Nikita Khrushchev - Opinoins?

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Watd u think of him?to me there is no question that Khrushchev was the greatest russian leader after lenin.he is not givin enough credit for all the excellent things he did.he reformed russia into an effective and good communist state after the horror that was stalin's russia.he denounced stalin and freed and helped millions and millions of stalin's surviving victims.he was not just the man who banged his shoe at the u.n.,NO!he was much more than that!i peasent who rose to the height of power and good!one of the greatest humans of the 20th century!

[Vinny Rafarino]

Oh yes...He was a fantastic leader!! How can you not just love a man who's policy was to change the Soviet Union into a capitalist nation. What a fucking hero he is.

What planet are you from man?

[Comrade Ceausescu]

lol what the fuck are you talking about?i think your one of those stalin worshippers.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

comrade raf thats complete and udder nonsense.

[lostsoul]

Khrushchev denoucing stalin, was the stupidest thing in history.

The problem with leftist are that they fight amoung each other too much(at times i wonder capitaists don't even need to do anything, the left will just kill itselfs if they keep fighting like this).

Khrushchev openly insulted his former boss, the main whom he praised in the past. He basically fucked his relationship with china. Many of mao's cruel acts during the culture revolution was also to get rid of Khrushchevism from his party.

i have not studied Khrushchev as much as i'd like, but one thing i know was he was shitty at forgin relations. i often think, if there were no Khrushchev would the culture revolution have happened? or would have soviet union had collasped? China and the soviet union should have stayed as allies.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

they always had shaky realations,soviets and china that is.also despite the cuban missile crisis Khrushchev did give cuba plenty of weapons.also,wat the fuck was Khrushchev supposed to do when stalin was in power?he was a communist and he joined the party and moved up!he most likely didnt like stalin but if you said that stalin would kill you.lol hes supposed to like him because hes his boss?

[lostsoul]

Quote: from cheguevara717 on 8:33 am on July 28, 2003
they always had shaky realations,soviets and china that is.also despite the cuban missile crisis Khrushchev did give cuba plenty of weapons.also,wat the fuck was Khrushchev supposed to do when stalin was in power?he was a communist and he joined the party and moved up!he most likely didnt like stalin but if you said that stalin would kill you.lol hes supposed to like him because hes his boss?

no....he doesn't have to like him..just not openly disrespect him.

you know what happens in armies when you insult your commanding officer? they fuck you up. Even if you hate your boss, you keep inside, just to keep everyone loyal.

Deng, the guy who was the chairman after mao, didn't denouce mao, and mao's actions killed more people then stalin.

What Khrushchev did made the soivets look unloyal and weak.

maybe many people will disagree with me, but i personaly don't think it was smart.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

theres a difference between mao and stalin.some of maos policies killed a lot of people,and mao personally felt remorse for those people,but realized it was the price china had to pay.and in reality,china makes it look like mao killed a lot cuz its so big.mao wasnt like stalin who was a blood thirsty motherfucker.i'm sorry but after stalin died most people hated him,but they were to afraid to express it!mao was great,stalin was a brutal and disgusting dictator who shames the name of communiusm and the soviet union!and maybe theres a reason why khruschev denounced stalin,cuz he was a prick who directly excecuted millions.he was so paranoid he created a large secret service to find traitors and stuff,and theyd find them by pretending to be anti stalin,and theyd capture them and shoot them.but stalin was so paranoid he thought maybe because the secret service pretended to be anti stalin,maybe they were!so he murder all of them.nuff said.

[lostsoul]

i don't mean to argue with you or anything. But one problem many of the people close to mao often said, was that he felt no remorse for his actions. He'd be laughing and happy while people were dying because of his policies.

He was also the one who said, that even their is a war between capilitists and socialists, perhapes 1/3 or 2/3 of the world would die and its ok, because the remaining 1/3 would regrow.

Also the culture revolution was designed to figure Khrushchevist(which are basically traitors, who pay lip service but behind your back plot against you)

and also if you research mao's military times, and try to find out about "ab tuan" you will see the things mao did inorder to fight "Traitors".

Stalin had the people's intrest in mind..if not he would have lived like a king and not done any work, and just partied. As bad as stalin was, i think no one is perfect, and even stalin should not be denouced by his own country. In my opinion it makes them look weak.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

ive read much differently about mao.he always had the peoples intrests at heatr.he had a good heart and was a great man!stalin was a sick indivigual.he wasnt nearly as bad as hitler,and i respect maybe a few things he said and did but still he was a madman.dont get started about mao cuz i really like him.no hard feelings though.all i ask is that you give khruschev a good amount of respect for reforming the ussr and making it a better place even if you think he shouldnt have dissed stalin.

[lostsoul]

Quote: from cheguevara717 on 9:02 am on July 28, 2003
ive read much differently about mao.he always had the peoples intrests at heatr.he had a good heart and was a great man!stalin was a sick indivigual.he wasnt nearly as bad as hitler,and i respect maybe a few things he said and did but still he was a madman.dont get started about mao cuz i really like him.no hard feelings though.all i ask is that you give khruschev a good amount of respect for reforming the ussr and making it a better place even if you think he shouldnt have dissed stalin.

sorry if i seem to hate Khrushchev, i respect any one who tries to advance the world into socialism, and although i haven't studied him alot, i think he did try. He must have did good things, because cuba, vietnam, india, etc..all tried to allie themselfs with USSR and not china during the conflicts between china and ussr.

but unfortantly, i just see him as a major factor in it, thats my problem with him. But as i said before..no one is perfect.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

i suggest you buy this book.the best on khruschev.i own it its great!very new!


