Rich Americans With Guns - Oh My! - Excellent piece from lew

[Solzhenitsyn]

Botswana banned sport hunting for lions last year. Western greens had a lot to do with this idiocy. Take a headline last year in Britain’s Guardian newspaper. "African Lions under threat from rich Americans with guns."

That’s one thing I like about the foreign press, unlike the frauds in the mainstream U.S. media, they make no bones about being "impartial" or "even-handed." You pick up the Guardian, you know you’re getting the mouthpiece for the ghost of Leon Trotsky. Fine. They lay their cards on the table. I like that.....While we’re on the subject, Trotsky, like Che, had it coming. Here’s the original architect of the Red Terror in 1918. Twenty years later it came back at him like a boomerang as the "Great Terror" and planted a pick-ax in the middle of his skull. Serves him right. Too bad the hatchet man was a Red Spaniard rather than a White Russian. But I’m glad he got whacked nonetheless.
[My sentiments exactly!]

Anyway, I gotta hand it to the Guardian editor who coined this headline last year. Here’s nine words and three of them guaranteed to boil the blood and foam the brain of three fourths of his readers. Consider his major market: Pinko Brits. Now behold the loaded words( rich, Americans, guns) – and imagine, for a second, their effects on the pinko central nervous system. Individually they provoke gagging and cold sweats; together the effects must be apoplectic.

read the rest here:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/fontova/fontova39.html

[peaccenicked]

That is idiotic. You get off on the suffering of others.
That kinda makes you sick.
If you have a criticism then make it.
That post is one load of emotive bullshit.

[Solzhenitsyn]

Who got their kicks butchering other human beings?

Trotsky, but only if you can even classify him as a human being. As one no talent hack would have put it:

Who started the blocking units?
Who recruited the Cheka?
Who butchered 500,000 Cossacks?
Who ordered the crucifixion of priests and bishops?
Who lit de monks and nuns afire?

Who, who who?

Trotsky.

[peaccenicked]

And you. I am not here to defend Trotsky but could you give me your info sources.
I have not come across any of your facts in the history books.

[peaccenicked]

Trotsky says that the number of Cossacks were only 2000. I would point out they and the red army were at war.

[Solzhenitsyn]

Start here:
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/1918p/lenimolo.html

It's a memo from Lenin to all other members of the politburo detailing how centuries old churches are to be looted and Russian Orthodox clergy shot on the spot. The Red Army carried out this action and Trotsky lied about the incident to Lord Curzon. Can you say complicity in crimes against humanity?

Trotsky's Red Army slaughtered Cossack women and children by the thousands. And the blocking units are common knowledge. If fact, the Red Army only won the war because they implemented an idea (shooting retreating troops) that Tsar Nicholas II emphatically rejected calling it an idea "hatched from the bowels of hell".

[peaccenicked]

A military idea that wins wars but I have never heard of it up till now. I heard that Stalin used this technique in WW2.
I dont see any evidence of murder on the spot. The confiscation of church wealth seems like a good Fransiscan measure to me.
Where is your evidence that the red army murdered woman and children.
All in all. I believe you are spreading cappie dirt on the bolsheviks. What gave the US the right to invade Russia at the time, and you talk about crimes against humanity.

(Edited by peaccenicked at 7:18 am on Oct. 10, 2002)

[Solzhenitsyn]

"The greater the number of representatives of the reactionary clergy and the reactionary bourgeoisie that we succeed in shooting on this occasion, the better because this 'audience' must precisely now be taught a lesson in such a way that they will not dare to think about any resistance whatsoever for several decades."

Sounds like a conspiracy to commit mass murder to me.

I can tell you've never set foot in an Orthodox Church. Despite what you may have heard, the Tsar only paid an inadequate stipend to the priests many of whom still had to work full time to make ends meet. Most of the "wealth" they had was in the form of liturgical trappings that only had value as historic artifacts. The rest was donated gold liturgical items of recent vintage that the Church always sold from during times of need like famines. Which the Orthodox Church was doing to help victims of the man made famine on the Volga. Lenin's point was that the Church's property was being sold to help victims of his terror and that was unacceptable.

It's also funny to note that, more often than not, Checkists who seized Church property sold it on the black market for personal profit. Indeed, the Vatican bought a large amount of stolen religious artifacts from Checkists- the return of which is still a point of contention between the Patriarch of Moskova and the Pope.

I'm unaware that the US Army commited mass-murder during their brief stay in Archangel and Vladivostock.

