Communism's Charge Sheet

[Killfacer]

In reaction to the silly "imperialism's charge sheet" i'v made one for communism, also i have done my best to source the information as on the imperialism one much of it was unsourced. I dont know how people source on this site so iv just done little reference numbers:

In the course of a year 7000 "counter revolutionaries" executed 1

Forced dissoloution of a democractically fair and popular assembly in which the Bolsheviks lacked a majority by just over 200 members2

Used conscription in order to bolster its army, the use of which shows the lack of support and a disregard for others. Whilst other left wing groups such as the Makhnovists used popular support and refrain from using conscription.3

Soviet Purges, Thousands die (dont think i need a reference for this, as it is common knowledge)

War Communism leads to the starvation of thousands (once again a reference is un-needed here as even commmunists conceed war communism killed thousands)

Red Army troops obtain grain from peasants, using force when neccesary. This leads to the strikes in Petrograd and the Tambov uprising.

Tambov is brutally put down, even neutral historians agree; "The ruthless supression of the tambov peasant revolt"4

The Kronstadt sailors upon seeing the Bolshevik juggernaut become a dictatorship not of the people but over them revolt. They are brutally put down at the cost of hundreds of lives on both sides. (no source needed)

Nestor Makhno and the Anarcho-communists in ukraine are originally loved and hailed has leftwing heroes. Once their help is not needed they are turned on. Trotsky okay's makhno's assassination. The makhnovsits are put brutally down.

The general use of terror throughout "communisms" reign in the USSR

The chinese purges, millions were prosecuted, including a famous philosopher, Chen Yuen. Many of them were executed with little evidence.

im running out of sources. BUt alot of them do not require sources.

Millions die in china due to starvation

Hundreds die in both China and the USSR in mass trials and executions

Thousands sent to the Gulags, for very little reason. Ruins families.

Gulags are disgusting place, the treatment of prisoners was awful5

There are thousands of more and if people wish to add then go ahead they will be welcomed!

I KNOW SOME PEOPLE WILL CLAIME THESE WERE NOT ATROCITIES OF COMMUNISM, YET MUCH THE SAME COULD BE SAID OF THE THREAD I BASED THIS UPON.

DONT BAN ME

1Modern World History, Page 120
2Modern World History, Page 117
3History of the Makhnovist Movement, Page 78
4Lenin and the Russian Revolution, page 47
5See Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago

[JazzRemington]

None of this shows that communism is the reason for any of this. In fact, all it asserts is that Russia and China performed atrocities, which no one is doubting (unless you ignore them).

I can't comment on the sources, since you didn't include any other information on the sources aside from the book name and since I don't have any in-depth knowledge of Russia or China (aside from working knowledge of Soviet Russia's particular social and economic organization and some current happenings) I can't comment on some of the assertions. You know, because I'm not going to pop open a book and just blindly copy things from secondary sources that could have a large bias or have a particular political agenda which requires them to deliberately distort things that isn't liked.

But I can comment on your concern about conscription. Most of the world, including many democracies (including some wealthy ones like Austria and Germany), use conscription. Hell, while US doesn't use conscription, they still require all able-bodied men of a certain age to register for the draft.

[Dean]

In reaction to the silly "imperialism's charge sheet" i'v made one for communism, also i have done my best to source the information as on the imperialism one much of it was unsourced. I dont know how people source on this site so iv just done little reference numbers:

So a thread based around a violent extension of colonialism into the present era is silly, but a thread based on discrediting a humanist ideology because of what has been done in its name is not?

[Kwisatz Haderach]

When deciding whether some event in history was good or bad, don't forget to ask yourself the question what was the alternative?

It's all nice and righteous to say that, for example, conscription or war communism were bad, but they helped the Bolsheviks win the civil war. The alternative would have been, at best, a much longer civil war - leading to many more deaths - and at worst the complete collapse of Russia into chaos, since it is highly doubtful that any faction in the civil war other than the Bolsheviks could have secured anything remotely resembling a victory.

[RGacky3]

what was the alternative?

I don't know, not murdering millions, not destroying freedom, not destroying any chance of genuine socialism.

Most modern Socialists do not support either the USSR or China, and many in the past (at least almost all the Anarchists) did'nt as well. That being said, do you still stand by Imperialisms crimes, and the system that brought them?

[Schrödinger's Cat]

"Silly" imperialism charge sheet? I guess to you capitalist imperialism is just a burp in the history books.


Forced dissoloution of a democractically fair and popular assembly in which the Bolsheviks lacked a majority by just over 200 members2

Dissolution and democratically are the words you're grasping for, and neither apply. The temporary government refused to pull out of the war despite scathing opposition, and it pushed back the date for the Constituent Assembly on the claim that the war must first be won - going so far as to declare Russia a liberal republic before the Constituent Assembly convened. This drew criticism from both socialists and monarchists. It was agreed that only the Constituent Assembly could establish the legal framework. The Bolsheviks called for an overthrow of the government so that all power could be turned over to the soviets, but the Russian ministers - headed by liberals who declared themselves authorized to rule - put down the uprising, banned the Bolsheviks, and censored all pro-Red press.

Put down your corporate textbooks and think for yourself. The Bolsheviks actively participated in the Durma before realizing it was under the tzar's control and even came to dominate the true source of power in the country - the Petrograd Soviet.


In the course of a year 7000 "counter revolutionaries" executed 1

More Reds were killed/executed during the Russian Civil War than Whites.


Used conscription in order to bolster its army, the use of which shows the lack of support and a disregard for others. Whilst other left wing groups such as the Makhnovists used popular support and refrain from using conscription.

What? You have got to be kidding me. Pick up a book, kid. Makhno was an anarcho-communist. You're going to compare conscription to the enslavement of African Americans and drug exchange in China? :rolleyes: Makhno was a decent man, but "Makhnovists" were known to be some of the cruelest participants in the Russian Revolution with POWs.


War Communism leads to the starvation of thousands (once again a reference is un-needed here as even commmunists conceed war communism killed thousands)

People starved in the American and Chinese Civil War, too. Who would have thunk that war leads to a shortage in food supplies, especially in a country where the iron plow had only recently been used.


The general use of terror throughout "communisms" reign in the USSR

Right. Like I thought when I entered this thread - no substance.


The chinese purges, millions were prosecuted, including a famous philosopher, Chen Yuen. Many of them were executed with little evidence.

You're confusing two separate incidents. Purges were done inside the party, and most were conducted peacefully. A purge can't be done against nationalist (scumbags).

Secondly, there is no evidence that the trials were done with any intention of killing people without evidence. The executions were widely supported by the Chinese peasants and workers. Indeed the nationalists were much more ruthless than Mao's communist campaign. There's incidences where the nationalists raped women before selling them to prostitution in exchange for war material - whereas the communists pushed for equality of genders under the law.


im running out of sources. BUt alot of them do not require sources.

:D


Millions die in china due to starvation

China was known as the "land of famines." It wasn't even the worse famine experienced in that region. Coincidentally, the population had increased by 40% by the time Mao died.

More people died of starvation in India's progression towards independence, and a higher percentage had died in the Irish potato famine.


Thousands sent to the Gulags, for very little reason. Ruins families.

