Log in

View Full Version : Why I don't like Gorby



Comrade Marcel
8th May 2006, 03:52
http://www.left.ru/inter/january/malenko.html

Nobody in Ireland has asked our opinion while inviting him into this country.
Yes, I know for quite a while already that our voices do not really matter here,
but never yet was it so blatantly obvious as it is today.

How would the Irish people feel if Oliver Cromwell was granted freedom of Moscow?
Any objections? Why not he is a real historical figure and was very progressive
at his time

At the last Russian presidential elections in which he dared to participate,
the Darling of the West, Mr. Gorby received just 0.51% of the vote. Not in
a single region of my home country did he get even 2%. So, when I am expressing
my opinion now, this isn't just my opinion. It is an opinion of the majority
of my people, whenever you like it or not.

My relatives were lucky. If I was in Dublin on the 9th of January this year,
the chances were big that I would follow the destiny of the Latvian schoolgirl
Alina Lebedeva who is now facing 15 years in prison for having symbolically
hit British prince Charles on his face with carnation flowers flowers of
the Revolution, as we call them.

Interesting, how many years can you get for this in Ireland?

I wouldn't choose carnations. Id pick up beautiful roses. With as sharp thorns
as possible. Well, Mr. Gorbachev should have been used to it by now: it has
happened to him several times in his home country where he appears now so seldom
that we even started thinking that he has emigrated for good. Once, a young
lady was giving him a bunch of roses, then she quickly turned it upside down
I smashed him on his smiling face. And another time, it was a young man who
has lost everything because of those reforms for which the West is so grateful
to Mr. Gorby: work, security in life, opportunity to study, ability not to
be afraid that you wont be able to afford to be sick (do you know that in some
parts of my country nowadays they already operate you without anaesthetics if
you cant pay in dollars?) ; basically, any form of a decent life for a human
being for himself and for his children. He has powerfully hit the cheek of The
Ex-Comrade Who Was Dreaming To Be Mister all his life, saying: I have been
dreaming to do that for a long time!

In Russia both these terrorists were not just not arrested the way Alina was:
everybody, including the policemen, were cheering at them.

The Westerners even those who consider themselves to be left wing do not
understand why the majority of my people did not love such a sophisticated and
tastefully dressed lady as Raisa, Mrs. Gorby. They explain it by all sorts of
ridiculous reasons: jealousy, our natural wilderness etc. It is impossible
to explain to them that in our culture in that culture in which I was brought
up we are used to value people by THEIR OWN achievements and contribution
to the society. The very western conception of The First Lady a woman who
is being considered important not because of her own achievements, but because
of whom she is married to is alien to us. In fact, it is deeply humiliating
for any modern, educated, independent, intelligent woman, and for our women
before Gorby all the ways in life were broadly open. (It is thanks to his democracy
and freedom that Russian women now get fired first, have to sleep with their
boss in order to keep their jobs and when being hired have to sign contracts
that they will not get pregnant for the next 3 years)
First Lady for me symbolizes the same what the Afghani chador symbolizes for
the Westerners: a woman who can not realize herself in the society by herself
and who needs protection of a man in order to do that.

But we, Russians, do not speak badly about our dead ones. It is our tradition;
so, lets better look at those who are still desperately trying to rise from
their own political grave.

Such a pity that you didnt let Gorbachev finish what he has started! I
hear so often from my Western friends who as a rule have no idea about our life;
neither before Gorbachev, not under him, nor after.

They think they know, but they dont. In 1991 I was planning to do Russian
Studies at the University of Leyden in the Netherlands but have abandoned
this idea, after discovering how many plain lies about my own country Id have
to repeat in order to pass my exams. They werent just exaggerations or one-sided
comments; they were plain lies, like, for example, that we didnt have trade
unions

But I noticed that too many people here also simply do not want to know how
did we live. It will destroy the whole vision of the world that they are receiving
from childhood on. It will make them feel uncomfortable, because they will inevitably
start questioning their own way of life. It is therefore far more convenient
to dismiss everything that doesnt fit into your mental picture created by the
media and the schools, as communist propaganda. I met people in the Netherlands
who were trying to tell me what life was like in the country where I have lived
for 22 years while they have never even been there. Unlike these people, I
really have the right to compare both systems as I have lived for 12 years
in the West now, in 4 different countries.

It is far more comfortable to think that you are receiving an important historical
figure in Dublin today. A figure that did something good. The only question:
good for whom?