[peaccenicked]

Pleading poverty does not wash. The black hundred were organised to violently overthrow the revolution.
sourcehttp://www.skalman.nu/soviet/books-review-...unkownlenin.htm (http://www.skalman.nu/soviet/books-review-unkownlenin.htm)

[Solzhenitsyn]

Nice try, peacenicked.

You're purposely confusing the Union of Patriotic Monarchists (aka the Black Hundreds) which existed from 1906-1911 and sometimes controlled by the Okhrana They were a radical monarchist political sect seperate from the Russian Orthodox clergy. Lenin is using "Black Hundreds" as a spiteful polemical term much like the Black Hundreds used the term Zhid to refer to a Jew.

(Edited by Solzhenitsyn at 1:45 am on Oct. 10, 2002)

[peaccenicked]

If you are trying to tell me that the clergy in Tsarist Russia were not extremely right wing then, I think you should forget about it as you have forgotten about the lie about church poverty.

[Solzhenitsyn]

What's wrong peaccenicked? Are you just now discovering your hero Trotsky was a mass murderer contra his self serving scribblings?

No shit, of course the ROC wanted to see the murderous bolshevik regime crushed. What right thinking person wouldn't? I'll grant that pretty much all the clergy leaned heavily to the right but not all of the were staunch Tsarists. Did you forget about Father Gapon?

I've effectivly refuted the idea of the endless wealth of the Church at large. It's true the bishops at or above the rank of archbishop lived very well. Obviously, not all clergy are Metropolitans. Almost all of the priests murdered by Lenin and his sychophants were rural, extremely poor and their parishes had little of value. Do you want me to start posting stories of how the VChKA tortured priests at random? Thought not.

[peaccenicked]

The church was very rich in its entirety possessed a large percentage of the nations wealth. As for torture.
To the degree the Cheka violated human rights they were indeed responsible for much blood and mayhem, I whole heartedly agree with your disaproval.
However, I find your assessment wholely one sided. In that peace with Germany had been establised . Only to be upset by a new 'civil war' with umpteen invading armies. If The USSR achieved anything it was a modern welfare state that could not have came about unless
The revolution happened. It is unfortunate indeed that the political counter revolution held back democracy and
international standards of human rights. Some of this was indeed born in the bloody nature of the revolution itself. However, it mostly came from Stalin's personal will to impose terror on the whole population. This was not in the nature of the bolsheviks as my link points out.


(Edited by peaccenicked at 10:43 am on Oct. 10, 2002)

[Dan Majerle]

Quote: from Solzhenitsyn on 10:00 am on Oct. 10, 2002
What's wrong peaccenicked? Are you just now discovering your hero Trotsky was a mass murderer contra his self serving scribblings?

No shit, of course the ROC wanted to see the murderous bolshevik regime crushed. What right thinking person wouldn't? I'll grant that pretty much all the clergy leaned heavily to the right but not all of the were staunch Tsarists. Did you forget about Father Gapon?

I've effectivly refuted the idea of the endless wealth of the Church at large. It's true the bishops at or above the rank of archbishop lived very well. Obviously, not all clergy are Metropolitans. Almost all of the priests murdered by Lenin and his sychophants were rural, extremely poor and their parishes had little of value. Do you want me to start posting stories of how the VChKA tortured priests at random? Thought not.


I do hope you know that Father Gapon was a double agent secretly working for the tsar.

[Solzhenitsyn]

I do hope you know that Father Gapon was a double agent secretly working for the tsar.

I thought someone would travel down this road. Easy enough to make that accusation, a little more difficult to prove. Weren't most of the mensheviks accused of the same crime? It was fairly easy and common for the OGPU to cook the books.

There also exists inconsistency within the charge. If the Tsar was fully in control of the Okhrana (Section 6 of the Interior Ministry), then the idea of it having Fr. Grigori (Gapon) instigate reformist demonstrations and enter labor negotations with the Tsar while also engaged in a secret conspiracy with the same Tsar is patently absurd. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. Pick one:

1) The Tsar was in full control of the Okhrana and Fr. Gapon wasn't a double agent

XOR

2) The Tsar wasn't in control of the Okhrana and Fr. Gapon was a double agent.

Finally, even if proven, the charge against Fr. Gapon means little. A lot of people in your beloved Bolshevik faction were double agents for the Okhrana at one time or another (at least until Count Stolypin cleaned house.)

