Does populist communism is true communism?

[maxham]

Some things that I've knon about communism itself id, there's a huge split between the despotic & the democratic communism itself. In my populist view, I described Stalin as "Sparta" of its despotic-military rule while Khruschev, Tito & Trotsky as "Athens" due to their more democratic & liberal approach.

I oftenly thinks that "Athenean" Communism is true-spirited communism, due to its poulist approach. What do you think about it?

[SEKT]

I think you have no idea you are talking about.

There is no such "Despotic" nor "Democratic" communism.

What you call Despotic is a form of left fascism.

What you call Democratic is communism, there is no other way!!!

And neither kruschev, tito or trotsky were "democrats", they were based on the boshevik model in which the "holly party" has to rule, which is not democrat at all!!!

Democracy (something the capitalist states always pregones) has to do with the power to each person and the decisions made by each one no the "right" to chose the next stupid that will rule you on a period of time (like Obama or Mccain or anyother bastard)!!

What it important is not to be slaves anymore!!!

Here is a quote can help you: Free election of masters does not abolish the masters or the slaves. Herbert Marcuse.

[Robespierre2.0]

What you call Despotic is a form of left fascism.

What you call Democratic is communism, there is no other way!!!

And neither kruschev, tito or trotsky were "democrats", they were based on the boshevik model in which the "holly party" has to rule, which is not democrat at all!!!


Please slap yourself in the face.
Did it hurt? Do it again.

'Left fascism'?! Are you fucking kidding me? Please, at the very least use the term 'state capitalist' or 'deformed workers' state'. Of course, you'd still be wrong, but at least you'd sound like you know what you're talking about.

Oh, and 'Holly Party?'. Was Santa General Secretary?

OP, your heart's in the right place, but you are looking at communism through the world-view capitalist society imbued you with.
First of all, your analogy doesn't work; We can't compare societies that existed 2,000 apart in so simple a manner.

Second, there is more than one side to every story. Unlike ancient history, events from the last couple of centuries are still very much politically charged and therefore, you have to dig through piles of lies in order to find the truh.
It seems like you just blindly accept Trotsky, Tito and Kruschev as the 'saints' of communism, and demonize Stalin because someone else told you so.

I suggest you read Stalin's writings, and some books and/or essays that give the Pro-Stalin perspective on things before you jump to conclusions like that.
Even if you still disagree with him after you finish reading, you'll at least have a better understanding of what he stood for.

Oh, and read 'Socialism: Utopian and Scientific' by Engels. It's a short read, and it explains Dialectical Materialism, something you should familiarize yourself with if you want to have a communist understanding of the world.

[Q]

Yay, another archeological find!