"For very little reason?" There were certainly abuses done, but Stalin and the Politburo settled the matter in 1938 by injecting themselves into the problem and seeking out officers who abused their privilege. Most people who went to the gulags deserved to - they were criminals. The prison population/rate in the United States is higher than it was during "Stalin's reign of terror" - and laborers actually got payed wages for their work.


Gulags are disgusting place, the treatment of prisoners was awful5

The gulag system was one of the first in the world to administer health tests to see if a person could handle his labor duties. By the the early 1950s the death rate went below 1%.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

I don't know, not murdering millions, not destroying freedom, not destroying any chance of genuine socialism.
Really? And how, exactly, was this supposed to happen, given the conditions that existed in Russia in 1917?

I'm sorry, but you can't argue that the USSR was bad because it would have been so much better if a fairy had dropped from the sky and magically created genuine socialism.

[Sky]

In the course of a year 7000 "counter revolutionaries" executed
For the Soviet state to have used violence against its opponents would also have been consistent with the terrorism of the Socialist Revolutionaries and others. Up to July 1918, 4000 Soviet activists had been murdered. In the period August-September, prior to the assassination attempt on Lenin, another 6400 had been murdered in August-September 1918. As a matter of self-defense, the soviet state set out to proportionately respond to the conduct of its adversaries. Overall, about 6000 people were executed by the organs of the soviet state in 1918, including many corrupt officials, hooligans, and common criminals. By contrast, the Kolchak government shot some 25,000 people in the Ekaterinburg area alone. Ataman Krasnov's “All Great Don Host” meted out 25,000 death sentences in the Don province from May 1918 to February 1919. The Denikin and Petliura bands pursued a policy of genocide against the Jews, murdering 150,000 of them. The White Guard regime in Finland executed or murdered in concentration camps some 25,000 people during the brief civil war in Finland. And on and on. In the context of counterrevolutionary aggression and terror, Communists will defend themselves to the utmost.


Forced dissoloution of a democractically fair and popular assembly in which the Bolsheviks lacked a majority by just over 200 members2

It is not constructive to exaggerate the significance of the Constituent Assembly. To start, the majority of the population simply did not care about the Constituent Assembly, for turnout was a mere 50 percent. In rural areas, electoral commissions were still under the control of the counterrevolutionary Constitutional Democrats and the right-wing socialists who refused to distribute lists of Bolshevik candidates to illiterate peasant voters. It was clear from the elections to the soviets that if the peasants were given the opportunity would overwhelmingly support the Bolsheviks and the left SRs. By the time of the Assembly convened in January 1918, the peasants regarded the soviets, which through the newly formed Soviet government, had met the key demands of the peasants--peace and land--as the only authentic organs of democracy.

The result of the elections to the Constituent Assembly did not reflect the actual interrelation of political forces in the country because the influence of the working class and the Bolshevik party on the non-proletarian masses was incomparably stronger in the extra-parliamentary than in the parliamentary struggle. The SR electorate was part of the Russian peasantry, and political power was held in the city. Numbers could not be translated into power because the voice of the peasant carried far less weight than the enlightened worker or soldier. When the October Uprising in Petrograd began, the right-wing SRs mounted no challenge due to their powerlessness. Nor was there a clear clear winner in the election. The Bolsheviks polled 24 percent of the vote, the SRs 38 percent, the Mensheviks 3 percent, and the Cadets 4 percent.

Most significantly, the election did the election reflect the split of the Socialist Revolutionary Party whose Left faction supported soviet power. In the Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets, half of the SR delegates voted in favor of soviet power. Even a vote for the Socialist Revolutionary Party by the peasant did not equate to repudiation of soviet power: by October 1917 the agrarian policies of the Bolsheviks and SRs were indistinguishable. The peasant was not voting for the SR any more than he was voting for the distribution of land from the large estates.

The election was held when the Soviet Government was still just becoming established and a sizable portion of the population was not acquainted with its decrees. Even the formal results, however, proved that the Revolution conformed to the laws of history: the Bolsheviks won in Petrograd, Moscow, on the Northern and Western fronts, in the Baltic fleet, and in 20 districts of the Northwest and Central Industrial regions. The majority of the working class and about half of the military voted for the Bolsheviks. When the Constituent Assembly convened, only 410 (including 140 Bolsheviks) deputies out of 715 even bothered to show up, suggesting that there was widespread apathy toward this body. The dissolution of the Constituent Assembly was wholly legal: by a decree of the Central Executive Committee of the Congress of Soviets, the Constituent Assembly ceased to exist. As we saw, the working people did not care about the disappearance of such a worthless body. By contrast, the Bolsheviks were able to lead demonstrations of 500,000 people in Petrograd against the policies of the Provisional Government during the June Crisis and the July Days.

Used conscription in order to bolster its army
By March 1918, when conscription did not exist, soviet power had been established in all of Russia with the exception of the western provinces under Austro-German occupation and Transcaucasia where bourgeois nationalists seized power (except Baku). Conscription was reinstated only after systematic aggression by a variety of counterrevolutionaries and interventionists. To attribute the restoration of military conscription to a lack of popular support is very dishonest. There certainly was no need for conscription in the period November-February 1918 when soviet power was established throughout Russia by the workers and toiling peasants.

Whilst other left wing groups such as the Makhnovists used popular support and refrain from using conscription.3
The Bolshevik-led partisan movement in the territories occupied by the White Guard was just as notable as that of Makhno's forces. For example, more than 20,000 Bolshevik-led partisans operated in the Altai province alone during 1920.


Soviet Purges, Thousands die (dont think i need a reference for this, as it is common knowledge)

Many of those were that endured repression were Communists. After the mid-1950s, many of those who were found to have been innocent were posthomously rehabilitated.

War Communism leads to the starvation of thousands (once again a reference is un-needed here as even commmunists conceed war communism killed thousands)
This is simply wrong. War Communism did not cause famine. One should keep in mind that the Soviet Government throughout 1918 did not have control of the grain producing regions. Ukraine from February to November 1918 was a German puppet state. The Don and Kuban provinces were controlled by the bloodthirsty Cossack warlords. Siberia were occupied by the Czech and Japanese aggressors, Admiral Kolchak, and bloodthirsty warlords like Semenov.
Famine first emerged in Russia in 1916, leading to food riots in the spring of 1917. The shortages turned into a major crisis following the 1917 harvest. The Soviet government was able only to collect a fraction of the necessary grain which was transferred from village to town in normal years. During most of the civil war, the vital agricultural regions of Ukraine, the North Caucasus, Siberia, and part of the Volga were under the occupation of the White Guard forces and foreign interventionists. As a result, Grain collections by the Soviet state declined from 8. million tons in the 1916/17 season to to 2.0 million in 1918/1919. In 1920/21, the grain requisitions increased to 6 million tons, most of which had come from territory that just been liberated. In the spring of 1921,the government moved away from requisitioning and reintroduced the market. The famine resulted from poor weather and a poor harvest in 1920 and severe drought in 1921. The 1920 harvest was only 60 percent of the pre-war level in 1920 and even smaller in 1921. The Soviet Government had always publicly acknowledged famine and accepted proposals from international agencies to organize aid. The claim that the Soviet state was exporting “large amounts of grain” is factually incorrect. Russian statistics show that only 115 tons of grain were exported in 1921-22 compared to 3000 thousand tons in 1926. In other words, the export level of 1921 was basically 0 percent of a normal economic year.

