Possibly The Most Biased and Right Wing Thing I've Ever Read

[YKTMX]

http://www.time.com/time/time100/leaders/p...file/lenin.html (http://www.time.com/time/time100/leaders/profile/lenin.html)

This piece of vile propaganda really is something, even for fucking TIME magazine.

[Nobody]

Agreed. The mass murder in the CCCP was Stalin fault, a man Lenin did not even like. accusing Lenin of mass murder is crazy. While he doubtlessly order many exuctions, in a time of revolutionary turmoil it is to be expected. What are a few cappies anyway?

[Sabocat]

Holy shit. I knew Time magazine was a piece of garbage, but this is over the top even for them.

Looks like a White House press release for fucksake.

[YKTMX]

My favourite titbit of revisionist genuis was calling the revolution a "bolshevik coup".

[Blibblob]

Where's their e-mail address! I have 5 e-mail addresses, must spam...

[YKTMX]

I'd advise against that, they'd probably "dissapear" you.

[Blibblob]

Only one from each. I don't wanna get thrown in the back of a white van(as stated in Patriot Act) just yet.

[YKTMX]

The Patriot Act...something that would have made old Stalin blush.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Yes! E-mail them! At once! Make it known that there are readers who will not tolerate such garbage as calling Hitler a follower of Lenin! Fascists!

[Invader Zim]

That site is rediculous, and hypocritical considering the fact that they made reviews of people like Al Capone that were complimentary. Now there was a murderer.

[Rastafari]

Calling Lenin a leader to people like Stalin, Pol Pot, and Hitler is just plain lying. Newsweek was made to present the facts, while Time was made to write about the opinions of the bourgeosie editors. Newsweek has gotten to be a shithole gossip magazine too, though.

Nobody wants the truth it seems

[hazard]

you know they mudrered x:

they tried to blame it on islam

return the power to the have-nots...then came the shot!

[YKTMX]

Quote: from hazard on 1:55 am on May 16, 2003
you know they mudrered x:

they tried to blame it on islam

return the power to the have-nots...then came the shot!

Well done!

[truthaddict11]

TIME once did a story on the CIA praising the Chileian coup

[Dirty Commie]

I have given up on even noticing the RW media, it's all bull shit anyway.

[Anonymous]

Ny Times is left-wing.

[RedComrade]

It's all about perspective DC, I read that article a while back though I about spit out my drink, it looked like an article from the John Birch Society.

(Edited by RedComrade at 4:44 am on May 16, 2003)

[hazard]

yeah, I love to start the stutta step and bomb more lefts upon the fascists -

YEAH!

what was the price on his head?

[antieverything]

Lenin sucks...and this is coming from a guy who is presently wearing a t-shirt with the guy on it. (he's striking a pose and looks like fucking batman so I couldn't pass it up.)

So, anyone going to attack some specific points with specific facts?

[Moskitto]

They gave a good review of that psychopath Margaret Thatcher!!!!

[Liberty Lover]

I'm with antieverything. What is it about the article you find to be incorrect and what evidence can you provide to verify this.

All you have done is criticise Time magazine despite the fact that the article was written by David Remnick, a New Yorker staff writer.

[Urban Rubble]

Did anyone read the one on Ho Chi Mihn ? It wasn't too bad.

[YKTMX]

"Lenin was the initiator of the central drama--the tragedy--of our era, the rise of totalitarian states"

The gretaest tragedy our time? OK, here goes. WWI, WW2, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Holocaust.

"Lenin introduced to the 20th century the practice of taking an all-embracing ideology and imposing it on an entire society rapidly and mercilessly; he created a regime that erased politics, erased historical memory, erased opposition"

Has he read the Patriot Act?

