Stalin

[Hiero]

Alot of people criticise Stalin on the amount of deaths him and other Polit Buro members gave orders for. My question is for the Trots mainly, how else could history had of run if socialism was to be acheived. To have a permenant revolution the workers would take more control, yet we all know how backwards Russia was.

Stalin through the means of a party lead the class war on the backward peasant majority, for socialism to be a possibality the kulaks had to be destroyed as a class and any peasants aiding them. Marxism is class warfare, all Stalin did was bring class warfare to reactionary peasants and kulaks.

Trotsky theory would of been the same, to get the workers to power the class war would of been brought back to the Kulaks and the peasants. How can we be communist and criticise the actions taking by Stalin and what was the other solution that could be taken to the peasant problem.

[redstar2000]

This thread clearly belongs in the History forum.

So moved.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net)
A site about communist ideas

[Hiero]

I was deciding wether it was mean to be in histoyr of theory. I choose theory because it is a debate between Trotsky's theory in relation to the peasants and Stalins.

[Colombia]

How can you say Trotsky would do the same when no one can even be sure of it?

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 02:15 PM
How can you say Trotsky would do the same when no one can even be sure of it?
Well if he was a Marxist Leninist he would of had to do something to the peasant problem. But what would his solution be to the peasant problem.

[Colombia]

http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/sw.htm

[Kez]

It was a theory question, but these fucknut moderators are too stupid to understand.

The point is that Stalinism should not have kept "socialism in one country". As a consequence of isolating the workers revolution, and keeping it from spreading it, gave dire consequences to the internal situation of the USSR.

For example, by spreading the revolution, it would have increased the number of workers, as was meant to be the case when the German Revolution was being supported by Lenin. Had the German revolution succeeded it would have meant that German engineers would have been able to help the Russian infrustructure, the same for using engineers from newly liberated countries to aid the backward Russia.

The same applies today, socialism cannot be maintained in one country, as Korea and China show, apart from the fact that doing this creates a barrier to innovation from other possible socialist countries, it also means that in backward countries the Communist Party takes control rather than the workers, creating a degenerated workers state.

[Hiero]

We are not talking about Socialism in one country versus permanent revolution.

If Trotsky or anyone else had the majority of the party then what could they do. They still would of had to deal the kulaks, there are not going to dissapear by themselves.

[Kez]

the point was that Stalin created the situation of the kulaks and so on, had he been a socialist, he would not have faced these problems, remember how he used to rely on kulaks at one stage, then kill them, very zig zag policy...

[Wiesty]

............stalin was an ass.
killed 11,000,000 people
and thousands of members of the cccp.

dont argue with me, ive read enough and seen enough to know
you cant hide 11000000 deaths

[1949]

I tried to argue with Wiesty's claims in another History thread in the past, but he basically rejected everything I said off-hand, as well as everything said by maksym, who, like Wiesty, had Ukrainian ancestors. Perhaps he would listen to someone smarter, such as kasama/eat the world.


1) no one "denies" that there were food shortages in the Ukraine (both in 1921 and in 1931-32). And no one denies they were "man-made" -- in the sense that they were not caused by natural disasters (i.e. droughts, floods, locusts, crop blights.)

2) the issue is what was the social cause of these food shortages.

3) the allegation has been made (by anti-communists) that the Ukrainian famine was *deliberately* and consciously unleashed on the people of the ukraine (in the early thirties) as punishment and as a weapon of control. I.e. that it was a matter of genocide. This is the issue that is generally being raised when people discuss "the ukrainian famine."

This thesis was basically promoted by Robert conquest in his book, "The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine." And this thesis is now circulating as if it is "accepted truth."


4) In fact, this notion (that the famine in the ukraine was a genocide deliberately orchestrated by Stalin) is absurd and quite the opposite of the facts.

6) The communist party of the soviet union decided (in the late twenties) to lead a new advance for the revolution and the process of socializing production. they led millions of poor peasants in a movement to collectivize agriculture -- to gather productive forces together (to better modernize, create infrastructural projects) and further, to prevent the great widening of rich and poor gaps in the countryside (the growing exploitation of poor peasants by wealthier farmers and merchants.)

This was needed, desperately. The countryside was sliding into a new entrenched system of exploitation, and there was vast hoarding of food by rural conservatives which caused intense hardships in the urban areas, where the working class was being forced to return to rural areas just to live.

7) In addition (and this is important) a key part of the communist goal was to RAISE FOOD PRODUCTION -- to create a solid basis for the rapid expansion of socialist industry they were undertaking.

8) Not surprisingly, this process of collectivization was a process of great class struggle in the countryside. Some parts of the rural population supported it, some opposed it. And the opposition was particularly fierce in the western Ukraine (which had been violently opposed to the revolution in the first place, and was a deepseated place of conservatism, anti-semitism, religion etc. especially among the wealthiest farmers.)

