The achivements of Lenin - all the good and bad things then

[apathy maybe]

When a general election was held in November 1917, the Bolsheviks came second to the Socialists-Revolutionaries. Lenin's response was simple. When the new Russian Parliament, the Constituent Assembly, met on 5th January, it was dispersed and Lenin began to rule as a dictator.

But what did he do before he became dictator? And did he further the revultion after? Why is it that he is worshipped almost by many people?

[elijahcraig]

He was no dictator, your assertion is useless.

I'm tired, can't list now. Maybe tomorrow.

[MiNdGaMe]

Lenin was a dictator, he order the Red Army units to crush the Kronstadt Rebellion, sailors who saw what the Bolsheviks really were: bureaucratic authoritarian thugs with no regard for democracy. And don't reply with the tiredless old argument: "They were counter-revolutionaries"

"Lenin is not comparable to any revolutionary figure in history. Revolutionaries have had ideals. Lenin has none." - Peter Kropotkin

"Vladimir Ilyich [Lenin], your concrete actions are completely unworthy of the ideas you pretend to hold." - Peter Kropotkin

(Edited by MiNdGaMe at 7:19 am on July 24, 2003)

[elijahcraig]

Lenin was a dictator, he order the Red Army units to crush the Kronstadt Rebellion, sailors who saw what the Bolsheviks really were: bureaucratic authoritarian thugs with no regard for democracy. And don't reply with the tiredless old argument: "They were counter-revolutionaries"


Wow, you really backed that up with facts...dumbass.

Yes, they fired on the Konstandters. But this was in the middle of a famine, 16 imperialist nations invading, and a civil war. There was no food, and the Bolsheviks had to keep control. It was a horrible time, there were bound to be mistakes.

Lenin was a dictator? The Bolsheviks practiced democracy. Lenin didn't even always get his way. You are talking from the viewpoint of western propaganda.

"Lenin is not comparable to any revolutionary figure in history. Revolutionaries have had ideals. Lenin has none." - Peter Kropotkin

From someone who supported World War One, aka the Great Imperialist War. This man holds no place in any debate over true "revolutionaries". Quoting him is useless seeing as he is a hypocrite.

"Vladimir Ilyich [Lenin], your concrete actions are completely unworthy of the ideas you pretend to hold." - Peter Kropotkin

Refer to earlier reply to this hypocrite.

(Edited by elijahcraig at 7:58 am on July 24, 2003)

[MiNdGaMe]

Quote: from elijahcraig on 6:25 am on July 24, 2003
He was no dictator, your assertion is useless.

I'm tired, can't list now. Maybe tomorrow.


Really backed that up with facts dumbass

Its most interesting to note that during the reign of the Tsar and the USSR, both authoritarian systems were quite the same. The Tsar was an autocratic leader "only answerable to god", the USSR was ruled by an elite few, the self-proclaimed "communist party". Both had collectives of workers/peasents, under the Tsar, Mirs, under the USSR, Soviets.

elijahcraig, if your so good at defending Lenin and his actions, what did he really archieve that was so "great"?

From someone who supported World War One, aka the Great Imperialist War. This man holds no place in any debate over true "revolutionaries". Quoting him is useless seeing as he is a hypocrite.

It was a horrible time, there were bound to be mistakes.

(Edited by MiNdGaMe at 1:06 pm on July 24, 2003)


(Edited by MiNdGaMe at 3:12 pm on July 24, 2003)

[YKTMX]

Quote: from apathy maybe on 6:03 am on July 24, 2003
When a general election was held in November 1917, the Bolsheviks came second to the Socialists-Revolutionaries. Lenin's response was simple. When the new Russian Parliament, the Constituent Assembly, met on 5th January, it was dispersed and Lenin began to rule as a dictator.

But what did he do before he became dictator? And did he further the revultion after? Why is it that he is worshipped almost by many people?


This stuff about the CA is silly. The leaders ADMITTED they were leading a counter revolution. It wasn't even a big deal in Russia, no one CARED. You should get your head out of Orlando Figes and read some real history. Proof? Look at Germany. Kautsky, Rosa, all criticsed Lenin for dissolving the CA. What happened in Germany? The constistuent assembly was left to it's own devices, there was a counter revolvtuon, and Rosa, Kautsy and the rest were shot.

[Reuben]

Regarding lenin's political approach, while, given the context of the so called 'civil war, his coersive treatment of nomn-marxists/non-communists was understandable or even justifiable on a pragmatic level, what is harder to justify is the treatment of other marxists and leftists.

Members of the Bund, a self-proclaimed Marxist organisation, an orgnaisation which at the time of the 1905 attempted revolution had been the onlymass based marxist organisation with 20,000 members, were sen back to the same prisons which they had been kept in by the tsar.

Arguably Lenin made the notion of 'dictatorship of the proletariat' a potentially dangerous and anti-pluralistic concept when he sserted that a single party and eventually a single leader could advocate for that class even without a clear mandate to do so.