"Lenin created a model not merely for his successor, Stalin, but for Mao, for Hitler, for Pol Pot"

Ahh, that greatest of right wing ploys, mention the facists, the enemy we can all hate and you're gurnatted to win the argument even if it's without foundation

"On the contrary, Vladimir Ilyich was a rather kind person whose cruelty was stipulated by science and incontrovertible historical laws. As were his love of power and his political intolerance."

Once, again, where is the evidence for this? There was a fucking civil war going on! How many Confederates did the Unionists kill in the American civil war. Oh yes, he was so hungry for power that the first thing he done after the revolution was put the Soviets in charge, genuis!

"For all his learning, Lenin began the Bolshevik tradition of waging war on intellectual dissidents--of exiling, imprisoning and executing thinkers and artists who dared oppose the regime."

Hmmm, in the last thirty years I can think off at least 10 wars the US has started SIMPLY because they did not like the politics of a goverment. The hypocrisy is brilliant.

"It sought to sweep aside as useless rubbish the wisdom that mankind had accumulated over millennia. In that sense, it was a unique effort to apply science to human affairs: and it was pursued with the zeal characteristic of the breed of intellectuals who regard resistance to their ideas as proof that they are sound"

Ahh, Richard Pipes, that historian of the most subjective kind. He spent two volumes revising 1917 and we're supposed to take his word for it.

"It is, perhaps, impossible to calculate just how many tens of millions of murders "flowed" from Leninism"

I'm confused. It's impossible to calculate but it's "tens of millions". Nonsense.

"Comrades! ... Hang (hang without fail, so that people will see) no fewer than one hundred known kulaks, rich men, bloodsuckers ... Do it in such a way that ... for hundreds of versts around, the people will see, tremble, know, shout: 'They are strangling and will strangle to death the bloodsucker kulaks' ... Yours, Lenin."

Your god damn right! And I'd do the same thing all over again.

, "not so much because of his political philosophy or practice ... but because of the omnipresent images which plagued almost every textbook, every class wall, postage stamps, money, and what not, depicting the man at various ages and stages of his life ... This face in some ways haunts every Russian and suggests some sort of standard for human appearance because it is utterly lacking in character ... coming to ignore those pictures was my first lesson in switching off, my first attempt at estrangement."

I hardly think he can be blamed for this, this was part of Stalin's bastardization of Lenin clearly.

"After the collapse of the coup in August 1991"

A Coup? What a moron.

[antieverything]

"Lenin was the initiator of the central drama--the tragedy--of our era, the rise of totalitarian states" Yeah, pretty stupid. Backwardness creates revolutionaries, not the other way around. Cambodia would have been thrown into horrible civil turmoil even without Lenin's influence. China's explosion was almost inevitable.


"Lenin introduced to the 20th century the practice of taking an all-embracing ideology and imposing it on an entire society rapidly and mercilessly; he created a regime that erased politics, erased historical memory, erased opposition"

Has he read the Patriot Act?
So, you don't deny that he did this? This is a horrible thing...it doesn't matter what you put it up against...and the Patriot Act is hardly a contender for the Repression Crown ™.


"Lenin created a model not merely for his successor, Stalin, but for Mao, for Hitler, for Pol Pot" See my first point.


"On the contrary, Vladimir Ilyich was a rather kind person whose cruelty was stipulated by science and incontrovertible historical laws. As were his love of power and his political intolerance."

Once, again, where is the evidence for this? There was a fucking civil war going on! How many Confederates did the Unionists kill in the American civil war. Oh yes, he was so hungry for power that the first thing he done after the revolution was put the Soviets in charge, genuis!
I agree that Lenin is often judged too harshly. Most Western observers choose to ignore the fact that the new Soviet state was being invaded by capitalist forces (in fact, most history books have no mention of this). Still, this doesn't excuse his actions. You seem to be confused about the relationship between Lenin and the soviets. The soviets were there before he came to power (they have a tendency to arise out of anarchy) and they weren't going anywhere, whether he liked them or not. It is true that at first Lenin allowed the soviets to pretty much govern themselves (he made famous the phrase "all power to the soviets.") but as soon as his government became better established he consolidated almost all power into the centralized party structure. The soviets were giving him resistance...you can't have democracy if you want to force people to do what you want them to, now can you?