9) On a massive scale, the rural reactionaries of the western ukraine responded by destroying livestock (rather than allow them to be collectivized) and sabotaging the harvesting process.

10) In other words -- the food shortages were caused by massive disruptions of food production during collectiviation. And the main source of this disruption was the anti-collectivizaiton actions of the counterrevolutionary parts of the population.

11) The simple facts show that it is absurd to think that Stalin WANTED food shortages. The whole Soviet project in the early 30s needed massive INCREASES in food production.

12) And it is absurd to blame the communists for the destruction of food stocks carried out by the anti-communists.

13) there is a larger method at work here: In anti-communist propaganda, all problems in a period of struggle are "crimes" of those who challenge the dominant order. If a revolutionary war breaks out (say in Peru, or Nepal, or the Philippines), the media says "30,000 people have died in a revolt by communists" (and people are supposed to believe that the communists KILLED 30,000 people, when in fact, the evidence always shows that the vast majority of deaths are caused by the governments and their brutal counterinsurgency methods.)

Or if a massive land reform takes place in china (1950-53) liberating 400 million peasants. And if, in hundreds of thousands of villages across china, peasants finally and excitedly get to try and punish landlords who have raped, and killed, and starved and literally tortured them for generations -- then the anti-communists say "Mao had millions of landlords killed in the early fifties" (even if this was a movement largely outside of central direction, and even if Mao, as an individual, did not "have" anyone killed.)

So if in a revolutionary movement of collectivization led by Stalin, a famine is caused by the counterrevolutionaries, this logic insists that the people who starved are killed by a "man made genocide of Stalin."

And a similar logic is used on the dislocations of the Russian civil war. Here is what we are told: The 1920-1 famine in the Ukraine was caused by the civil war. The civil war was caused by the revolution of 1917. the revolution was caused by lenin and the bolsheviks. Therefore (so goes this false logic) Lenin and the bolsheviks are to blame for the hunger of the 1920s -- and any deaths from war time famine are basically murders by communists.

It is a method that turns truth on its head. Reverses right and wrong, and blames the people for the crimes of their oppressors.

To get an idea of how absurd this is: you can add up all the dead of the U.S. civil war of 1860-65, all the casualties of the war, those who died because of the disruption of agriculture, and the awful conditions of prison camps, and the diseases caused by the dislocation of civil war etc. (which certainly is in the millions!) and simply say "Lincoln killed 10 million people during his presidency." (Since if Lincoln had not opposed the confederdacy, and if there had not been a movement against slavery, there would clearly not have been a civil war to cause such deaths.)
(emphasis added)

"Stalinist" critics. (http://awip.proboards23.com/index.cgi?board=politix&action=display&num=1069048940)

[ComradeChris]

I have to agree. Stalin himself allowed many people only on suspicion to be sent to the Gulags to work to death. He ordered the execution of the Bolsheviks because they may question HIS power. I don't know why people are trying to defend him. Sure their was a famine. But he himself ordered the death of millions.

[Wiesty]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 04:54 PM
I tried to argue with Wiesty's claims in another History thread in the past, but he basically rejected everything I said off-hand, as well as everything said by maksym, who, like Wiesty, had Ukrainian ancestors. Perhaps he would listen to someone smarter, such as kasama/eat the world.


(emphasis added)

"Stalinist" critics. (http://awip.proboards23.com/index.cgi?board=politix&action=display&num=1069048940)
k, you cant hide the fact that 11 000 000 people just went missing. It was not by natural causes. Stalin starved the people of their resources

god or ignorant

[1949]

Lies Concerning the History of the Soviet Union (http://www.northstarcompass.org/nsc9912/lies.htm)

In Search of a Soviet Holocaust (http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/vv.html)

[Maksym]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 03:44 PM
............stalin was an ass.
killed 11,000,000 people
and thousands of members of the cccp.

dont argue with me, ive read enough and seen enough to know
you cant hide 11000000 deaths
For your theory of Stalin murdering 11 million people to be valid, a rather large paper trail would be left behind. A paper trail of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of orders, plans and documents. Can you point me towards the direction of this paper trail? Plus, who did the body count for a 11 million? It is a western number so which organizations, such as the Red Cross, did an accurate body count during the famine? Can you provide this or not?

