of an argument: If you're not going to say anything, you coward, why do you even respond to my posts? Do you need to let everyone know that you disagree with them? As though we don't already? Who knows though, maybe your university professor will equip you with the mechanisms of actually forming an argument.

[The Disillusionist]

Excuse me, perhaps if these totalitarian countries espoused long discredited Malthusian reactionary drivel, they would have appeared more "open minded" to you.

How is it that I am yet again proven right? Remember when I attacked Lantz for his dismisal of ideology in music, everyone? Well surprise surprise, the same philistine logic that disallows him to see ideology in music, disallows him to see ideology in "science": http://www.revleft.com/vb/most-important-right-t191293/index.html?p=2803118#post2803118

This is why a comprehensive understanding of ideology is necessary. This is why Marxists do not regard anything simply for "what it is" - it's why so-called analytical philosophy is garbage. It's no surprise you can't even form a semblance of an argument: If you're not going to say anything, you coward, why do you even respond to my posts? Do you need to let everyone know that you disagree with them? As though we don't already? Who knows though, maybe your university professor will equip you with the mechanisms of actually forming an argument.

Remember that time that Rafiq made up his mind before the argument began, then was actually wrong, but convinced himself that he was right, because he misread/misinterpreted pretty much everything everyone else wrote? Remember when he refused to actually respond civilly and logically to anyone's attempts to discuss with him, instead flooding various threads with vicious attacks and polemic, unsubstantial ranting? Remember when he invented definitions to support his arguments and then called several people (not just me) stupid for disagreeing?

Actually, I'm guessing that no one actually remembers any of that, because this is the internet, and few people pay that much attention.

Anyway, I should know better than to feed this kind of discussion, but sometimes I just can't help myself.

[John Nada]

Right, but it's still far more blatant. It's not like it's worse because DAMMIT THIS IS MURICA AND WE AIN'T LIKE THEM RUSKIES, I think it has more to do with the fact that their capitalist model is still a baby (Yeah yeah the USSR was capitalist state capitalism blah blah blah blah, but there was still a clear difference between the USSR's state capitalism and capitalism in non-'socialist' nations). Their economy is kind of like how ours was in the late 19th and early 20th century, when only a handful of famous titans of industry had so much power and such huge monopolies over production and land (men like Ford, Morgan, the political machines in the heart of industrial America, etc).Strangely, I looked up the distribution of income and they're about equally unequal.

Russia:
Gini index:40
fourth 20%-21
Highest 10%-31
Highest 20%-47
Lowest 10%-3
Lowest 20%-6
Second 20%-11
Third 20%-15

US:
Gini index:41
Fourth 20%-23
Highest 10%-30
Highest 20%-46
Lowest 10%-1
Lowest 20%-5
Second 20%-10
Third 20%-16

Source:http://wdi.worldbank.org/table/2.9

So the US is about the same as Russia in terms of income distribution, only the US is slightly worse. Those fucking American oligarchs are robbing us blind!:laugh:
If capitalism survives another 100 years Russia won't be much unlike the US in this regard, but there's still a huge difference. Wealth is way more concentrated in far fewer hands over there, and maybe the US is just as corrupt and just better at hiding it, but I'm not so sure.I pray to Marx almighty that my descendants won't still have to live with capitalism 100 years from now. The whole solar system will be a dystopian nightmare, not just the US or Russia, more than it is now. They'll probably have developed mind control by then, so the proletariat can literally be their drones.:ohmy:
The last I checked hate crimes were more prevalent there, but it wasn't a stark contrast.I'll have to look into it. But I don't trust law enforcement anywhere.
Well see the thing is, on top of its anti-LGBT (propaganda) laws, which do go after PDA and other open displays of homosexuality (you're not gonna find any gay pride parades in the region, I don't think), it's more a back a lack of laws protecting these people than anything else. There is very, very little in Russia in the way of laws protecting employer and legal discrimination against LGBT people, and there little is literally zero hate crime laws.