[Dan Majerle]

The tsar wasn't in control of the Okhrana, he could barely run government and he left organisations like the secret police up to others like Stolypin. He did not interfer with investigations or the actions of the secret police despite them working for him. What Father Gapon was demonstrating that fateful Sunday was not in fact that the Tsar be overthrown or anything like that, merely he and his followers requested bread before wanting the tsarist government further consolidated and maintained. He petitioned for the tsar to continue his rule be it with minor adjustments such as increase in food for the people. That is hardly revolutionary and not much away from the practices of the Ohkrana who despite having some drawbacks still overall wanted the tsar to continue to rule.
A conspiracy is that the Ohkrana ordered Father Gapon to lead to simulated "movement" against the tsar and pretend that reform has been agreed upon. This would show the tsar as willing for change and somebody who puts the people first, putting him a favourable light. However bad communication from the Ohkrana resulted in things getting out of hand and the murder of hundreds.
I'd tend to go the the former.

[Solzhenitsyn]

So, Bloody Sunday was basically a publicity stunt gone awry? Don't be offended when I say this stretches credulity to say the least.

However, I'm willing to applaud your efforts to recover. You forgot the fact that the Tsar was in Omsk instead of St. Petersburg on that day and would be gone for two more weeks. Surely, the Okhrana would have known the Tsar's scheduling. It seems pointless to pull a cynical publicity stunt if you can't bask in your own self generated light.

You are, of course, correct to point out that the Okhrana was a very odd institution and seemed to do things without rhyme or reason. Among some of their other more notable activities they also spied on the Tsar and the Imperial Family. My best guess is that they latched to the idea early on that communism = Jews = conspiracy. So logically, they hatched a counter- conspiracy of which the most notorious product is the infamous Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. The Tsar rewarded their efforts by placing the Protocols on the censorship list and imprisoning some of the chief counter conspirators at the urging of Stolypin. They then refined the formula: Communism = Jews = Germans = Conspiracy. The Tsar and his family were ethnically German so that would seem to explain the spying. It's also equally odd that Stolypin's assassin was also a double agent working for the Okhrana.

[Stormin Norman]

Solzhenitsyn,

Your knowledge of Russian history is impressive. What sources would you recommend to someone interested in this subject. You seem to deal in facts, therefore I would prefer your insight over one of the leftist on this board.

[Solzhenitsyn]

SN,

Most books printed before the fall of the USSR aren't worth the paper they're printed on. Too much disinfo was being propagated by the Soviet evangelical organs and bad historians soaked the garbage up like a sponge. In English, there's a man called Richard Pipes who was a former Librarian of Congress. He knows his stuff and is largely sympathetic to the plight of the Russians who suffered under that "terrible synthesis of crime and madness." The Tsar's personal correspondence between himself and Alexandra has been translated and released. Very informative and touching. There's also a nice right-leaning journal floating around called Modern Age that printed an extensive piece on the exact nature of the Okhrana and its relationship with the Tsar. Lays to rest some of the more vicious myths aimed at Nicholas II. The degenerate and vindictive nature of the Russian Imperial Court (the nobility) is exposed in some of the books dealing with Rasputin (like the Rasputin File)

If you can find translated books or journals printed by some of the old dissident emirge then you're luckier than me. They have since been proven correct for the most part and are quite good as they deal with stuff since flushed down the memory hole. I can only get the Russian versions and my Russian wife must either translate them (if they're short journal articles) or read them to me (books). As you can well imagine, she doesn't really like to do that very much. Alas, my Russian language skills are still a work in progress.

[Dan Majerle]

Quote: from Solzhenitsyn on 9:55 am on Oct. 11, 2002
So, Bloody Sunday was basically a publicity stunt gone awry? Don't be offended when I say this stretches credulity to say the least.

However, I'm willing to applaud your efforts to recover. You forgot the fact that the Tsar was in Omsk instead of St. Petersburg on that day and would be gone for two more weeks. Surely, the Okhrana would have known the Tsar's scheduling. It seems pointless to pull a cynical publicity stunt if you can't bask in your own self generated light.

You are, of course, correct to point out that the Okhrana was a very odd institution and seemed to do things without rhyme or reason. Among some of their other more notable activities they also spied on the Tsar and the Imperial Family. My best guess is that they latched to the idea early on that communism = Jews = conspiracy. So logically, they hatched a counter- conspiracy of which the most notorious product is the infamous Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. The Tsar rewarded their efforts by placing the Protocols on the censorship list and imprisoning some of the chief counter conspirators at the urging of Stolypin. They then refined the formula: Communism = Jews = Germans = Conspiracy. The Tsar and his family were ethnically German so that would seem to explain the spying. It's also equally odd that Stolypin's assassin was also a double agent working for the Okhrana.



