Was che leninist Scum? - a question for vox

[peaccenicked]

I dont mind people arguing against Leninism.
Somehow el che can do it without personal abuse.
Do you deny that Che Guevara was a Leninist and a vanguardist?
Try reading ''Man and Socialism in Cuba'' It is appended to this site.
Or is it not all Leninists are scum.
If it is only me.
What branch of Leninists are not Scum.
Or are you here like the Capis to promote ignorant lies
about the nature of Che's politics and of Lenins?
Are you not better finding a site that scandalises che rather promotes his good name and politics.
Like the Capis you don't seem to have a conscience
I have never been able to persuade anyone into having one, it comes through feeling actual solidarity with humans and not through arrogant assertions that denigrate the workers movement itself.


(Edited by peaccenicked at 5:21 pm on Mar. 3, 2002)

[vox]

As for Che, I suggest you look at his actions when Castro threw his lot with the USSR.

As for denigrating the worker's movement, quote me. You can't, of course. It's just more of your hot air. However, I stand accused without a case made against me, and that is a true capitalist tactic.

And as for my conscience, I suggest that you worry more about your own, for you said that you demand "ideological unification," as I recall.

Perhaps a worker who doesn't agree with your brand of Leninist politics is always an enemy?

vox

[peaccenicked]

What has the USSR after Stalin got to do with leninism.
So you say Che was not a Leninist or a vanguardist.
Yes yes or no no.
You are avoiding the question.
I have already answered your garbage on ideological
unification.

[vox]

peacenicked,

Allow me to ask you a question in respnose, okay? I think that this might illuminate some things for you.

If Che were a US citizen and, let's say, 25 years old, what would he be?

I ask this because you don't seem to realize that material conditions in Latin America are different than material conditions in the USA today. Too, you suggest that Che wanted a priveledged power structure which is, of course, not true. The man even yelled at his wife for using a party car rather than taking the bus like everyone else.

Your elitism doesn't wash here, sir.

vox

[peaccenicked]

What is your question.
What is my elitism?
What is Lenin's elitism?
Whas Che a vanguardist and a Leninist?
Why cant you answer?

[vox]

I've answered your silly question about Lenin's elitism in so many other threads that I won't start it again here.

Your elitism is the same as Lenin's.

I say that Che was not a Leninist in the commonly accepted definition of the term, and this stems from Che's overwhelming and unequivocal abidance of the right of the proletariat to determine itself.

Perhaps you think of Che as a wannabe dictator. I do not.

There, your questions are answered. Now, perhaps, you could do something more than copy and paste answers to me?

vox

[peaccenicked]

So you somewhere in the universe there is an uncommon definition of the term leninist.
If so what is it?

(Edited by peaccenicked at 11:45 am on Mar. 7, 2002)

[vox]

"So you somewhere (sic) in the universe there is an uncommon definition of the term leninist.
If so what is it?"

Are you, peacenicked, backing off a common understanding of Leninism at this late date? After you've already posted, all over the place, your thoughts about Lenin?

HEE!

Do you now want "Lenin" to be whatever you what him to be? It sure sounds that way.

I've said my piece about Lenin. Do you think you have the courage to stick by what you've already said?

vox

[peaccenicked]

Again you avoid my question?

[vox]

I'm not avoiding anything, peacenicked. Perhpas you could state your question in proper English? Is that too much to ask of you?

Fact if, peacenicked, you're grasping at straws. I've answered everything you've thrown at me, and I've shown your Leninism to be at odds with Marx.

So ask your question, son. I'll answer.

vox

[peaccenicked]

Intelletually bully.
I am merely asking what is this uncommon leninism you refer to.
I think that was obvious even with my mistake.

[vox]

I don't believe I ever mentioned an "uncommon" definition of Leninism. I believe you did that. Please don't try to attribute your mistakes to me.

Also, when you speak of "Intelletually (sic) bully," I have to wonder what you mean? Can one "intellectually" bully someone else if they know that of which they speak? HARDLY!

Call me a bully, peacenicked. Call me all sorts of things. It's just further proof that I have made my case, in several threads, against your Leninst arrogance, and you've nothing with which to counter, so you call me names.

Hell, you didn't even answer my post, just called me a bully.

You're dismissed, peacenicked. You're a has-been, a found-needing, a wannabe, a failed-academic, and, out of all the things to fail at, failing at academia has to be the most pathetic.

vox

[peaccenicked]

"I say that Che was not a Leninist in the commonly accepted definition of the term" Vox

[vox]

That's your whole response?