[elijahcraig]

Really backed that up with facts dumbass

Its most interesting to note that during the reign of the Tsar and the USSR, both authoritarian systems were quite the same. The Tsar was an autocratic leader "only answerable to god", the USSR was ruled by an elite few, the self-proclaimed "communist party". Both had collectives of workers/peasents, under the Tsar, Mirs, under the USSR, Soviets.

elijahcraig, if your so good at defending Lenin and his actions, what did he really archieve that was so "great"?

From someone who supported World War One, aka the Great Imperialist War. This man holds no place in any debate over true "revolutionaries". Quoting him is useless seeing as he is a hypocrite.

Some things the Bolsheviks did:

Made Racism punishable by death
Gave women the right to vote and run for office
Made Homosexuality legal
Led the first workers' revolution
Took the land of the bourgeois and gave it to the workers and the whole of the majority
Nationalized industry and agriculture
Mass Participation through democratic workers' councils and the like
Allowed all officials to be recalled at any time by the people
Destroyed the churches which had so long fucked over the people
Defended the revolution against the white army and 16 imperialist nations, mass famine, civil war, etc.

That's some of the list, I'll let others contribute if they like.

Calling Lenin a dictator is unfounded propaganda. He debated issues with the others and whoever gave the best presentation got their way by vote.

Please don't quote the bourgeois traitor Kropotkin again.

[MiNdGaMe]

Quote: from elijahcraig on 9:46 pm on July 24, 2003

Some things the Bolsheviks did:

Made Racism punishable by death
Gave women the right to vote and run for office
Made Homosexuality legal
Led the first workers' revolution
Took the land of the bourgeois and gave it to the workers and the whole of the majority
Nationalized industry and agriculture
Mass Participation through democratic workers' councils and the like
Allowed all officials to be recalled at any time by the people
Destroyed the churches which had so long fucked over the people
Defended the revolution against the white army and 16 imperialist nations, mass famine, civil war, etc.

That's some of the list, I'll let others contribute if they like.

Calling Lenin a dictator is unfounded propaganda. He debated issues with the others and whoever gave the best presentation got their way by vote.

Please don't quote the bourgeois traitor Kropotkin again.

He hardly "led" the workers first revolution, vanguardism requires the working class, without it the vanguard does not exist.

Returning to Kronstadt once again, seeing that you mentioned "democracy", where was the democracy involved in that???
War is no accuse for absense of democracy.

Here are some stats about the victims of the Cheka between 1918-1919
- Some 8,000 persons had been executed
- 12,000 had been sent to forced labour
- 9,000 were put in concentration camps
- 40,000 remained in prison


On the 8th April the Cheka demanded it needed more troops at its disposal for combatting counter revolution. On the 11/12 Cheka and Lettish troops surrounded 26 Anarchist clubs in Moscow, in the insuing fighting Anarchists suffered 40 casualties and 500 were taken prisoner. On the 26 of April similar raids were carried out in Petrograd. At this stage Dzershinsky justified his action on the ground that the anarchists had been preparing an insurrection and that in any event most of those arrested proved to be criminal riff raff. He stressed that the Cheka had nether the mandate or the desire to wage war on ideological anarchists. Yet on the 13 June, secret documents outlined that the department for counter revolution investigative section and intelligence unit had sections allocated to dealing with anarchists.

'Revolutionary Terror', summary executions, etc. was kicked off by two proclamations signed by Lenin

[elijahcraig]

He hardly "led" the workers first revolution, vanguardism requires the working class, without it the vanguard does not exist.

That's what vanguardism is, leading the revolution. Lenin did not do it by himself, without the working class there would be nothing, but without Lenin they would've been at a loss.

Returning to Kronstadt once again, seeing that you mentioned "democracy", where was the democracy involved in that???
War is no accuse for absense of democracy.

I'd call it a mistake in horrible times, I don't know if it can be "justified" except by that. It doesn't totally make Lenin a dictator either, in fact it doesn't even say that at all.

Engels said that the job of the proletariat state was NOT to defend freedoms but to defend the revolution.

Here are some stats about the victims of the Cheka between 1918-1919
- Some 8,000 persons had been executed
- 12,000 had been sent to forced labour
- 9,000 were put in concentration camps
- 40,000 remained in prison

Executions? Bound to happen in every revolution.
Forced labor? They sent white army and their collaborators, no problem there. They actually let the bourgeois rebels go at first, then when they started sabatoging and joining the whites, they were put into camps.
Concentration Camps? That meant something quite different than the Jewish Concentration camps. The same as a labor camp.
Remained in Prison? So? White army and their collaborators, who gives a shit?

Lenin was not a dictator, and you have ceased to prove that he was.

[apathy maybe]

OK then when Lenin and the Bolsheviks gained power they did some good things and some bad things. Some of the bad things include it seems killing off and imprisoning many people, some of whom where counter-revulutionaries in that they wanted a return to the Tsar rulling and them as top dogs again but I sam sure that many included people who just wanted a bit more freedom, the right to critise the policies of the new elite. The right to select the elite.

Oh and to go back to what I said in another thread elijahcraig, I take back that he was a bastard but he was a murderer.