If there were a similar lack of laws in the US, it's possible we too would see just as if not higher levels of open discrimination, but it's hard to say. Fuck, if I were a better man I'd say that most southern businesses would still deny service to minorities if they were allowed.

Do you have any articles or anything I could read about US missionaries and other US influences promoting far-right agendas and anti-homosexuality in the country? I've been reading a lot lately on how Uganda's vicious anit-gay laws were inspired by US missionaries in the country, this would be in line with that I would sayRight here: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/02/world-congress-families-russia-gay-rights The US seems like it's turning into the swamp of reactionary idea that start as tadpoles in the US, then turn into a big ass poisonous toad in other countries.
There are a lot of countries that aren't as fucked up as the US. Canada still clearly has its issues, but no where many as we do (I'd love to live in BC!). Europe would be tough without being great in whatever field you work in, or having a lot of cash.The thing is, those countries are held up by imperialism. The relatively less shittyness is based on others more shittyness. A lot of the very bad off countries are that way because of places like the US. It's the imperialist phase, even if it doesn't look like the pre-WWI map.
I'd settle with living in Washington or Oregon, honestly. Even those places are far better than the south east.Even? Especially, now that those propositions passed.:cool:

[Illegalitarian]

Strangely, I looked up the distribution of income and they're about equally unequal.

Russia:
Gini index:40
fourth 20%-21
Highest 10%-31
Highest 20%-47
Lowest 10%-3
Lowest 20%-6
Second 20%-11
Third 20%-15

US:
Gini index:41
Fourth 20%-23
Highest 10%-30
Highest 20%-46
Lowest 10%-1
Lowest 20%-5
Second 20%-10
Third 20%-16

Source:http://wdi.worldbank.org/table/2.9

So the US is about the same as Russia in terms of income distribution, only the US is slightly worse. Those fucking American oligarchs are robbing us blind!:laugh: I pray to Marx almighty that my descendants won't still have to live with capitalism 100 years from now. The whole solar system will be a dystopian nightmare, not just the US or Russia, more than it is now. They'll probably have developed mind control by then, so the proletariat can literally be their drones.:ohmy: I'll have to look into it. But I don't trust law enforcement anywhere.R

Hmm, so despite Russia having only a dozen or so lavish men owning the entire nation and it's economy and those men all being extremely corrupt and in collusion with the government, we're still about the same in the way of income inequality?

Let that sink in: America is on the same level of income inequality as a country that hasn't recovered from a 20 year old societal collapse, dominated by right-wing authoritarian thugs and a handful of businessmen. Ahahah holy SHIT.



As for those other countries, held up by imperialism as they may be, they would still be better to live in for the average person, I think BC is pretty famous for its bud, after all ;)

[Rafiq]

Remember that time that Rafiq made up his mind before the argument began, then was actually wrong, but convinced himself that he was right, because he misread/misinterpreted pretty much everything everyone else wrote? Remember when he refused to actually respond civilly and logically to anyone's attempts to discuss with him, instead flooding various threads with vicious attacks and polemic, unsubstantial ranting? Remember when he invented definitions to support his arguments and then called several people (not just me) stupid for disagreeing?


I love how you are so confident and secure in your ignorance that you think this is somehow O.K. - that Lantz is somehow someone so credible that he need not explain himself.

You're a coward - either give us some actual points or shut the fuck up. As far as anyone is concerned, nothing you say is worth shit.

[Decolonize The Left]

Just a friendly mod reminder for everyone to be cool and follow the rules.

Love, the BA.

Edit:
This goes for personal insults as well as troll posts which have no substance. Please try and discuss/dialogue and not argue.

[Rss]

Russian Maoist Party consists of just two people - the chairman and his subordinate. The former pens articles on revisionism when he isn't busy visiting anime conventions.

That's still leaps and bounds better than full-on collaborationist KPRF and more promising than RCWP-CPSU (I know good comrades from there though).