Grain requisitions were put in place by the Tsarist autocracy during the imperialist war. Even in the grain rich areas of Ukraine and South Russia, and Siberia,the regimes of Kolchak, Skoropadsky, Denikin, and Wrangel resorted to coercion to take grain due to shortages. In Siberia, the Kolchak “government” imposed a law requiring all surpluses to be transferred to the state. Wrangel invaded the Crimea in search of grain and even introduced a foreign trade monopoly in order to prevent exports. By the end of 1919 peasants were merely given paper receipts in exchange for requisitioned food.

This leads to the strikes in Petrograd and the Tambov uprising.
If there was such widespread opposition towards soviet power then why was there not another February 1917 in Petrograd? These strikes you speak of are just a figment of your imagination.

Casualties during the Antonovshchina in the Tambov area amounted to about 5000 dead bandits and likely an equal number of Red Army troops. There was nothing peaceful about the methods of the bandits. Some 3000 workers and soviet functionaries were murdered and there was extensive material damage in the area. The bandits made use of the tactics and methods of partisan warfare, resorting to ambushes and surprise attacks. Against this violent war of aggression declared by the kulaks against established soviet authority, the working people through the Red Army had no choice but to defend themselves.

With the implementation of the New Economic Policy, the revolt lost any basis for its continuation. When Tukhachevsky, Uborevich, and others were sent to combat the bandits in May 1921, they had orders to finish off the bandits within a month. By July, the size of Antonov’s forces diminished by some 40,000 men, down from a peak of 50,000. By August 1921 the revolt was completely suppressed.

There was not anything extraordinary about a peasant revolt in Russia, for there were thousands of peasant disturbances in 1917 when the land held by the nobility were seized. When measured with the partisan activity against the White Guard and the interventionists, the Tambov revolt seems insignificant. In December 1919, more than 50,000 partisans operated in the rear of Denikin’s troops in Ukraine. Many cities were liberated, including Poltava, Kaztin, and Kremenchug. Around Novorissisk and Tuapse, some 15,000 red and green partisans fought successful battles against the White Guard and disrupted transportation on the Maikop-Tuapse line. The partisan movement in the northern Caucasus diverted a considerable portion of Denikin’s forces and helped Soviet troops the foil the enemy offensive in Astrakhan. The partisan movement attained an even broader scope in Siberia. In the summer of 1919, the partisans in Altai province numbered 25,000. About 100,000 partisans in Siberia liberated vast regions even before the approach of the Red Army. In February 1920, some 20,000 partisans liberated the Amur region.

The Kronstadt sailors upon seeing the Bolshevik juggernaut become a dictatorship not of the people but over them revolt. They are brutally put down at the cost of hundreds of lives on both sides. (no source needed)

The outbreak of an isolated revolt among a few thousand thousand rebellious soldiers and sailors at a military port need not be overemphasized. The revolt was quickly suppressed because of its small scope. Remember that on 12 March 1917 some 200,000 revolutionary soldiers joined forces with striking workers in Petrograd and quickly took control of the city. Had the Kronstadt revolt been anything analogous to March 1917 in Petrograd then soviet power would have been eliminated in 1921.

The military revolt at Kronstadt should be seen in the context of the dissatisfaction by a portion of the population against the economic dislocation and other hardships caused by the civil war of 1918-20, imposed on Russia by the imperialist forces and their henchmen. Instead of reconciling themselves to the authority of the workers’ soviets, the SR-Menshevik conspirators resorted to organizing a violent revolt in order to set conditions for open activity by the White Guard and the restoration of capitalism. They employed such fallacious slogans as “Soviets without Communists.” A “Provisional Revolutionary Committee” was illegally established consisting of anarchists and SR-Menshevik elements which proceeded to arrest many Communists and workers. Against such bellicose provocations there was no choice except to suppress this violent revolt with the use of force. The SR-Mensheviks initiated this confrontation with the soviet authorities and ended up losing in what was a completely fair fight.

Nestor Makhno and the Anarcho-communists in ukraine are originally loved and hailed has leftwing heroes. Once their help is not needed they are turned on. Trotsky okay's makhno's assassination. The makhnovsits are put brutally down.
Makhno allied with the soviets multiple times and each time he betrayed the soviets.

The general use of terror throughout "communisms" reign in the USSR
This surely does not apply to the entire post-war period of Russia.


Millions die in china due to starvation
The famine in China resulted from two successive years of natural calamities and declining harvests. As a result, grain output dropped from 200 million tons in 1959 to 170 million tons in 1960 to 144 million tons in 1961. Through the system of rationing grain reserves and large purchases of Canadian and Australian wheat, the Chinese Government helped to alleviate the situation. Famine has been a chronic feature of Chinese history. There were 1,828 major famines recorded during the years 100BC-1911 AD. Their severity and frequency appeared to have increased over the centuries, and that an 1876 famine in northern China left 15 milion dead, a higher percentage of the population than in 1959-61. As scholars state, it was not the intention of the Chinese Government to kill off a portion of a peasantry.

In late 1959, several natural disasters and bad weather conditions were reported in the press. Floods and drought brought about the Three Bitter Years of 1959-62. After 1962, the economy recovered, but the politic was shifting toward a struggle against revisionism, which brought on the Cultural Revolution four years later. In March 1959, the entire Hunan region was under flood, and soon after that the spring harvest in southwestern China was lost through drought. In 1960, the situation deteriorated further. Drought and other bad weather affected 55 percent of the cultivated area. Since the famine was caused by natural disasters and because the Chinese Government worked arduously to alleviate the situation, the Chinese Government cannot be held responsible for the deaths of people from disease resulting from malnutrition.

In 1990 the first UN Human Development Report indicated that about 10 million children would die that year for want of basic medical care. Virtually all of them died in countries controlled by capitalists. Since then the figure has been 10-12 million annually, or at least 170 million over the past 17 years. Of course, there is no blame placed on the international monopolies or the capitalist system for this tragic fact.
Gulags are disgusting place, the treatment of prisoners was awful

There was nothing extraordinary about the "Gulag", which were analagous to penal institutions in the capitalist countries and labor camps from the Tsarist period. The vast majority of those in the labor camps were convicted of crimes of a non-political nature. Soviet Russian labor camps were no more fatal in terms of the death rate than Russia proper today.

[mykittyhasaboner]

DONT BAN ME
stupid request, giving the nature of your post...:thumbdown:

[Joby]

Allow me to add a few more to the list:

-Soviet troops invading Czechoslavakia illegally, and killing dozens of civilians in order to suppress political rights.

-Murdering 2500 Hungarians, and displacing 250,000, in order to suppress political rights (fuck u joe, yer dead!)

-Killing between 200-800 in Tiananmen Square, in order to suppress political rights

-Killing thousands in the middle of the night and depositing them in a ditch. Quite possibly because you pissed off your po (political officer).