[elijahcraig]

I will admit the Bolsheviks made mistakes...but who wouldn't? Imagine it. 16 imperialist nations invade, famine, millions starving, cannibalism, half of the working class dead, total population decimated badly, chaos. They had to rule in place of the working class...there was no working class to rule! at the time it was chaos and war.

Thank you for acknowledging both sides, about Lenin.

[MiNdGaMe]

Thank you for reapting the same facts, and paddling around in circles a typical lennist in denial.

[elijahcraig]

What did I deny jackass??? I have explained to your uneducated mind the truth of those dates, you have looked at it in a one-sided manner like a fool.

Typical anarchist uselessness, quoting Kropotkin like a hypocritical jackass.

[MiNdGaMe]

The truth is the mindset of a lennist, yes I'm the uneducated one i'm not the fool, who actually supports Lenin and his actions.

Interesting considering since you a had Proudhon quote and a Lenin avatar.

(Edited by MiNdGaMe at 8:27 am on July 25, 2003)

[elijahcraig]

And?

What does that have to do with anything?

Typical anarchist one-sided fool. Quoting kropotkin's hypocrisy for all to see.

[MiNdGaMe]

Typical Lennists, gloating about the great "archievements" of Lenin for all to see. To save you time I thought I'd make you a template for your next reply

-- Lennists Template v0.1a --

< Insert some repitative self denying argument gloating about Lenin his so-called great "archievements", Bolshevism and Vanguardism. >

Typical anarchist one-sided fool. Quoting kropotkin's hypocrisy for all to see.
-- End Here --

(Edited by MiNdGaMe at 9:07 am on July 25, 2003)

[elijahcraig]

I have denied nothing.

I agree we should end this, it is a useless flame war.

[elijahcraig]

I might note that I used to be an anarchist, and have even written anarchist pamphlets. And started books. I have read most anarchist texts.

[YKTMX]

On a slightly diffirent note, I met someof the black bloc on my recent trip to Italy (the Carlo Guiliani demo). Interesting fellas, if mad.

[YKTMX]

Quote: from YouKnowTheyMurderedX on 1:23 pm on July 25, 2003
On a slightly diffirent note, I met some of the black bloc on my recent trip to Italy (the Carlo Guiliani demo). Interesting fellas, if mad.

[Kez]

On the issue of konstadts:
http://www.newyouth.com/archives/classics/...adt_trotsky.asp (http://www.newyouth.com/archives/classics/trotsky/hue_and_cry_kronstadt_trotsky.asp)

For Lenins acheivements, although im quite sure it wasnt due to LENIN for leading the workers, but Leninism if you catch what i mean. IE had lenin been shot in 1916 then there would still have been a revoltuion due to the fact that rank and file were marxists and would bhave been able to use the theory to effect
Lenin having formed the Bolsheviks, put forward the revolution from the ideealistic softies the mensheviks, who would have simply been crushed and there would never have been a socialist revolution of any sort.

Lenin was also responsibl;e for pushing for the German revolution

We musnt also forget about the ideas of national self determination brought by lenin to name a few

not a very clear question, too vague

[redstar2000]

It seems to me that a Marxist approach to the "great figures" of history involves two things: (1) an appreciation of the totality of their work...not a one-sided (bourgeois) "list" of "achievements" or "crimes"; and (2) an understanding of the material conditions that shaped the person's ideas and practices.

Making people in history into "angels" or "devils" is too misleading to be useful in understanding them or their times. We can and often do "look back" and emotionally identify with this or that figure...but that's not the same as understanding.

For Lenins acheivements, although im quite sure it wasnt due to LENIN for leading the workers, but Leninism if you catch what i mean.

Kamo is, on this occasion, quite right. Like it or not (I don't), the genuine achievement of V.I. Lenin was the original conception of the vanguard party of professional revolutionaries, as set forth in What is to be Done? at the beginning of the 20th century.

There was nothing like it before and, despite many claims to the contrary, nothing really like it ever again. Stalinists, Trotskyists and Maoists all assert that they follow in Lenin's footsteps...but it seems to me they mostly follow the Lenin of 1921 a lot more than the Lenin of 1901 (much less the Lenin of 1917).

I think it's pretty clear to serious revolutionaries now (with the benefit of experience), that the Leninist innovation was and had to be a failure...something that both Luxemburg and Trotsky anticipated at the time.

However gloomy his shadow, it has been a very long one and is only now beginning to lift...and about time. We can only speculate what the history of communism in the 20th century would have been like without him...more revolutionary but less "successful" perhaps. I don't know.

But if you desire an "achievement", there it is.

:cool:

PS: I only recently learned that Kropotkin supported the imperialist first world war. That's not just a "mistake"...that's treason to the working class. It doesn't necessarily invalidate anything he wrote prior to 1914...but it casts a deep shadow on anything he said after that.

It would be interesting to know the details: what his rationale was, did he come to regret it, show any remorse for such a crime, etc.?

We know that when Kautsky and his associates supported the war, that was only the beginning of their ugly and total capitulation to the bourgeoisie. I'm curious to what degree Kropotkin followed that twisted path.