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...=books&n=507846 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0393051447/qid=1059379795/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/102-8091339-4329728?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)

(Edited by cheguevara717 at 9:19 am on July 28, 2003)

[Vinny Rafarino]

Thanks for your educated reply boyGuevara717.

You obvously know nothing about communism if you think Nikita was a socialist. Get your facts together son. Perhaps school would be good for you.

I am sorry to have read any of your posts here as they are absolute drivel.

Just to let you in on a secret "udder" means something completely different than what you were trying to convey. I believe the word you were looking for is "utter"

Unless of course you milk cows for a living.

I get it! You are from Pluto!

[lostsoul]

Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 8:58 pm on July 28, 2003
Thanks for your educated reply boyGuevara717.

You obvously know nothing about communism if you think Nikita was a socialist. Get your facts together son. Perhaps school would be good for you.

I am sorry to have read any of your posts here as they are absolute drivel.

Just to let you in on a secret "udder" means something completely different than what you were trying to convey. I believe the word you were looking for is "utter"

Unless of course you milk cows for a living.

I get it! You are from Pluto!

why attack him? why not simply stick to attacking his idea's instead?

i personaly don't see how you can change someone's thinking by insulting their spelling.

[Vinny Rafarino]

I am more volatile than you are comrade Lostsoul.

I would also suggest using at least a hint of grammar and punctuation in your posts. You would be amazed at the results Mr. 717.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

lol at you calling me "boy''.i believe the word your searching for is che!you obviously havent read anything on khruschev if you think he wasnt a communist.and you say i dont know anything about communism?but you suggest school!please!i live in america!all they do is diss communism.also its again funny that you say i know nothing about communism,your the one who reps stalin,he didnt even follow the ideals of communism.he was a paranoid skitsophrenic who murderd millions.he did a few things for communism.

[Vinny Rafarino]

If you want to look other than the foolish boy you have presented yourself as, please use proper grammar and sentence structure.

I repeat.

Your posts are pure babble.

Nikita Khruschev's revisionist capitalist regime is responsible for the downfall of the Soviet Union. You are alone in your admiration of him. Us educated communists have known about his betrayal of the people for a generation. I take it you have never had any classes in economics boy?

Take one son, your eyes will then open to Nikita's crimes against the people.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

stalin was the one who commited horrific crimes against his own people boy.


p.s.-are you from a southern part of the united states?

[MikeyBoy]

Stalin killed the revolution and Khrushchev started a capitalist one. Khrushchev was as bad as Stalin. He stayed by Stalin's side allowing things to happen and as soon as Stalin is dead Khrushchev says, "WOw, that was one fucking bad trip, man!". He was such an idiot.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

playa haters! :lol:

[Vinny Rafarino]

Mikey;

Stalin killed the revolution? Your interpretation of historical fact is quite flawed.



cheguevara717;

I'm not even from the USA son and please provide some scientific proof that comrade Stalin suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. I won't even bother to comment again on your claim that Stalin murdered millions of people as you obviously (much like everyone else on this board) can't provide any empirical evidence to support your "theories". Dubunking the claims of the children on this site has been like shooting cappies in a barrell.

If you consider stopping the advancement of fascism, building the perfect Socialist State and being one of the few leaders in history to never waver from his commitment to the people and revolution "horrible crimes" then call us criminals son.

[CubanFox]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2003, 02:30 AM
playa haters! :lol:
You shouldn't've said that. RAF's going to mock you into oblivion.
http://membres.lycos.fr/fuzzynoodle/MsgBoardPics/flamed.jpg

[Vinny Rafarino]

Cheguevara717 stifled this conflict in another thread. It would not be appropriate to flame him now comrade Fox.

[Urban Rubble]

You know, I can't really comment on how "bad" Stalin was. I tend to think that alot of his purges were the result of paranoia, but I haven't really read all that much and most of my opinions have been set in place by American propaganda. I think it's hard to live in this country and not automatically think Stalin was a murdering prick. However, I shouldn't really make a call because like I said, I haven't read much about the guy.

One thing I know for sure, whoever says that Kruschev was a "great" Socialist leader is a, how can I put this eloquently, ah yes, a douche bag.

Not only was Kruschev a whiny little ***** who would do ANYTHING to get JFK's attention, he was also building a Capitalist state right under the noses of the Soviet communists.

If you love Kruschev so much, fine, but I suggest you stop calling yourself a communist.

[Just Joe]

Khrushchevs vision for Socialism was flawed to say the least. I'm reminded of his giving more power to de-centralised bodies. A very un-socialist thing to do as it is basically a step back to a system of ownership. When a manager is held accountable to profits, not an elected government or his work collegues, how is that really different to the system we have today?

[blackemma]

When a manager is held accountable to profits, not an elected government or his work collegues, how is that really different to the system we have today?

Why not abolish the profit incentive altogether?

For what it's worth, I would suggest decentralization is a highly democratic and socialistic move more often than not. The trouble is to whom is one giving the power? If one is transferring power from a monolithic, state bureaucracy to a series of democratically-organized workers' councils - then yes, that is indeed socialism. If, however, decentralization means transferring power from a monolithic, state bureaucracy to a monolithic, private bureaucracy, then it doesn't really make a difference since you have capitalism either way.

[atlanticche]

Khrushchev was one of the worst
Andropov was better than him
he was a child of Stalin's regime he copied Stalin he took away any trace of his predecessor
he had carried out a lot of Staslin's commands he rewrote any connection between himself and Stalin he droped the USSR on its head he created a huge regime change in a small amount of time causing struggle in the process
it would of been better if he had taken time to do what he did and finished of some of Stalin's plan's
he descraced the Soviet Union he made it look bad his plan's were useless
he spent to much money on agriculture with no positive result

Gorbachev was better