What person or group has done more for the left?

[R_P_A_S]

Who or what organization do you guys think has done more for the left than any other?

[Ander]

Che Guevara.

While he didn't really contribute too much to its actual theory, he dedicated his life for the cause of socialism and brought revolution to countries around the world. He also ended up dying for it as well, which is something that can't be said about many leftists.

Maybe my answer isn't completely correct, but that's how I feel right now. Obviously those who came up with the actual ideas of communism contributed a lot, but Che DID a lot.

[Fawkes]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2006 08:50 pm
He also ended up dying for it as well, which is something that can't be said about many leftists.


That's not true.

[which doctor]

I can't believe Stalin and Mao were even mentioned in the thread title. They didn't do shit, in fact they put workers movements back several decades due to their shit stains all over communism.

I would say the worker has done the most for the left, for obvious reasons.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Stalin and Mao didn't do anything? Are you kidding? Have you heard of the Russian and Chinese revolutions?

[which doctor]

Lot's of people have started revolutions, not all of them deserve our respect.

Both Stalin and Mao have put real workers movements back many many years due to the negative connotation of communism that many people in the first world hold.

[Prairie Fire]

What a predictable turn.

Someone starts a thread, and some other person high-jacks the thread and uses it as a platform to attack Stalin and Mao.

Here is an example of how it happens:

>Who likes puppies?

Dude 1: I like puppies.

Dude 2: Me too.

Donkey raper: I'll tell you who probably didn't like puppies: Stalin!
Stalin killed 20 million people! And he started a famine in the Ukraine! He was practically allied with Hitler, and he oppressed People! God I hate Stalin! I hate him so much!

Dude 1: Um.. What does that have to do with puppies?

Anarchist: Yeah, fuck Stalin! Fuck Lenin too!

RavenBlade:What evidence do you have of your claims? What does this have to do with the thread? Ass hole.

Mod: RavenBlade, this is your final warning. Quit flaming. Oh, by the way: Fuck Lenin.

This is how it usually works. I think that Rev-left should start a seperate board called "Fuck Stalin", and all of the people with an axe to grind against Stalin could go there, and leave all of the other threads alone.


To get Back on topic, the question itself is kind of anti-socialist. I don't believe in the "great man" theory of history. If Marx, Engles, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hoxha, Castro, Che, Ho chi Minh, or any other leader had never been born, it would make no difference. Historical figures are created by the times and social conditions, not the other way around.

And by the way, not to dis Che, but a LOT of people have given their lives for socialism. At least 25 Million in the Soviet Union alone.

If I had to pick one person, or organization, I would probably Say Karl Marx. He laid down the theory, and everyone who came after him owes him credit.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2006 02:41 am
>Who likes puppies?

Dude 1: I like puppies.

Dude 2: Me too.

Donkey raper: I'll tell you who probably didn't like puppies: Stalin!
Stalin killed 20 million people! And he started a famine in the Ukraine! He was practically allied with Hitler, and he oppressed People! God I hate Stalin! I hate him so much!
Oh that's a classic :lol:

[Joby]

:lol:

That was good.

Anyway, Ravenblade is right. There are no liberators, the people liberate themselves.

But I'm still tempted to give an answer. I'm going to go with Che, because of his belief towards what later became known as the "Bolivarian Revolution" Though not as Socialist in nature as Che would have preferred, the unifying call to socialism has gone out 40 years after his death with many of the countries of latin america begining to bleed pink, if not red. Even those who aren't communist are at least tolerable when compared to the Fascist Governmens the CIA created for the region.

Now, with Morales calling for a "reasonably good sized" land reform, and Ecuador about to join the left, it seems as though Ches legacy will be intact for a long time.
More than Lenin, Stalin, Trosky, Mao, or any other dead leader, it is Che who is alive now like they never wanted him to be.

[chimx]

yeah i agree, stalin blows. lenin too.

[bolshevik butcher]

To be honest there's all the great theorists and proffessional revolutionaries like Lenin, Trortksy, Che Guevara etc. But I think it's worth remembering the rank and file trade unionists, the people like the miners in Britain who went through so much hardship and those that continue to do so. The fighters that provide the rank and file, the long suffering conscious working class, the shop stewards struggleing against bueraucracy the third world workers that man picket lines while facing deatht threats they are the poeple that the socialist movement is built upon.

[Louis Pio]

Sorry for being hard but I have to admit I think the question is quite stupid. First of you know you would get as many different answers as there are cells in a human being. Secondly on what way do you think this should be juged?


To be honest there's all the great theorists and proffessional revolutionaries like Lenin, Trortksy, Che Guevara etc. But I think it's worth remembering the rank and file trade unionists, the people like the miners in Britain who went through so much hardship and those that continue to do so. The fighters that provide the rank and file, the long suffering conscious working class, the shop stewards struggleing against bueraucracy the third world workers that man picket lines while facing deatht threats they are the poeple that the socialist movement is built upon.

