Sandinista come Here - On a point from Election/Revolution T

[Pete]

Please explain to me two things based upon the following statement: "Stalinism, state capitalist."

1) What do you mean by Stalinism?

2) How is that state capitalist. I would say America and Canada are state capitalist nations, as the state interfers in the capitalist workings.

[Conghaileach]

On that second point, the state has to interfere in capitalism. Otherwise capitalism would exist in its unrestricted lassez-faire state, which would be a nightmare for whomever suffered under it i.e. much worse that as it is now. The US is the close that the world could ever come to lassez-faire capitalism.

State capitalism is where the state has total control over the economic system. This could be a planned economy and such.

[Sandanista]

Stalinism isnt socialism but state capitalism as the USSR had to use trade for economy to survive, being a gigatic nation it shouldnt have had to, but Stalin with his penchant for a massive military and top-down beaureucratic politics destroyed a nation which could have become a true socialist nation which could have started a chain reaction to form world communism.

But because of stalins isolationalism it never happened.

He was also in constant competition with the west, wheter it be the arms race, the space race or even in several trouble spots around the world, and the TRADE (dun dun dun, bad word) with other (ahem) socialist nations.

[Pete]

Didn't the arms/space race occur after he was ahem dead? And then revisionists came into power and tried to undo what stalin did. If I am not mistaken.

[Conghaileach]

I'd say that Stalin was more interested in making deals with the West than competing with it.

And just think, it was Nazi scientists who put the first men on the moon.

[Dirty Commie]

The nazi scientists captured by the red army got into space first though

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

I think Ciaran B was referring tio the U$ space program, because I think the Soviets never went to the moon, did they?

[Guest1]

It is state capitalism because while the production was owned by the state, there was nothing giving the people power over the government, so it was really just an even bigger boss, where socialism is supposed to eliminate the boss.

[Blibblob]

It is state capitalism because while the production was owned by the state, there was nothing giving the people power over the government, so it was really just an even bigger boss, where socialism is supposed to eliminate the boss.


I always thought socialism was a government controled economy. State capitalism. I think it should be more leader capitalism. You weren't allowed to be an entrepenuer. You couldn't do whatever you wanted. But the leaders could. Stalin could send money wherever he wanted to. The state profited, but the people didn't. Eh, it was a fucking dictatorship.



Didn't the arms/space race occur after he was ahem dead? And then revisionists came into power and tried to undo what stalin did. If I am not mistaken.


I know that was mostly sarcastic, but yes. Except they came in saying they would fix it, but they just made it worse.



I think Ciaran B was referring tio the U$ space program, because I think the Soviets never went to the moon, did they?


Yeah, but Dirty Commie just pointed out that the USSR got Nazi scientists also, and were the first in space. Yeah, nothing to do with the moon.

Just my little pathetic peice... I don't know all that much about the USSR.

(Edited by Blibblob at 5:04 pm on May 23, 2003)

[Sandanista]

Maybe i mislead some people, but it was stalin who started the space race,and the arms race, but kruschev (although he critscised stalin, he was just as bad) and breshnev, and even gorbachev continued it.

[Pete]

Kruschev and Gorbachev where bastards. (But please let us not argue this here)

[Vinny Rafarino]

Agreed, they were and are bastards, but they did know one thing.

After one mobilises the populace for revolution, there will always be a need for economists and politicians. You simply cannot completely rely on the the people to manage economics and foreign/domestic policies. It cannot be done. There will always be a need for a ruling executive party to SOME degree. One just hopes they continue with the appropriate vision. The longer it takes, the more opportunities capitalists have to create dissention, which in my opinion was why Che supported the "first strike" ideal. How could you rely on the worker's to make a decision like that?

Too bad they were such wankers.

(Edited by COMRADE RAF at 4:18 am on May 24, 2003)