[Robert]

Joby, do not forget that:

1) your stats are all lies;

OR

2) the killers weren't communists;

OR

3) if they were communists, they weren't acting qua communists;

Or

4) it's still not communism's "fault."

[pusher robot]

Joby, do not forget that:

1) your stats are all lies;

OR

2) the killers weren't communists;

OR

3) if they were communists, they weren't acting qua communists;

Or

4) it's still not communism's "fault."

5) It's no big deal, since they were communists.

[RGacky3]

Really? And how, exactly, was this supposed to happen, given the conditions that existed in Russia in 1917?

Well, tell me, what conditions were there that made restricting freedom of speach, destroying all oposition on the left and the right, (I"m not talking about the whites who were actively fighting against the revolution), taking control of the soviets by force if they wern't elected to power in those soviets, and consolidating power in a few people to the detriment of autonomy and real socialism nessesary?

As far as I can see those things wern't nessesarsy as far as building true Socialism, tey were nessesary to keep the Bolsheviks in control.

btw, the Soviet Union is very guilty in attacking true communism, in its own country, in the Ukraine, in Hungary, in Spain, and even globally by trying to control the leftist movements in other countries, in places like Spain, Hungary and the Ukraine, the USSR did more to destroy genuine communism than the United States did.

[Killfacer]

This was supposed to be like the other list, it was meant to be just a list. Not a discussion on the matter. I created it just to even things up a bit. Its more for people who dislike many of the things they beleive communism have caused to be able to list the greivances. Maybe i should of mentioned that before.

If anyone can, like a moderator who reads this, can they deleate the posts which are not a list of the crimes of communism.

Also i want to laugh at the person who defended the Gulags. Ha.

[JazzRemington]

This was supposed to be like the other list, it was meant to be just a list. Not a discussion on the matter. I created it just to even things up a bit. Its more for people who dislike many of the things they beleive communism have caused to be able to list the greivances. Maybe i should of mentioned that before.

If anyone can, like a moderator who reads this, can they deleate the posts which are not a list of the crimes of communism.

Also i want to laugh at the person who defended the Gulags. Ha.


Oh bullshit. You cannot honestly claim that you published this crap and expected NO ONE to respond telling you how full of shit you are.

[RedAnarchist]

Killfacer, why don't you just drop all pretence of leftism and reveal your true views? Its quite obvious that you either know nothing about communism or that you just like to label yourself as a leftist.

[Robert]

Soviet Russian labor camps were no more fatal in terms of the death rate than Russia proper today.

Well, I assume you mean Russian prisons, not Russian nursing homes? Anyway, what is your source for today's evidently horrendous health care system in "Russia proper today"?

Moreover, I am sure (?) you condemn political imprisonment regardless of the survival rate of the guests.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

5) It's no big deal, since they were communists.

Do you ever contribute something worth reading? I'll get back to staring at the shit stains on the toilet paper. :D

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Allow me to add a few more to the list:

-Soviet troops invading Czechoslavakia illegally, and killing dozens of civilians in order to suppress political rights.

-Murdering 2500 Hungarians, and displacing 250,000, in order to suppress political rights (fuck u joe, yer dead!)

-Killing between 200-800 in Tiananmen Square, in order to suppress political rights

-Killing thousands in the middle of the night and depositing them in a ditch. Quite possibly because you pissed off your po (political officer).

Hey Joby, perhaps you could order a history book online via amazon (cheap!) and fact check your own bullshit. Most of the participants who organized in Tiananmen Square were Maoists protesting economic liberalization and the lack of progress towards political democracy.

The capitalist participants in this thread are living examples of how much education in our country sucks. Thank you corporate interest groups. Here's another kickback.:D

[Jazzratt]

If anyone can, like a moderator who reads this, can they deleate the posts which are not a list of the crimes of communism.

Where the fuck do you get off telling me what to do?

The replies to this thread are perfectly balanced, if we needed to read a list of the same stupid bollocks you guys love bringing up I'd have made a link to an e-book of the Black Book of Communism.

For fuck's sake, the problem with vanguard-party communism isn't that it's inherently EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIL!!!!ONEOENE111!!!`111zomghitler wasworsethanstalin!!!!7!!111, the problem was gross inefficiency and problems with the material reality of Russia. Now read GeneCosta's reply, it deals with your bullshit very well.

[redSHARP]

grant that some of this is true and granted shit happened and people died, that is a reasonable and respected point. but...
how many people died because of capitalism?
why dont we start that thread?

people died in world war 2 and 1 + African colonialism + vietnam war + french indo-war + iraq war + gulf war + indigenous stuggles + cold war politics by the US =...? anyone? how about a shit ton more than communism!

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Well, tell me, what conditions were there that made restricting freedom of speach, destroying all oposition on the left and the right, (I"m not talking about the whites who were actively fighting against the revolution), taking control of the soviets by force if they wern't elected to power in those soviets, and consolidating power in a few people to the detriment of autonomy and real socialism nessesary?
You completely missed the point. I did not mean that material conditions forced the Bolsheviks to act the way they did. I meant that if any other faction existing at the time had taken control of Russia, it would have been just as oppressive, if not more so, than the Bolsheviks.

"True socialism" (whatever you mean by that) could not have been built in Russia after 1917 because there was no political force willing and able to build it.

[RGacky3]

I meant that if any other faction existing at the time had taken control of Russia, it would have been just as oppressive, if not more so, than the Bolsheviks.


Theres no way of knowing that, plus why did it have to be a faction, why could'nt the soviets work autonomously in solidarity with each other.


"True socialism" (whatever you mean by that) could not have been built in Russia after 1917 because there was no political force willing and able to build it.

That may be true, its hard to say, but it does'nt justify the Bolsheviks.

[Killfacer]

Killfacer, why don't you just drop all pretence of leftism and reveal your true views? Its quite obvious that you either know nothing about communism or that you just like to label yourself as a leftist.

Just because im not regurgitating party bullshit you think im not a leftist. Not all leftists have to love communism you know. Reveal my true veiws? what the hell is that supposed to mean. You think im gonna change my name to UNCLE ADOLF and start goose stepping about? Im simply trying balance out the board, this is in opposing ideologies after all. You clame i know nothing about communism. This isnt true, i may not have read as many books as you but i know enough about it to know i disagree with some of its fundementals (mainly the whole dictarship of the people and the vanguard party).

[Colonello Buendia]

Killfacer, you may have your disagreements with communism as do is but what you posted WAS PURE UNREFINED BULL SHIT

[Sky]

Soviet troops invading Czechoslavakia illegally, and killing dozens of civilians in order to suppress political rights.
If there was an illegal invasion, then surely the Czech military would have resisted the Soviet "invaders". Soviet troops retaliated only when counterrevolutionary hooligans provoked them by throwing explosives grenades at tanks and setting buildings on fire. Overall, some 100 Soviet troops were killed or wounded, demonstrating that the conduct of the counterrevolutionaries was far from peaceful.


-Murdering 2500 Hungarians, and displacing 250,000, in order to suppress political rights (fuck u joe, yer dead!)

This is a distortion of the conflict. To start, the counterrevolutionary revolt in October 1956 was by no means peaceful. More than 2000 Soviet troops were killed or wounded by the counterrevolutionary gangs. If the counterrevolutionaries had the right to engage in violence against the Government, then the Government with the use of Soviet troops was equally justified in responding with violence.