So fucking true! You hit the nail right on the spot. When I see my comrades putting forward working class politics when they know the union bureaucrats will attack them with all means possible I feel proud. This may sound corny to some, but it's the day to day struggle that in the end paves the way for the socialist transformation of society. And in that and every other respect it's the greatest sacrifice, taking time off you could have used for relaxing after a hard days work, being with your family/mates, not getting enough sleep, stress, etc etc etc

[Dominicana_1965]

Che actually did volunteer work so people could have a little view of what Communism was, Saturdays and Sundays in Cuba.

[Cryotank Screams]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2006 10:01 pm
I would say the worker has done the most for the left, for obvious reasons.
I agree.

[Prairie Fire]

Wow,I haven't even been on rev-left that long, and I can't believe how accurate my model thread was. I succesfully predicted an anarchist jumping on the wagon and insulting Lenin and Stalin. :D

Fuck off, chimx. If you have something useful to contribute to the thread, do so.
If you just want to insult Communist leaders for the sake of being an anarchist, then you're just shit disturbing. Oh, and by the way, not to get off topic, but I really enjoyed your analysis that there was no actual genocide against the
native peoples of North and South America by european settlers("The history of thanksgiving", History). As an aboriginal persyn, believe me that I mean it when I say that you are an ignorant American-Chauvenist prick, who masquerades as a socialist!

[TC]

If you want to quantify doing stuff, then obviously by the numbers Mao's Chinese Communist Party has liberated the most people from feudalism and imperialist capitalism. The Chinese revolution was the single greatest achievement in social progress on a human level.

Although one could argue the CPSU/Bolshevik party has done the most in geo-political terms although, i still don't think the argument would be persuasive.

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2006 02:01 am
I can't believe Stalin and Mao were even mentioned in the thread title. They didn't do shit, in fact they put workers movements back several decades due to their shit stains all over communism.

I would say the worker has done the most for the left, for obvious reasons.
i said POST! POST those those guys. I never said like them.. geee :rolleyes:

[black magick hustla]

workers

[Cryotank Screams]

Fuck off, chimx. If you have something useful to contribute to the thread, do so. If you just want to insult Communist leaders for the sake of being an anarchist, then you're just shit disturbing.

Listen to me carefully, he/she only said that cause you made that stupid scenario, in other words;

HE/SHE WAS JOKING

Nice LaVey phrase though, ;) .

[Intellectual47]

I think it might be Hugo Chavez. Certainly there are more important people, but he does deserve credit for being one of the few likable socialist leaders

Along with Che

Possibly Ho Chi Minh, but he hurt socialism in the US

[Organic Revolution]

The IWW outright. They organized workers affectively to combat capitalism and takeovers on the shop floor. At the peak of the IWW they had about 100,000 members to fight were necessary for the eight hour day, and other labor causes.

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by Organic [email protected] 30, 2006 11:52 pm
The IWW outright. They organized workers affectively to combat capitalism and takeovers on the shop floor. At the peak of the IWW they had about 100,000 members to fight were necessary for the eight hour day, and other labor causes.
The IWW? Come on man. The CNT of course. They had 3 million members, won the 8 hour day in Spain (first in the world to do this I think?) and were a major player in the Spanish Revoultion.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2006 11:44 pm
Cryotank:

Do you deny the accuracy of my thread scenario?
Oh my fucking God. You predicted what happened on a thread. You must be a genius. Really, though, anyone could've guessed what would happen. Someone was bound to praise Stalin and Mao and someone was bound to criticize them. Where you are wrong is in implying people have no justification for this. They have plenty of justification. They just don't want to waste time explaining things to bandwagon leftists who became anti-authority because their parents forced them to stop cutting themselves. Stalin and Mao clearly set back real revolutionary movements. Mao might be praised for eliminating feudalism, but that was done at the expense of chinese workers.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 01, 2006 09:00 am
Oh my fucking God. You predicted what happened on a thread. You must be a genius. Really, though, anyone could've guessed what would happen.
You know, you're actually right. These days someone who predicted that a thread wouldn't descend into a sectarian flamefest would be considered mad. These days its actually impossible to debate or even mention a whole range of topics without a constant stream of bullshit from ignorant kids eager to defend their idols.

Well to hell with that. RevLeft is not the place it was a year ago. Adios.

[Organic Revolution]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2006 12:44 am
Cryotank:

Do you deny the accuracy of my thread scenario?
nobody cares if you predicted it, stay on topic.

[Ander]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2006 11:04 pm
I think it might be Hugo Chavez.
Wow, I can't believe no one tore this down yet. Let the wolves descend upon their prey...