When I was passing the State Exam for Interpreters in the Netherlands, I have
received a bad mark for country knowledge simply because I dared to disagree
with my well-fed Dutch examiner who stated that Russia is flourishing.

Our population is diminishing with 1 million per year. (The Irish, dont you
remember your own Potato Famine and your own emigration, full of bitter tears
and broken hearts?). Premature deaths, an enormous amount of murders, civil
war, emigration In Moscow there are about 50.000 homeless children something
we didnt have even during the darkest days of W.W.II!
There are 3 to 5 millions of such children in the whole country. The same as
the whole Irish population!

You cant tell me that we had it under communism too. I have lived there
you have not.

I do not like Gorbachev. Just as many millions of my compatriots.

What should I like him for? For the freedom of speech?

Yes, such a freedom when the ruling Cat Vaska is listening and continuing
to it

I was always saying what I think, my whole life, and nobody even threatened
to send me to any GULAG.

And you cant feed a nightingale with the fairy-tales.

Freedom of movement?

For those 3 % of the population who are spending their holidays on Bahamas
now while millions have lost even their only opportunity to visit their parents
in the neighbouring Ukraine once a year, because they can not afford it...

And when we, finally-free-to-move people, come here to the West, we are not
welcome. Unless we come with the stolen millions, of course

Would Irish people be interested to know how an ordinary Russian family of 5
(husband, wife, 2 children and granny) nowadays manage to survive solely on
grannys miserable pension and self-grown potatoes and gherkins the whole year
through?

Probably they wont. Its much nicer to talk about human values to a distinguished
gentleman like Gorby who would not even know how much an average pension in
Russia is.

Before giving this gentleman freedom of your city, why dont you ask our Russian
women what we think of the Godfather of the modern Russian Mafia State? Those
of us who still remember that before 1988 you could freely walk on the street
at night, and nothing would have happened to you. Until this distinguished gentleman
and his spin-doctors (interesting, who was financing them?) have enlightened
our males that erotica is a part of worlds high culture. And how, from that
time on, it became impossible to walk on the street or to work in the office
without constant fear that you can be grabbed under your skirt at any moment
in time

Today our women and children are being sold into sex-slavery in the West as
much as 50.000 of them per year. This is also Gorbys heritage .

But would the Westerners be able to understand me if at the end of the year,
on the most wonderful holidays of the year they are being shown programs like
Highlights of the British Television where penises and boobs are flying around
the screen, people are telling each other whom and how they shagged, and this
is supposed to be very funny? It might be possible that they already do not
know any culture other than this

I remember Gorby's visit to Rotterdam where I lived at that time. This once
head of state was acting like some sort of escort service offering himself
for dinner for the rich Western entrepreneurs. Among Russian emigre circles
there were continuous rumours that Mikhail Sergeevich was even entertaining
them with singing Russian folk songs accompanied by a guitar.

He has fallen much in price since though: if Bill Clinton can still reasonably
charge for his company at the dinner table ?100.000, poor Mikhail Sergeevich
can get no more than lousy ?8000 As far as I know, it was the highest and the
only bid he got offering himself for dinner at an Internet auction.

I could say oh so many warm words for your highly respected guest. But I only
want to say about a Somali refugee whom I met in the Dutch city of Tilburg.
An old man who has lost all his family, including 7 little beautiful grandchildren,
during the civil war and the American intervention in his country. He was cursing
the man who is receiving freedom of Dublin today, saying that there is no balance,
no parity in the world today, no stability, and that Americans were able to
enter his country just because of what Gorby did on a world-wide scale.

Today, remembering tears of this old man who had to come against his will
at this age in his life into a completely alien for him country and to live
among complete strangers who do not care, who has lost everything what held
the sense of life for him, I would like to ask the Irish people: what good did
Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev do for your country?

No, dont give me quotations about democracy and freedom in general. Well
sort him out ourselves. A politician should be judged by the following criteria:
has the life become better for the majority of his people because of his politics
or not?

Anybody who has experienced excellent standards of free education and medical
care in Cuba, can say that by this criteria Fidel Castro is a democrat. Mikhail
Gorbachev is clearly not. He has destroyed both in his home country and has
not built anything decent in return. He has been far too busy writing the books
and giving lectures around the world (for a good honorarium, of course!) about
human values.

What did he do for you?

Many of you nowadays are complaining or at least, are concerned about the flood
of asylum-seekers and refugees into Ireland , among whom too many bogus,
or shameless economic refugees.