According to the 1947 Paris peace treaties, each government was to prevent the resurgence of fascist organizations "whether political, military, or semi-military, whose purpose it is to deprive the people of their democratic rights"

Events in Hungary made it clear that, with the assistance of the United States, a reactionary underground movement had been organized in Hungary which had exploited the difficulties and shortcomings in the work of state organs in Hungary in order to mislead certain sections of the people. Mr Nagy drew a clear distinction between the democratic movement and the movement of counterrevolutionary elements which had attached itself to it.

Measures for the liquidation of the latter had been carried out by the people's militia and the Hungarian people's army. In response to an appeal by the Hungarian Government, Soviet military units located in Hungary in conformity with the Warsaw Treaty, had gone to the help of the Hungarian forces and the Hungarian workers. The Nagy Government collapsed, and a revolutionary Workers and Peasants Government had been formed, including several Ministers of the Nagy Government. The Government declared that all communiations from Nagy were invalid.



Killing between 200-800 in Tiananmen Square, in order to suppress political rights

The mythical account of the Tiananmen Square "massacre" is discredited here
http://www.studien-von-zeitfragen.net/Zeitfragen/Tiananmen/tiananmen.html

[Green Dragon]

[quote=RGacky3;1129277]Theres no way of knowing that, plus why did it have to be a faction, why could'nt the soviets work autonomously in solidarity with each other.


How would the soviets simutaneously work "autonomously" yet in "solidarity" with each other?

[Green Dragon]

Well, tell me, what conditions were there that made restricting freedom of speach, destroying all oposition on the left and the right, (I"m not talking about the whites who were actively fighting against the revolution), taking control of the soviets by force if they wern't elected to power in those soviets, and consolidating power in a few people to the detriment of autonomy and real socialism nessesary?


Okay. Even after what you know, you still prefer the bolsheviks to the whites.



As far as I can see those things wern't nessesarsy as far as building true Socialism, tey were nessesary to keep the Bolsheviks in control.


Why not? Remember what you are doing: Building socialism. From the ground up. Imagine the difficulties when building a house, and different builders keep moving around the appliances, electrical outlets, redesigning rooms ect. while the construction is going on because each builder is convinced he is the "true" builder. Compound that with the fellows with the wrecking ball outside taking out a room or a floor every so often because those fellows don't want the building at all. Heck, maybe even some of "true" builders secretly want their work knocked out, or others are convinced their ideas simply make it easier for the wrecking ball to its job.

In such an environment, the actions of the Bolsheviks, and the similiar groups subsequent, were entirely rational and logical.
And bear in mind: these guys have been the only successful example of socialism. They had the staying power. The Bolsheviks, the Maoists were far more impressive, and far more successful, than those liitle bands in Spain in 30s, or in Paris in 1870.




btw, the Soviet Union is very guilty in attacking true communism, in its own country, in the Ukraine, in Hungary, in Spain, and even globally by trying to control the leftist movements in other countries, in places like Spain, Hungary and the Ukraine, the USSR did more to destroy genuine communism than the United States did.


Either socialism is "international" or it isn't. What is the complaint here: That the USSR opposed the development of "national" socialisms throughout other countries?

[Schrödinger's Cat]

If there was an illegal invasion, then surely the Czech military would have resisted the Soviet "invaders". Soviet troops retaliated only when counterrevolutionary hooligans provoked them by throwing explosives grenades at tanks and setting buildings on fire. Overall, some 100 Soviet troops were killed or wounded, demonstrating that the conduct of the counterrevolutionaries was far from peaceful.



This is a distortion of the conflict. To start, the counterrevolutionary revolt in October 1956 was by no means peaceful. More than 2000 Soviet troops were killed or wounded by the counterrevolutionary gangs. If the counterrevolutionaries had the right to engage in violence against the Government, then the Government with the use of Soviet troops was equally justified in responding with violence.

According to the 1947 Paris peace treaties, each government was to prevent the resurgence of fascist organizations "whether political, military, or semi-military, whose purpose it is to deprive the people of their democratic rights"

Events in Hungary made it clear that, with the assistance of the United States, a reactionary underground movement had been organized in Hungary which had exploited the difficulties and shortcomings in the work of state organs in Hungary in order to mislead certain sections of the people. Mr Nagy drew a clear distinction between the democratic movement and the movement of counterrevolutionary elements which had attached itself to it.

Measures for the liquidation of the latter had been carried out by the people's militia and the Hungarian people's army. In response to an appeal by the Hungarian Government, Soviet military units located in Hungary in conformity with the Warsaw Treaty, had gone to the help of the Hungarian forces and the Hungarian workers. The Nagy Government collapsed, and a revolutionary Workers and Peasants Government had been formed, including several Ministers of the Nagy Government. The Government declared that all communiations from Nagy were invalid.


The mythical account of the Tiananmen Square "massacre" is discredited here
http://www.studien-von-zeitfragen.net/Zeitfragen/Tiananmen/tiananmen.html

Wait. Hold on there. Just one minute!

You're telling me the bourgeoisie textbooks weren't being honest? That the Soviet Union didn't kill a thousand people just because some people cheered for autonomy?

Nonsense. :D

[Joby]

Hey Joby, perhaps you could order a history book online via amazon (cheap!) and fact check your own bullshit. Most of the participants who organized in Tiananmen Square were Maoists protesting economic liberalization and the lack of progress towards political democracy.

Do you have a point? That it's OK to steamroll protestors if they're to the left? Did I not say that it was done to suppress political rights?

Anyway, I don't believe you on the "they were Maoists claim." Maoists don't believe in speaking out.

"While the protests lacked a unified cause or leadership, participants were generally against the authoritarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism) and economic policies of the ruling Chinese Communist Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_China) and voiced calls for democratic reform within the structure of the government...

Some students and intellectuals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual), who believed that the reforms had not gone far enough and that China needed to reform its political system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China), since the economic reforms had only affected farmers and factory workers; the incomes of intellectuals lagged far behind those who had benefited from reform policies. They were concerned about the social and political controls that the Communist Party of China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_China) still had. This group had also seen the political liberalization that had been undertaken in the name of glasnost (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasnost) by Mikhail Gorbachev (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Gorbachev), so they had been hoping for comparable reform.

The Tiananmen Square protests in 1989 were in large measure sparked by the death of former Secretary General Hu Yaobang (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hu_Yaobang). Hu Yaobang's "resignation" from the position of Secretary General of the CPC had been announced on January 16 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_16), 1987 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1987). His forthright calls for "rapid reform" and his almost open contempt of "Maoist excesses" had made him a suitable scapegoat in the eyes of Deng Xiaoping and others, after the pro-democracy student protests of 1986–1987 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-democracy_student_protests_of_1986%E2%80%931987) (Spence 1999, 685). Included in his resignation was also a "humiliating self-criticism", which he was forced to issue by the Central Committee of the Communist Party. Hu Yaobang's sudden death, due to heart attack, on April 15 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_15), 1989 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989) provided a perfect opportunity for the students to gather once again, not only to mourn the deceased Secretary General, but also to have their voices heard in "demanding a reversal of the verdict against him" and bringing renewed attention to the important issues of the 1986–1987 pro-democracy protests and possibly also to those of the Democracy Wall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Wall) protests in 1978–1979 (Spence 1999, 697)."