How the hell is Hugo Chavez, a Social Democrat, the most useful leftist in history? Sure, he's done some decent things for his country and pissed off the US, but more important than other historical greats? No way!

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2006 02:29 am
Lot's of people have started revolutions, not all of them deserve our respect.

Both Stalin and Mao have put real workers movements back many many years due to the negative connotation of communism that many people in the first world hold.
What is this bullshit? Can someone explain too me, as I am having a hard time understanding, how someone can be soooo naive?

Mao contributed greatly to marxism. The cultural revolution and the idea of class struggle throughout socialism are major contributions to marxism.

If Mao and Stalin didn't exsist, people would still percieve communism in the first world as evil. Look at the red scares of the early 1920s pre-stalin.

Mao and Stalin helped lead movements that would build industrial powerhouse worker states that had previously been living in the stone age.

[Fawkes]

If Mao and Stalin didn't exsist, people would still percieve communism in the first world as evil.

Most people do percieve communism as "evil".

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30, 2006 02:41 am
This is how it usually works. I think that Rev-left should start a seperate board called "Fuck Stalin", and all of the people with an axe to grind against Stalin could go there, and leave all of the other threads alone.

:lol: lol that is the greatest idea I have ever heard all day. :lol:

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/8418/uploadedviahttpphixrkw8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Most people do percieve communism as "evil".

yeah but it has little to do with Mao and more to do witht the fact that they are capitalists.

[Fawkes]

It didn't have that much to do with Mao, but it did have a lot to do with Stalin and his succesors.

[Prairie Fire]

Dooga:

Oh my fucking God. You predicted what happened on a thread. You must be a genius. Really, though, anyone could've guessed what would happen.

My point exactly. The outcome of every thread on rev-left is almost formulaic in its disintigration into sectarian divisions. I don't necesarily believe that this is the intent of every persyn on this board. I'm sure that the persyn who started this thread never even considered that it would become an ideological battleground.


Someone was bound to praise Stalin and Mao and someone was bound to criticize them.

erm, who praised Stalin or Mao in this thread? This person simply MENTIONED
Stalin and Mao (in addition to Marx and Lenin) in the title of the thread, and these mother fuckers pounced on him rabidly, and started started spreading slander.



I can't believe Stalin and Mao were even mentioned in the thread title. They didn't do shit, in fact they put workers movements back several decades due to their shit stains all over communism.


Both Stalin and Mao have put real workers movements back many many years due to the negative connotation of communism that many people in the first world hold.

In my experience, in life and on rev-left, it is very, very rare for an anti-revisionist to start shit. Take a look at all of the threads on Stalin on rev-left;
I'm positive that at least 90%-95% of all Stalin threads are started by people who HATE HIM. On this thread, like most others, it is the anti-stalin forces that started shit; we simply responded.


Where you are wrong is in implying people have no justification for this.

Of course they don't. Comrade R P A S started a thread, and we all could have put in our two cents and been civil. Instead, like a violent lunatic at a tea party,
the anti-Stalin forces showed up, crashed the thread and destroyed any possibility of civil discussion.


They just don't want to waste time explaining things to bandwagon leftists


Anyone who doesn't "Want to explain things", has no buisness on a discussion forum. This is a place of discussion.


...bandwagon leftists who became anti-authority because their parents forced them to stop cutting themselves.

This coming from an anarchist, easily the most bourgie, middle-class, false revolutionary ideology in the world :D . Are you speaking from experience, you little skate-board prick?


Comrade OM:


RevLeft is not the place it was a year ago.

Really? It was better than this at one time?

Organic revolution:


nobody cares if you predicted it, stay on topic.

I'm trying, but some individuals arn't making it easy. I spoke my opinion;
now I'm simply responding to criticism. In the meantime, i'm suggessting that everyone get back on topic.

Left Henry:


What is this bullshit? Can someone explain too me, as I am having a hard time understanding, how someone can be soooo naive?

Naivity is their choice. Their political orientation is also their choice. My problem lies with hijacking threads just to ***** about Stalin, Mao, etc.

Freedom for all...ALL:


It didn't have that much to do with Mao, but it did have a lot to do with Stalin and his succesors.

You honestly believe that there was NO anti communism before Stalin? You honestly believe that the ruling class was not planting these ideas before Stalin? :D

[Xiao Banfa]

I would say Mao, but he negated his positive contributions with his purging of so many brilliant marxists such as Liu Xiaoqi, Peng Zhen. He was a destructive personality to the CPC.

Also the starvation and the refusing to listen to anything the cadre (of various rank) said about the agricultural schemes.

Lenin.

[Phalanx]

Definately Mao. Raised the life expectancy of China from 35 to over 70 years, lowered illiteracy from 80 percent to 17 percent. His actions gave a large portion of the world's population living standards that were unimaginable for such a poor country as China.