How blind shall one be not to see the direct connection between what Russian
philosopher, ex-dissident A. Zinovyev calls Catastroyka (from the world catastrophe
) and this catastrophic growth of the refugee numbers in the entire world that
is more and more noticeable on Dublin streets today!

Or maybe that is exactly why you have invited Wests favourite Teddy Beer to
Dublin today to tell him go raibh mile maith agat for having all of us
with you today?

I love Ireland. But I doubt I would want to live here or in any other country
full-time if Mr. Gorbachev wouldnt have made with his politics survival
for any decent human being in my own country impossible.

If I were him, Id wake up in cold sweat every night and think about all of
those who perished after his Catastroyka as lives of all of those who died
in the civil and international armed conflicts, those who drank himself to death
because he wasnt able to feed his kids, those who cut her veins because she
was sold abroad as an animal to satisfy sexual fantasies of distinguished Western
gentlemen with thick wallets , are on his conscience.

He has taken away from me the very thing freedom is impossible without. The
freedom to make choices.

I have spent 12 years of my life in the West. Some Russians might still have
an illusion that it is worth to suffer in order to build Western-style freedom
and democracy. It isnt. The life that I see and live here, is most definitely
not worth to suffer for.

In fact, a lot of things people here can only dream of (free good medical care
with no waiting lists, free education, low rents, job security, 18 months paid
maternity leave, the list can go on and on and on) we already had. And have
given it all away for an empty promise of freedom. Freedom for those who can
pay for it. Slavery and misery for the majority that works to feed them.

I am human being not an animal. I do not want to live the kind of life I have
here where man is a wolf to a man and your only joy in life is a pint of
beer, shop-till-you-drop and watching somebodys erected penises on TV. I do
not want to live in Russian Columbia of today that differs from it only by
its material conditions.

Before, when there were 2 world systems, people had choice. It wasnt always
easy to emigrate, but those who wanted, always could find the way.

Today I have no choice. I am being imposed on a life style that is deeply alien
to me, - and I am being told that this is freedom. I have nowhere to run from
here.
And I see again and again the surprised faces of my Irish friends to whom I
tell that, given a chance, I would like to move now back to Soviet Union, even
knowing all the shortcomings of the life we had. Id leave behind everything
without what they cant imagine their lives. Without any hesitation.

An Old Russian jokes ends with: Well, well have to start everything from the
beginning! I am not afraid of that.

Laughing, I am telling to my Irish friends about their guest: You can have
him, if you like him. But there is no warranty: we won't take him back!"

And I wont to say Cead mile failte! to Mr. Gorby in my beautiful Dublin
today.

Mesijs
8th May 2006, 10:19
Interesting read... However, I think Gorby did really have ideals, but was too blind to be pragmatic and to look deeply into the pro's and cons. I also think that he was sort of blinded by the welfare in the west, that he wanted to copy it really quick. I read 'Perestroika' by him, explaining his policy, and it sounds good. However, with the implementation he was so quick and so abrupt, that there wasn't any outcome but failure. That's sad.

Raul
8th May 2006, 21:19
Gorbachev was a traitor who sold out and now, he is making pizza commercials.

Comrade Marcel
8th May 2006, 22:05
Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2006, 08:40 PM
Gorbachev was a traitor who sold out and now, he is making pizza commercials.
I heard that as well, supposedly it's the Russian Pizza hut or something. I'de like to try to find them and put them on youtube or something, just for laughs! :D

Raul
8th May 2006, 22:40
This is what I have found:

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/view?&...=428.0kB&dur=21 (http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/view?&h=105&w=140&type=avi&rurl=vlastitel.com.ru%2Fmultimedia%2Fvideo.html&vurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvlastitel.com.ru%2Fmultimedia%2F video%2Fgorbachev_pizza_eu.avi&back=p%3Dgorbachev%2Bpizza%26fr%3DFP-tab-vid-t%26toggle%3D1%26cop%3D%26ei%3DUTF-8&turl=scd.mm-so.yimg.com%2Fimage%2F1703758567&name=%3Cb%3Egorbachev%3C%2Fb%3E_%3Cb%3Epizza%3C%2F b%3E_eu.avi&no=1&tt=6&p=gorbachev+pizza&oid=1213661cf71c80d2&size=428.0kB&dur=21)

Comrade Marcel
8th May 2006, 23:23
Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2006, 10:01 PM
This is what I have found:

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/view?&...=428.0kB&dur=21 (http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/view?&h=105&w=140&type=avi&rurl=vlastitel.com.ru%2Fmultimedia%2Fvideo.html&vurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvlastitel.com.ru%2Fmultimedia%2F video%2Fgorbachev_pizza_eu.avi&back=p%3Dgorbachev%2Bpizza%26fr%3DFP-tab-vid-t%26toggle%3D1%26cop%3D%26ei%3DUTF-8&turl=scd.mm-so.yimg.com%2Fimage%2F1703758567&name=%3Cb%3Egorbachev%3C%2Fb%3E_%3Cb%3Epizza%3C%2F b%3E_eu.avi&no=1&tt=6&p=gorbachev+pizza&oid=1213661cf71c80d2&size=428.0kB&dur=21)
Hahaha, that's great man:

"Because of him we have Pizza Hut!"

sanpal
8th May 2006, 23:58
Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2006, 08:40 PM
Gorbachev was a traitor who sold out and now, he is making pizza commercials.
Gorbachev was not a "special traitor" but he hauled "road-roller" of soviet economy by conversing it into more free market and into developing of council of workers in plants. In final he began to run away from it not to be crushed by "road-roller" because party and comsomol leaders was more "smart fellows" than the workers and they become new capitalist owners.


With "$ west presents" Gorby had jumped on footboard of going road-roller

KickMcCann
9th May 2006, 03:13
Say what you will about his reforms, but I don't think its fair to blame Gorbachev for the fall of the USSR. If I remember my history correctly it was a group of top generals in one corner and yeltsin in the other, ripping apart the Soviet Union. Right before the coup there was supposed to be a popular referendum on the legitimacy of the Soviet Union. Most sources estimate that had the referendum taken place, the vast majority of the Soviet people would have voted in confidence of the Soviet Union and it could have theoritically still existed today. But that referendum didn't occur, the generals took over and froze everything. This was self-promoting Yeltsin's golden opportunity to upstage Gorbachev and declare Russian independence from the USSR. The rest is history.
The soviet economy did need restructuring, not neccessarily capitialism, but had the generals not acted out so brashly and insecurely, yeltsin would have gotten no where and the Soviet experiment might have continued in some shape or form. The point is, the Soviet people never really had a voice in these events, it was the actions of the people on top.

Comrade Marcel
9th May 2006, 05:29
Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 02:34 AM
Say what you will about his reforms, but I don't think its fair to blame Gorbachev for the fall of the USSR. If I remember my history correctly it was a group of top generals in one corner and yeltsin in the other, ripping apart the Soviet Union. Right before the coup there was supposed to be a popular referendum on the legitimacy of the Soviet Union. Most sources estimate that had the referendum taken place, the vast majority of the Soviet people would have voted in confidence of the Soviet Union and it could have theoritically still existed today. But that referendum didn't occur, the generals took over and froze everything. This was self-promoting Yeltsin's golden opportunity to upstage Gorbachev and declare Russian independence from the USSR. The rest is history.
The soviet economy did need restructuring, not neccessarily capitialism, but had the generals not acted out so brashly and insecurely, yeltsin would have gotten no where and the Soviet experiment might have continued in some shape or form. The point is, the Soviet people never really had a voice in these events, it was the actions of the people on top.
Gorby brought about the beginning of the end, without a doubt. It was he who brought about "reforms", in which he overrided the Supreme Soviet. The bourgeois "scholars" give him credit for bringing in "democracy", but he used the most undemocratic means of doing what he wanted, not caring about the opinions of the party ranks. He also desolved the USSR when an estimated 70% of the people were against the idea.

A good read is Bahman Azad's book "Heroic Struggle, Bitter Defeat: Factors Contributing to the Dismantling of the Socialist State in the Soviet Union".

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/071780726...glance&n=283155 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0717807266/103-9892578-4709439?v=glance&n=283155)