You're more pathetic and vapid than I thought. Hee!

vox

[peaccenicked]

You are still avoiding the question?
Vapid ??????

[vox]

Perhaps I am vapid.

Please state the actual, not implied, question, and I will answer it. Why are you having such a difficult time doing this?

vox

[peaccenicked]

"I am merely asking what is this uncommon leninism you refer to.
I think that was obvious even with my mistake."
I made it a couple of posts ago.

[vox]

Again, the Leninist coward does not respond to me.

vox

[peaccenicked]

What is this uncommon leninism you refer to?

[vox]

Umm, peacenicked? You're the one who brought that up.

Have you been drinking too much tonight? I suggest you read back through the thread, son. You seem a bit off.

vox

[peaccenicked]

I quote you again.
"Your elitism is the same as Lenin's.

I say that Che was not a Leninist in the commonly accepted definition of the term, and this stems from Che's overwhelming and unequivocal abidance of the right of the proletariat to determine itself. "

[vox]

Ummm, okay. I stand by what I wrote, and I believe you just copied enough for it to be self-explanatory.

Now, what is your question?

vox

[peaccenicked]

His Leninism is no different from Lenins in
the respect to the independence of the proletariat.
You are merely convey the false impression that Lenin
suppressed dissent. As much as Capitalist is trying to give the false impression that Che suppressed dissent.

[vox]

So where, and when, was dissent tolerated? In Cuba, that is, of course?

And, why, exactly, did Che leave cushy Cuba? I asked you that before, but, despite answering many other threads, you haven't answered that.

vox

[peaccenicked]

"Workers Opposition

A group within the Russian Communist Party that struggled to achieve workers rights and trade union control over industry — by 1922, the Communist Party had condemned their ideas and forced the group to disburse.

The Workers Opposition began to form in 1919, as a result of the policies of War Communism, which had set a precedence for the domination of the Communist Party over local party affiliates and trade unions. Near the end of the Civil War, the Workers Opposition began agitating against the control of the party, seeking to restore more power to local party affiliates and trade unions.
Here 1919 to 1922."
And Che left Cuba because as he said himself he had done his bit.

[vox]

Okay, peacenicked, you found a piece here (http://www.marxists.org/glossary/orgs/w/o.htm) and copied it. Good job.

I think the problem arose in my second post to this thread. I asked you, "If Che were a US citizen and, let's say, 25 years old, what would he be?"

I went on to say, "I ask this because you don't seem to realize that material conditions in Latin America are different than material conditions in the USA today."

That's something you never answered. Rather, you keep asking me to answer your questions, but, in reviewing this thread, I believe I've answered them all. A copy-and-paste quote is not a question, right?

So, answer the question, and, if you wish, ask one in question form.

Is this beyond you?

vox (still waiting)

[peaccenicked]

''So where, and when, was dissent tolerated? In Cuba, that is, of course?''
my reply?
Workers Opposition

A group within the Russian Communist Party that struggled to achieve workers rights and trade union control over industry — by 1922, the Communist Party had condemned their ideas and forced the group to disburse.

The Workers Opposition began to form in 1919, as a result of the policies of War Communism, which had set a precedence for the domination of the Communist Party over local party affiliates and trade unions. Near the end of the Civil War, the Workers Opposition began agitating against the control of the party, seeking to restore more power to local party affiliates and trade unions.
Here 1919 to 1922.
The bully does not accept the answer because of the form it is given not a critique of content. Then asks a wholly speculative question,
that I am sure is only designed to entrap me and set me up for another round of bullying tactics.




(Edited by peaccenicked at 3:35 pm on Mar. 10, 2002)

[militantmindLAM]

che was a stalinist fuck........he was great, but the fact is that he was a stalinist.

[vox]

peacenicked,

I do not understand your nonlinear reply. Please answer directly, if you can. If you cannot, please say so.

You say I do not accept the answer, and you're correct, I do not accept the answer. Saying that there was a dissenting group that the Leninists crushed merely proves my point about the elitist and arrogant nature of Leninism, doesn't it?

Now, if you've something to say, please say it.

vox

[vox]

No repsonse, peacenicked?

vox

[peaccenicked]

Why dont you reply to your own posting.
You asked the question where and when.
I gave you a when.