[Wiesty]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 09:46 PM
For your theory of Stalin murdering 11 million people to be valid, a rather large paper trail would be left behind. A paper trail of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of orders, plans and documents. Can you point me towards the direction of this paper trail? Plus, who did the body count for a 11 million? It is a western number so which organizations, such as the Red Cross, did an accurate body count during the famine? Can you provide this or not?
they were estimates, watch some video
u stalinist defenders disgust me

[Wiesty]

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/ukra.html

http://www.infoukes.com/history/famine/

http://www.infoukes.com/history/famine/links/

http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/Great_Famine/index.shtml

http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/Great_Famine/index.shtml

EVEN HERE ON OUR OWN SITE

http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=5200

is that enough info for you


stalinist scum.........

ev

[Maksym]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 11:03 PM
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/ukra.html

http://www.infoukes.com/history/famine/

http://www.infoukes.com/history/famine/links/

http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/Great_Famine/index.shtml

http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/Great_Famine/index.shtml

EVEN HERE ON OUR OWN SITE

http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=5200

is that enough info for you


stalinist scum.........

ev
No, since you failed to answer my questions.

[Hiero]

What the fuck are you people going on about?

I'm asking what was to be done?

To build socialism you cant have a backwards society, you must destroy the kulak class at one stage or another. Stalins method was very effected, it was class warfare with the giudance of a workers party. What was Trotsky going to do that would of have been any different but would result in the industrail USSR. Or was Trotsky going to elt the peasants crush the workers revolution.

Alot of people go own about killing the rich and how they will deserveit but when it comes to Stalin he is a monster.

[Hiero]

Fraud, Famine and Fascism The Ukrainian Genocide Myth from Hitler to Harvard (http://www.rationalrevolution.net/special/famine.htm)

I posted that in another thread. It explains some things. Like what the Nazi and Naiz sympathers had to do with the Unkraine and fabricating the lies about the Ukraine famine 1931 32. In fact Nazi's and sympathers were lving with post world war two imigrants in canada.

[Wiesty]

yes i know that the germans did use it as propoganda. Ive seen captured footage of the ukrainian famine, and the mass graves in bukovena forest. Watch the video Eternal Memory, it give proof that the famine actually happened.
Look up ukrainian Famine on google, but that is because like
What makes the Ukrainian "Famne" anymore differnet and unnoticible then the Jewish Holocaust. It was that the Jewish community had the money and were captures of an enemy nation, so therefore when aid arrived it was given, and believed

And the Ukrainians, which had no money, no resources, because everything had been sucked outta there land, could not advertise and tell the rest of the world the tragedies.

And stalin and the soviet union, was an ally of the big country USA, so whatever he told them, they would believe, and even if they did find out, no one was going to do anything to an ally.

[Wiesty]

more proof (http://www.jos-cu-ei.home.ro/index_files/Texte/Black%20famine%20in%20Ukraine.htm)

proof of famine (http://www.ukremb.com/ukrainian/famine/photodocuments/)

I have done my reasearch and found evidence of the ukrainian famine, please take a look at the pictures, picture 1 is a site of mass graves located somewhere in the ukraine, or former ussr. these are just a few

3-19 are documents, and if anyone can read ukrainian or if its russian, please breifly describe to us what they say.
the rest are just so u stalinist #$#@s will get it through ur heads

[Wiesty]

http://www.pgf.cc/heritage/great_famine.htmproof (http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/1988/458814.shtml)

http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/Great_Famine/index.shtml

http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/soviet.exhibit/famine.html


im gonna keep posting till u and ur lame excuses stop

[Hiero]

And stalin and the soviet union, was an ally of the big country USA, so whatever he told them, they would believe, and even if they did find out, no one was going to do anything to an ally.

No they werent. The only time they worked in cooperation was in the war to defeat teh facist threat. US was one of the countries that help the counter revolutionary whites in the civil war. In the 1930's during the depression the US would accept any information to damage the image of the USSR who's economy was booming. Thats why shoty information was accepted so easily.


I think you should look at that link i gave, i havent completed reading it i dont know when but within the first chapter he mentions alot of photo's where doctered, or where not of the Ukraine famine. Some photos had cloths that were form the Austrain area same with the nature in the photos. He also exposes one of the main source for the Ukraine famine. A reporter who aparantly risk his life and snuck into the Ukraine to take pictures in the spring. It was found out this man never came within 100 miles of the Ukraine, was in the USSR in autumn for 5 days, and was in fact a ex convict and was using a false name.

[Hiero]

Anyway this thread is not to discuss weather the Ukraine famine is told in its truest form, it's to discuss what was to be done to build socialism.

So you can stop post those links.

[Hiero]

So now answer, to what would Trotsky down in Stalins shoes. Come you people critcise Stalin's handling of the peasants, what was the alternative.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

I don't know what Trotsky would do, probaly fuck up like Stalin did.

From 1918 till 1921 there was a highly succesfull anarchist movement in the Ukraine. They were far more effective in fighting the kulaks then the Bolsheviks were. Most kulaks fled and other joined the social revolution. That all without prisons, gulags or mass excecutions.

I have written a small article on it, it's in newswire.