Of course, I'm talking about the 1989 protests--Not the other 2 the Chinese Government violently suppressed.


The capitalist participants in this thread are living examples of how much education in our country sucks. Thank you corporate interest groups. Here's another kickback.:D


Ya, and communism has shown that in a post-revolutionary world, government officials only act in the interests of the people :rolleyes:

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Nobody died in Tiananmen Square. Hundreds of student organizers were disbanded peacefully. Even more left on their own will. If you're going to complain about Chinese oppression (which there is plenty), why don't you get your facts straight?

Of course the media conveniently forgets more brutal examples of political oppression in Thailand and Mexico. :D


Anyway, I don't believe you on the "they were Maoists claim." Maoists don't believe in speaking out.You also tried to use Wikipedia as a credible source of information. So in other words you don't know spit about Maoism. Gotchya.


Ya, and communism has shown that in a post-revolutionary world, government officials only act in the interests of the people :rolleyes:Communism and government officials is an oxymoron. Perhaps you need to take a class on Marxism 101 before re-entering this thread with your anti-Han bias?

[pusher robot]

Nobody died in Tiananmen Square.

It's this kind of blinkered, detached-from-reality pig-ignorance that causes people to dismiss the entire communist movement as filled with loonies and smucks. This is only a small step up from holocause denial.

Trust me, people died. A good friend of mine was a Sri-Lanken attending school there at the time and was an eyewitness. His best friend was shot in the head while crossing the street, and though most of his video footage was confiscated he even managed to smuggle out some video of the carnage. It was messy.

EDIT: I realized he might be saying that nobody died in the square proper, which may possibly be true, but mendacious and irrelevant. Are the Chicoms somehow better guys because they killed people in the streets instead of in the square?

[Joby]

Of course the media conveniently forgets more brutal examples of political oppression in Thailand and Mexico. :D

So?



You also tried to use Wikipedia as a credible source of information. So in other words you don't know spit about Maoism. Gotchya.


Well, I tried to look up independent Chinese sources for information.

Then I realized they don't exist.


Communism and government officials is an oxymoron. Perhaps you need to take a class on Marxism 101 before re-entering this thread with your anti-Han bias?

anti-Han? Did I not also point out instances in other communist nations were violence was used to suppress political rights?

Perhaps you need to get your head out of the clouds. There have been many brutal, authoritarian regimes which allowed a Capitalist economic system.

However, Communism has a 100% failure rate when it comes to allowing political (and in many cases, comparable social) freedoms.

[Dean]

Just because im not regurgitating party bullshit you think im not a leftist. Not all leftists have to love communism you know. Reveal my true veiws? what the hell is that supposed to mean. You think im gonna change my name to UNCLE ADOLF and start goose stepping about? Im simply trying balance out the board, this is in opposing ideologies after all. You clame i know nothing about communism. This isnt true, i may not have read as many books as you but i know enough about it to know i disagree with some of its fundementals (mainly the whole dictarship of the people and the vanguard party).

Centralized power and classist power structures are not inherent to communism, or even marxism. You don't know what you're talking about.

[Killfacer]

yeah whatever, point to me the communist state which hasnt had an inherent power structure and centralised power.

[Joby]

Ooops, didn't mean to pass you over Sky.


If there was an illegal invasion, then surely the Czech military would have resisted the Soviet "invaders".

Because "Alexander Dubček (leader of the Czech government and main concern of Brehznev) called upon his people not to resist. He was arrested and taken to Moscow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow) along with several of his colleagues."



Soviet troops retaliated only when counterrevolutionary hooligans provoked them by throwing explosives grenades at tanks and setting buildings on fire. Overall, some 100 Soviet troops were killed or wounded, demonstrating that the conduct of the counterrevolutionaries was far from peaceful.


Source?

The only cases of violence I can find were done by the Soviet pigs, including against their own citizens who peacefully showed their solidarity with the Czech freedom fighters in Red Square:



The protest began at noon as eight protesters (Larisa Bogoraz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larisa_Bogoraz), Konstantin Babtsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Konstantin_Babtsky&action=edit&redlink=1), Vadim Delaunay (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vadim_Delaunay), Vladimir Dremluga (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vladimir_Dremluga&action=edit&redlink=1), Pavel Litvinov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Litvinov), Natalya Gorbanevskaya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalya_Gorbanevskaya), Viktor Fainberg (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Viktor_Fainberg&action=edit&redlink=1), and Tatiana Baeva (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tatiana_Baeva&action=edit&redlink=1)) sat at the Lobnoye Mesto and held a small Czechoslovak (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czechoslovakia) flag and banners with various slogans, including:

"We lost our best friends" («мы теряем лучших друзей»),
"At’ zije svobodne a nezavisle Ceskoslovensko!" (Glory to free and independent Czechoslovakia) ,
"Shame to occupants" («Позор оккупантам!»),
"Hands off the CSSR" («Руки прочь от ЧССР!»),
"For your freedom and ours (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_your_freedom_and_ours)" («За вашу и нашу свободу!»),
"Freedom for Dubchek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Dub%C4%8Dek)" («Свободу Дубчеку!»).Within few minutes, seven protesters were assaulted by the seksots (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Seksot&action=edit&redlink=1), loaded into cars, and handed over to the KGB (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KGB). The Czech flag was broken, and the banners were confiscated. Since Natalya Gorbanevskaya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalya_Gorbanevskaya) had recently given birth, she was not made to stand trial. The other protesters convinced 21-year old Tatiana Baeva (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tatiana_Baeva&action=edit&redlink=1) to declare that she had been at the Lobnoye Mesto by accident, and she was released soon after.


And what was the punishment for speaking out against the illegal war against a sovereign nation?



Lawyers for the defence had shown that there was no criminal intent in the demonstration held by the protesters [3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Red_Square_demonstration#cite_note-2), but despite this, the protesters received harsh sentences of up to several years in prison.
It was claimed by Yuliy Kim (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuliy_Kim) that the sentences had already been written down before the trial


Of course, this was during the civil rights marches in America. The difference being that movement eventually took us to the "promised land." This one got several people to Siberia.



This is a distortion of the conflict. To start, the counterrevolutionary revolt in October 1956 was by no means peaceful. More than 2000 Soviet troops were killed or wounded by the counterrevolutionary gangs. If the counterrevolutionaries had the right to engage in violence against the Government, then the Government with the use of Soviet troops was equally justified in responding with violence.


-Some students organize a protest against the Stalinist (and no matter what any Fasc-Com says here, very undemocratic) Hungarian government.
-They enter a radio station to broadcast their message and are fired upon
-Riots break out, where common people organize into militia's and begin to do away with the Secret Police and other colloborators with the occupation
-The Soviets say they'd be willing to negotiate, but change their mind, invade, kill thousands, displace hundreds of thousands, and launch an even more repressive regime.

-In 1989, the Evil Reds are thrown out for good, and October 23, the date the Revolution against the occupation began, is declared a national Hungarian holiday.

Did I get anything wrong?