The fact that the tsar was away on Bloody Sunday buttresses the accepted notion that the tsar did not directly control the okhrana and that okhrana comprised of individuals loyal and disloyal to the tsar who ran it mostly out of their own selfish interests.
Also, Richard Pipes? Come on that guy is way to biased, i mean his book is called "A People's Tragedy". Sure the Russian Revolution did result in huge losses, etc but if you wanna mention people's tragedies then just look at the state of Russia today. 10 years of capitalism and it has amounted to nothing. At least in communism these victims capitalism would have been entitled to free medical care, education and largely housing. Now they are sick, illiterate and homeless. It won't not be outrageous to say that most what the Soviet Union and its security back. This is evident in the fact that many including Moscow's mayor want an old statue of Felix Dzenshkey (excuse spelling), creator the the CHEKA back as a reminder of the better times and stability they had.

[Stormin Norman]

Solzhenitsyn,

Thank you for the information. By the way, I like your signature. "The Road to Serfdom" was a great work. It should be required reading for all junior high school kids.

[Dan Majerle]

Stormin, your signature is the epitome of "pointing out the obvious". It is like saying, if committing a crime is bad, then don't commit one! Very Mao like in its simplicity and common sense.

[Solzhenitsyn]

"Now they are sick, illiterate and homeless. It won't not be outrageous to say that most what the Soviet Union and its security back. This is evident in the fact that many including Moscow's mayor want an old statue of Felix Dzenshkey (excuse spelling), creator the the CHEKA back as a reminder of the better times and stability they had. "

They can get those things in an American prison but would they be any better off? No. Do you really want to know what my Russian in-laws think of Communism? It's now taboo to talk about the Soviet period knowing each other fairly well. The in-laws wouldn't even talk to me about it at first because they thought the entire Soviet affair was shameful and reflects badly on the Russian people.

It should be pointed out that the Cannonization of the Tsar and the Imperial Family had (and still has) much wider support than the Dzerzhensky statue.

SN,

I forgot to mention the Gulag Archipeligo by my namesake. Your Russian History education can't be complete without reading the book that slammed the door shut, forever, on the good Lenin/bad Stalin myth.

[Stormin Norman]

Dan,

Your signature is the mark of a loser. If you can identify with something that blaims society for the loneliness of an individual, then you need help. If you can't find somebody to bo your friend out of millions of people, then you must be seriously defective. Seeing as how you are a Marxist, this point is obviously true.

(Edited by Stormin Norman at 7:22 am on Oct. 12, 2002)

[Dan Majerle]

Solzhenitsyn,

The cannonisation of the tsar is aboslute ridiculous, i hope you don't think otherwise and plus it was the church that did that not the people and the church was allied with the tsar.
Stormin, i was just saying your signature is nothing special that is all. I mean if you wanna quote yourself then make sure it is worth it. Seriously dude you can understand the simplicity and blatant obvious-ness of that signature.

[Stormin Norman]

Yes, my signature does see to be a common sense idea. However, this is an idea that is often ignored by the communists on this board, as they continuously defend a system that has proven itself a failure, time and time again. Unfortunately, it does not seem like Marxist truly understand this concept, and it becomes necessary to remind them that when a theory is disproved it should be discarded. The fact that Marxism continues to infect the human condition today is direct evidence that many people either don't understand the principle of which I spoke, or they feel that it should not be applied to the political and economic aspects of our lives.

[Dan Majerle]

mmmm fair enough

[Stormin Norman]

Sorry about the loser remark. It was off-base.

[Dan Majerle]

np,
if you want books on the Russian Revolution that are concise yet rich with information, consider the texts we use at school for it. Michael Lynch - Russia in Revolution and for extracts of documents and stuff Mark Fielding - Spirit of Change - Russia in Revolution. Other than that Robert Conquest who despite being overtly anti-Soviet is also pretty good.

[IHP]

SN,

i also recommend the Michael Lynch book. very neutral and informative.

also (hope no one drills me for this, lol) "the russian revolution 1917 - a personal record"by a guy called Sukhanov, i liked it as it tells the whole situation as it happened by someone who was there.

hope this helped.

--IHP

(Edited by i hate pinochet at 9:38 am on Oct. 12, 2002)