In Bahman Azad's book "Heroic Struggle, Bitter Defeat," Azad explains the factors leading up the dismantling of the socialist state in the Soviet Union during the years of 1989-1991. The history of the U.S.S.R, and the difficulties it faced, is outlined from the October Revolution of 1917 to Gorbachev's betrayal of socialism and finally to Yeltsin's suppression of Communism in the re-immerging bourgeois state. After a lengthy explanation of Marxist theory, Azad gets into the issue of the Soviet Union itself and how those theories were applied. He begins with the October Revolution in war torn, impoverished Russia. The civil war against counter- revolutionary and foreign invading forces and the policy of War Communism that was adopted as a result is discussed. Azad then goes on to explain the New Economic Policy (NEP), the rapid industrialization era and the devastation of World War Two. A certain emphasis is put on the issue of beurocracy and the fact that beurocracy within the Soviet Union was not combated strongly enough. Another point of emphasis is the arms race with the United States which forced the Soviet leadership to funnel huge sums of money into weaponry. The uneasy relationship between the Soviet Union and the Peoples Republic of China was also a negative factor, says Azad. Due to lack of solidarity between the two Communist states, resources were drained into bickering between one another and away from fighting the common enemy. Furthermore the disagreement spilled over into the whole international Communist movement causing yet another split in the movement. This situation surly aided no-one but the international bourgeoisie. Azad contests that although some work was done in the Khrushchev era to fight beurocracy, there was also major corruption of Marxist theory. At the 22nd Congress of the CPSU in 1961, a "state of the entire people" and "party of the entire people" was declared. Azad argues, as would any Marxist, that such a move was un-Marxist. It blurred class distinctions within the state as a whole. And within the party in particular. The idea of a "state of the entire people" suggests that the class war has come to an end yet the state still exists; this is an un-Marxist claim and an incorrect claim historically, as class distinctions still did exist. A "party of the entire people" meant that members of the bourgeoisie could now join the proletarian party. Azad moves on to say that while somewhat of a renewal of socialism was taking place during the Brezhnev and Andropov era's it had perhaps been too little, too late. In 1990, despite the results of a referendum in which 76% of the Soviet people voted in favour of socialism, Gorbachev began dismantling of the Soviet Union, beginning with the economy. Although the Cold War, arms race and internal mistakes had weakened the Soviet Union, it was Gorbachev and his "new thinking" cronies, who had managed to seize control of the CPSU that ultimately dismantled the socialist state. For lack of "resolute response" by Communists, the proletariat and their allies in the U.S.S.R, Gorbachev was not ousted, and the Soviet Union was not saved. When the U.S.S.R was dissolved, Yeltsin became leader of the Russian republic, he quickly moved to illegalize the Communist Party and systematically repress Communists in Russia. Bahman Azad's book "Heroic Struggle, Bitter Defeat" is an in-depth look at the Soviet Union and the factors leading to its dismantling. Its arguments are backed strongly by statistical evidence and are put forth in relation to Marxist theory. It gives a good explanation of the Marxist theory, which is necessary for properly understanding the history of Communism and of the Soviet Union. "Heroic Struggle, Bitter Defeat" is a book worthy of endorsement to any individual who wishes to learn about the history of the Soviet Union.

http://ycl.communist-party.ca/documents/heroicstruggle.html

Intelligitimate
9th May 2006, 05:32
Are you familiar with Kotz and Weir's Revolution from Above: The Demise of the Soviet System, Comrade Marcel? If so, how does Bahman Azad's book compare to theirs?

Comrade Marcel
9th May 2006, 05:59
Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 04:53 AM
Are you familiar with Kotz and Weir's Revolution from Above: The Demise of the Soviet System, Comrade Marcel? If so, how does Bahman Azad's book compare to theirs?
I'm not familiar with that one unfortunately.

Heroic Struggle is written from somewhat of a revisionist standpoint, as it is put out by CPUSA (International Publishers) and endorsed by the CPC... I don't know much about Azad except that he calls himself a Marxist-Sociologist. The book is also dedicated to Gus Hall, who was CPUSA.

Mesijs
9th May 2006, 12:51
It's however you interpret it... You could say Lenin brought the beginning of the end by creating a dictature of the elite. You can say Brezhnev created the beginning of the end by not doing anything. At least Gorbachev had ideals and tried to do good for the country. Sadly, he failed.

sanpal
9th May 2006, 21:43
Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 12:12 PM
It's however you interpret it... You could say Lenin brought the beginning of the end by creating a dictature of the elite. You can say Brezhnev created the beginning of the end by not doing anything. At least Gorbachev had ideals and tried to do good for the country. Sadly, he failed.
I think similarly. Gorbachev was a 'product of his time". He was general secretary of Communist Party of SU and ideologically he couldn't lead to capitalist way openly. But there was a hidden bourgeois elite (people who had enough money and who needed to influence on the forming of ideology). One day Gorbachev lost control of situation .... As I mentioned earlier, the working people was not able to take occasion to pass on to self-government at work places because soviet propaganda was telling them during 70 years that they are ruling class. Unfortunately the lack of training on self-government :(