...Gee, it kinda sounds like a layout for the revolution many people are pushing for here...



According to the 1947 Paris peace treaties, each government was to prevent the resurgence of fascist organizations "whether political, military, or semi-military, whose purpose it is to deprive the people of their democratic rights"


Come on. What the Soviets did makes Kent State look like a picnic.

It was the students, as so often happens in the world, who were yearning for a freer, better world. Unfortunately, the Soviet Jackboot saw that it would be put on hold for several generations....



Events in Hungary made it clear that, with the assistance of the United States, a reactionary underground movement had been organized in Hungary which had exploited the difficulties and shortcomings in the work of state organs in Hungary in order to mislead certain sections of the people. Mr Nagy drew a clear distinction between the democratic movement and the movement of counterrevolutionary elements which had attached itself to it.


This is what all you fascists need to understand:

THERE WERE NO OUTSIDE INFLUENCES.

This is as pathetic as Richard Nixon saying that the Chicano protests were done by extremists from the outside. Uncle Sam had as much to do with this as the KGB had to do with the Free Speech Movement. "Outside Agitators" has been used by the elites to justify repression by both superpowers, whether it be in this illegal occupation or the ones happening today.

[RGacky3]

How would the soviets simutaneously work "autonomously" yet in "solidarity" with each other?

Communication, Mutual aid, its not that hard a concept, and its been done before.


Of course the media conveniently forgets more brutal examples of political oppression in Thailand and Mexico. http://www.revleft.com/vb/communisms-charge-sheet-t76499/revleft/smilies/biggrin.gif

As they always do, you Capitalists want to defend those ones?

Rather than adnauseum asking us to defend governments which most of us don't support anyway. Why not explain away say ... the Mexican massacre in 1968 for example, or the treatment of indigenous peoples for centuries, or the abuses by the police, rapes, and murders which have gone on pretty much without reprisals against 'radicals'. There are many examples, and thats just one country. Once you explain those away, we'll go on to the next Capitalist country.

[pusher robot]

Once you explain those away, we'll go on to the next Capitalist country.
We're not the ones claiming our ideology can perfect humanity! Explanation: some people are atrocious assholes, and neither communism nor capitalism has any effect on that whatsoever. Your only hope is the rule of law.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

We're not the ones claiming our ideology can perfect humanity!

Neither are we. Why don't you stop constructing straw men and attack substance?

[Bilan]

In reaction to the silly "imperialism's charge sheet" i'v made one for communism, also i have done my best to source the information as on the imperialism one much of it was unsourced. I dont know how people source on this site so iv just done little reference numbers:

How is it silly to have an "imperialist charge sheet"? What a ludicruous statement.



In the course of a year 7000 "counter revolutionaries" executed 1

Where?



Forced dissoloution of a democractically fair and popular assembly in which the Bolsheviks lacked a majority by just over 200 members2

Ah, yes, communism at its worst, again!
As much as I despise the Bolsheviks, this is a pretty blanket statement, especially because you have one bias sorce for it, and didn't even quote it, nor link to it.



Used conscription in order to bolster its army,

...um...you know every single capitalist government has had conscription in the past?
That's nothing new.


the use of which shows the lack of support and a disregard for others.

What, like Iraq? And Afghanistan?
Please fuck off and die.


Whilst other left wing groups such as the Makhnovists used popular support and refrain from using conscription.3

Ah...Yes, that's true. Same with the CNT/FAI militias.


Soviet Purges, Thousands die (dont think i need a reference for this, as it is common knowledge)

You can't make statements without any factual, statistical, or any evidence except "Common knowledge" and expect anyone to believe you.



War Communism leads to the starvation of thousands (once again a reference is un-needed here as even commmunists conceed war communism killed thousands)

The Great Depression led to global mass rises in unemployment, starvation, etc.


Red Army troops obtain grain from peasants, using force when neccesary. This leads to the strikes in Petrograd and the Tambov uprising.


The English government seized entire continents in its colonial times.
So did, and does, the American government.



Tambov is brutally put down, even neutral historians agree; "The ruthless supression of the tambov peasant revolt"4

There is no such thing as a neutral historian.


The Kronstadt sailors upon seeing the Bolshevik juggernaut become a dictatorship not of the people but over them revolt. They are brutally put down at the cost of hundreds of lives on both sides. (no source needed)


Yes, a fucking source is needed.
I'm not even a sympathiser of the Bolsheviks and you're pissing me off with these statements.



Nestor Makhno and the Anarcho-communists in ukraine are originally loved and hailed has leftwing heroes.

...in the south of Ukraine.



Once their help is not needed they are turned on. Trotsky okay's makhno's assassination. The makhnovsits are put brutally down.

This is a product of not communism, but bureaucratic state socialism.



The general use of terror throughout "communisms" reign in the USSR


Find me a government in the world that hasn't used it.
Communism never "reigned" in Russia, either.



The chinese purges, millions were prosecuted, including a famous philosopher, Chen Yuen. Many of them were executed with little evidence.

Source?



im running out of sources. BUt alot of them do not require sources.

OF course they fucking do!



Millions die in china due to starvation

...Before the revolution...and following it. This being due to ...what? Guess. I bet you wont get it.



Hundreds die in both China and the USSR in mass trials and executions


This is getting tedious.



Thousands sent to the Gulags, for very little reason. Ruins families.


Really? Evidence?
Or aint got none? Just talking out of your ass.
And "ruins families".
Please.
Australia as a continent is built on the destruction of an entire nation of peoples, and their culture. More than families are ruined here, mate.
Same can be said for America.




Gulags are disgusting place, the treatment of prisoners was awful5


So are prisons.




I KNOW SOME PEOPLE WILL CLAIME THESE WERE NOT ATROCITIES OF COMMUNISM, YET MUCH THE SAME COULD BE SAID OF THE THREAD I BASED THIS UPON.

Clearly, it can't. Unless you don't know what imperialism is; because evidently, you don't know what communism is.

[Robert]

Why don't you stop constructing straw men and attack substance?

Gene, I once respected you as a misguided but, at least, earnest and articulate defender of a form of government as discredited as monarchy.

But your casual and smarmy dismissal of the violent crackdown
("suppression of counterrevolutionary riot," as the government calls it) in Tiananmen is disgusting and dishonest.

I thought about posting some of the links to the many eyewitness accounts and reports by Amnesty International, but I suspect you know perfectly well what happened, though the scope of the carnage will never be known due to government censorship.

Travel to China as I have, walk among the people, try to talk to the policeman on the street, watch a little state-run TV, and grow the fuck up.
You have defamed a lot of good, and now dead, young people.

[Bud Struggle]

Another CHARGE AGAINST COMMUNISM:

You closed off RevLeft Chit Chat so only Commies could read it. :(



But your casual and smarmy dismissal of the violent crackdown
("suppression of counterrevolutionary riot," as the government calls it) in Tiananmen is disgusting and dishonest.

I thought about posting some of the links to the many eyewitness accounts and reports by Amnesty International, but I suspect you know perfectly well what happened, though the scope of the carnage will never be known due to government censorship.

Travel to China as I have, walk among the people, try to talk to the policeman on the street, watch a little state-run TV, and grow the fuck up.
You have defamed a lot of good, and now dead, young people.