[Inviction]

The left? In general? I'd pick the French Third Estate. For the left that espouses a system of common ownership, i.e. Communism, I'd pick Marx.

[risky.riot]

The problem with picking the 3rd Estate is that it was a liberal group of bourgeois thinkers angered by the influence of the church and nobility. If you actually read deep enough into "What is the 3rd Estate?" by Abbé Sieyès, you'll find that it really argues for class society and is simply an argument for legal equality, not social equality.
I wouldn't say that Stalin or Mao did the most for the Left because they were very destructive forces. Stalin was counter-communist in that he fought against other communists and brought new meaning to the Vanguard Party. Mao was very similar; the both of them purged their countries of communists that disagreed; which really takes its toll on the revolution because it shows that people have no liberty. The Vanguard Party showed that the people were living without equality, and the use of CHECKA, the GPU, the OGPU, the NKVD, and the KGB (and this is just in the SU) made people very edgey and made it pretty damn hard for people to unite because they were always living in fear that they wouldn't wake up in the morning.
In regards to who actually did the most for the Left though, I would say Bukanin, Marx, Lenin, and Trotsky. Now, hold on, I'm not wanting to spawn a massive debate here, but my reason is pretty simple: they all tried to spread the ideas of communism. Marx because of his communist works, but also because of the First International. Bukanin also went to the First International, but also because he translated the Communist Manifesto into Russian. Lenin because he tried to bring communism to Russia (I said tried, that doesn't mean he did). He also had some internationals, I think, but am not entirely sure, the 2nd and 3rd internationals. And the last one, who will probably bring the most argument, is Trotsky. I would say that he was a truly important person. His Fourth International acted as a way for the Left to have discussions outside of the Stalinist Comintern. Trotsky did a lot for communism in that he argued for an alternative to Stalinism and provided a critical analysis of Stalin's actions. He also provided an analysis of Fascism... I dunno, you'll probably argue with me and Raven Blade will probably complain that I'm just in here bashing Stalin and Mao, but guess what? I'm providing oppinion, insight, and criticism. Ought not we, leftists, be allowed to provide criticism of each other? If we don't provide constructive criticism, we will never get anywhere and will always be sectarian. Yes, I think Stalin and Mao were pretty shitty Leftists, but shouldn't I be entitled to those oppinions? I mean, so what if I don't think that industrialization was what they should have pursued after the revolution? That's simply my belief. Maybe you guys are right though, maybe we shouldn't look at this in terms of single individuals, maybe we should think of it on terms of the working people as a whole...

[Inviction]

The problem with picking the 3rd Estate is that it was a liberal group of bourgeois thinkers angered by the influence of the church and nobility. If you actually read deep enough into "What is the 3rd Estate?" by Abbé Sieyès, you'll find that it really argues for class society and is simply an argument for legal equality, not social equality.

Well yeah, of course the French Revolution was the victory of the bourgeois over the aristocracy, but still, the thread maker is talking about influence, not how much we like them. Notice also that the thread maker said "the left," not "Marxist." The mainstream left, such as the Democratic Party in the United States, has been greatly influenced by the by ideals of the French and American Revolutions, wouldn't you agree?

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Also the starvation and the refusing to listen to anything the cadre (of various rank) said about the agricultural schemes.

bollocks. Of course he listened, and he was lied too. Capitalist roaders in the party exagerated grain harvests, so the cultural revolution hoot to root 'em out. Plus if you look at Chinese history, even today natural disasters kill thousands upon thousands of people and back then in an agarian based country like China, that was devastating.

BTW, China solved it's problem of aquadatly feeding its people in 1970, under Mao Zedong Thought.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Naivity is their choice. Their political orientation is also their choice. My problem lies with hijacking threads just to ***** about Stalin, Mao, etc.

I agree. I personally think Revleft should be renamed the:

http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/5390/uploadedviahttpphixr1xc8.th.jpg (http://img294.imageshack.us/my.php?image=uploadedviahttpphixr1xc8.jpg)

That can be its header.

[S R]

Who or what organization do you guys think has done more for the left than any other?

I don't understand the question. Why buy into the notion that it is the "left" that needs emancipation rather than the working class and people? A better question would be, what organization actually addresses the problems of the working class and is excercising leadership?

[R_P_A_S]

I don't understand the question. Why buy into the notion that it is the "left" that needs emancipation rather than the working class and people? A better question would be, what organization actually addresses the problems of the working class and is excercising leadership?
sure if you wanna get all technical. same shit.

do u kno?

[AGITprop]

yeah i agree, stalin blows. lenin too.

yea...lenin blows.?

ofcourse, ur a hoxhaist

[AGITprop]

Ted Grant

[Holden Caulfield]

Stalin did most,

but what he did was mostly bad,

I would say Lenin tbh, just for making the first workers state possible