RTG is correct here, Tiananmen Square was a violent and bloody crackdown by Chinese troops on unarmed and (relatively) peaceful students and LABORORS that were merely protesting against the countries economic policies They in no way posed any real threat to the Chinese Communist government.

What the troops did was brutal.

[Killfacer]

yes, imperialism MAY have led to the deaths of more people, but if it has then that is only because it has had more opportunity.

I dont support imperialism for starters, i think it is pretty bad. The only reason i disagree with a page about its charges because its hugely subjective. Alot of this things on the sheet were simply ridiculous. Some, things that would of happened anyway.

Ok next, someone mentioned world war 2 as a imperialist war. Well i seem to remember it was the USSR that hurled millions of unarmed troops at the nazis, shot anyone who retreated and needlessy wasted the lives of millions of young men. I also know it was the USSR which, because of its blatant disregard for human life, lost the most troops.

[Green Dragon]

[quote=RGacky3;1131770]Communication, Mutual aid, its not that hard a concept, and its been done before.


Actually it is a difficult concept.

One autonomous soviet communicates with another as to what it autonomously plans do. The other one... what? autonomously agrees to do the same in order to foster "solidarity?"

And you still have the problem as to exactly what is being communicated, what constitutes "mutual aid."

In other words, you still have to describe socialism. And as you have been quite clear that you feel no real obligation to do so, you have demonstrated nothing. The idea of "autonomous" soviets become meaningless as you do not feel the need to actually demonstrate, to prove, the concept.



Rather than adnauseum asking us to defend governments which most of us don't support anyway.

Nobody is asking you to defend governments of which you dissaprove. You are being asked to describe and explain governments that you WOULD support, in an ideal situation.

[pusher robot]

Neither are we. Why don't you stop constructing straw men and attack substance?

Well then how do you account for your arguments that communism itself will eliminate (in no particular order):
- Lust
- Gluttony
- Greed
- Sloth
- Wrath
- Envy
- Pride
- Crime
- War
- Scarcity
- Inequality
- Disease
- Pollution
- Etc.

Capitalists do not propose to change mankind. You don't hear talk of the New Capitalist Man. They don't talk about how man himself will be transformed by capitalism.

Of course, since you want to talk about argumentative fallacies, why don't you look up Red Herring, e.g., your attempt to deflect the conversation from your disgusting defense/denial of Chinese murder by bringing up irrelevant claims of capitalist atrocities.

[InTheMatterOfBoots]

Well then how do you account for your arguments that communism itself will eliminate (in no particular order):
- Lust
- Gluttony
- Greed
- Sloth
- Wrath
- Envy
- Pride
- Crime
- War
- Scarcity
- Inequality
- Disease
- Pollution
- Etc.

Capitalists do not propose to change mankind. You don't hear talk of the New Capitalist Man. They don't talk about how man himself will be transformed by capitalism.

Of course, since you want to talk about argumentative fallacies, why don't you look up Red Herring, e.g., your attempt to deflect the conversation from your disgusting defense/denial of Chinese murder by bringing up irrelevant claims of capitalist atrocities.

That is a very statist Marxist/Dialectical understanding of Communism. This thread has systematically failed to enage with anarchist communism, left communism, council communism, autonomist marxism or early pre-industrial forms of communism. I am sorry but you can't take the abuse of one marginalised sect (and their offspring) to level accusations at the whole school of thought. I totally agree with your criticisms of Bolshevism (and the Russian revolution) though some of your figures are decidedly dodgy. But showing statist communism as a fallacy does not automatically follow for all communist models. Every ism has its charge sheet and it is easy to make blanket claims.

Anarchist communists do not believe they will eleminate the things you have outlined. They believe that a more socially progressive society can help people themselves avoid the reactionary behaviour encouraged and fostered by a capitalist society.

[Kronos]

[cough].....yeah, what TDC said.

[pusher robot]

I totally agree with your criticisms of Bolshevism (and the Russian revolution) though some of your figures are decidedly dodgy. But showing statist communism as a fallacy does not automatically follow for all communist models. Every ism has its charge sheet and it is easy to make blanket claims.

I appreciate your candor. The problem is, those who believe as you do almost never speak up or offer their support to those who criticize your "comrades," who do take the time to respond. Thus, the only response is one that defends the indefensible, and the result is the appearance of monotonic acceptance of such on behalf of your entire movement. It's amazing to me that expressing the mere opinion that abortion might be wrong is enough to get you restricted to OI, but you can defend murder and oppression with barely a hint of opprobrium.

[Comrade Rage]

Hmmm...
The 'Left' Communists and the capitalists are getting friendly.

Oh geez....that never happens.:rolleyes:

[Joby]

Hmmm...
The 'Left' Communists and the capitalists are getting friendly.

Oh geez....that never happens.:rolleyes:

We're all friends here, right?

After all, it ain't like there's any revolutionaries on this site :rolleyes:

[InTheMatterOfBoots]

Hmmm...
The 'Left' Communists and the capitalists are getting friendly.

Oh geez....that never happens.:rolleyes:

That is an unfair supposition. The idea that one can hold a position against both bourgeois, capitalist society and the repeated mistakes of Bolshevism should not be so easily dismissed. Leninism vs. Capitalism is not a dichotomous relationship. In fact, if anything it is synthetic given the inevitable continuation of wage slavery and labour "discipline" under statist communism. Many economic theorists positively admire Leninist modes of organisation, you could never hope for such state enforced wage and conditions restraint under a capitalist economy.

[InTheMatterOfBoots]

It's amazing to me that expressing the mere opinion that abortion might be wrong is enough to get you restricted to OI.

Don't confuse our politics. That is a totally indefensible position and you should be personally ashamed if you hold such views.

[Joby]

Don't confuse our politics. That is a totally indefensible position and you should be personally ashamed if you hold such views.

He's just pointing out the fallacy between supporting both a woman's right to choose because of "freedom," yet defending the KGB's outright denial of it.

[Comrade Rage]

Hmmm...
The 'Left' Communists and the capitalists are getting friendly.

Oh geez....that never happens.:rolleyes:
That is an unfair supposition. The idea that one can hold a position against both bourgeois, capitalist society and the repeated mistakes of Bolshevism should not be so easily dismissed. Leninism vs. Capitalism is not a dichotomous relationship. In fact, if anything it is synthetic given the inevitable continuation of wage slavery and labour "discipline" under statist communism. Many economic theorists positively admire Leninist modes of organisation, you could never hope for such state enforced wage and conditions restraint under a capitalist economy.Engels and Lenin both proved in their writings that the state is indispensible in fighting for
communism.

[Bud Struggle]

Many economic theorists positively admire Leninist modes of organisation, you could never hope for such state enforced wage and conditions restraint under a capitalist economy.

Very similar to the way everyone admires Mussolini for getting the trains to run on time in Itialy.

[Robert]

We're all friends here, right?

Wrong. Friends respect and are honest with each other.

[InTheMatterOfBoots]

Engels and Lenin both proved in their writings that the state is indispensible in fighting for
communism.

Oh well if someone wrote something then it must be accurate. ;)

case closed.

clearly.