"It is, perhaps, impossible to calculate just how many tens of millions of murders "flowed" from Leninism"See my first point.


"Comrades! ... Hang (hang without fail, so that people will see) no fewer than one hundred known kulaks, rich men, bloodsuckers ... Do it in such a way that ... for hundreds of versts around, the people will see, tremble, know, shout: 'They are strangling and will strangle to death the bloodsucker kulaks' ... Yours, Lenin."

Your god damn right! And I'd do the same thing all over again.

Ah...isn't that sweet?


"not so much because of his political philosophy or practice ... but because of the omnipresent images which plagued almost every textbook, every class wall, postage stamps, money, and what not, depicting the man at various ages and stages of his life ... This face in some ways haunts every Russian and suggests some sort of standard for human appearance because it is utterly lacking in character ... coming to ignore those pictures was my first lesson in switching off, my first attempt at estrangement."

I hardly think he can be blamed for this, this was part of Stalin's bastardization of Lenin clearly.
Good point.


"After the collapse of the coup in August 1991"

A Coup? What a moron. By "coup" I believe he means a coup d'état which is defined as,

a sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force or a sudden, decisive exercise of power whereby the existing government is subverted without the consent of the people; an unexpected measure of state, more or less violent; a stroke of policy.

I think that this is a pretty good way of defining the Bolshevik take-over...remember that they thought they had to crack down because the Mensheviks were gaining too much support among the proletarians from which the Bolsheviks claimed exclusive support.

[edit] I fucking hate the ikonboard quote system...

(Edited by antieverything at 9:53 pm on May 17, 2003)

[YKTMX]

"So, you don't deny that he did this? This is a horrible thing...it doesn't matter what you put it up against...and the Patriot Act is hardly a contender for the Repression Crown"

Listen, I am not trying to deify Lenin, or indeed Leninism. I think he made mistakes, NEP, the centralization of power during the civil war for example. However, I will not take abuse from the right about freedoms being "restricted" during times of social crisis. I do not for one second believe that Lenin planned on "forcing" anything on anybody, he was a man of peace and intelligence. The Centralization was ALL about defeating the whites, also, coincedentally anyone who has any doubts about whether the Revolution had mass support would just have to look at the Red Army.

"a sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force or a sudden, decisive exercise of power whereby the existing government is subverted without the consent of the people; an unexpected measure of state, more or less violent; a stroke of policy"

Well, the revolution had the consent of the mass of the people so it wasn't a coup. The overthrowing of Allende, now THAT was a coup. Another notch on the belt of freedom.

[synthesis]

I think that the main fallacy of the article is the assertion that Lenin initiated totalitarian governments, while anyone with even a mediocre understanding of history knows that the totalitarian government has existed for thousands of years.

At the very least, it began with the Sun King in the 14th century.

(Edited by DyerMaker at 11:14 pm on May 17, 2003)

[Som]

The Centralization was ALL about defeating the whites, also, coincedentally anyone who has any doubts about whether the Revolution had mass support would just have to look at the Red Army.

Actually, its just the contrary, considering the vast amount of concentration of bolshevik power happened AFTER the whites were defeated. I think the descision that gave the bolshevik party members more than 50% of a vote or so, effectively destroying the democracy of the soviets was in 1921 or 23. Either way, after the war.

Well, the revolution had the consent of the mass of the people so it wasn't a coup. The overthrowing of Allende, now THAT was a coup. Another notch on the belt of freedom.

maybe, but the initial siezure of power with the bolsheviks storming the duma was. Sort of a coup-to revolution and civil war.

[YKTMX]

"Actually, its just the contrary, considering the vast amount of concentration of bolshevik power happened AFTER the whites were defeated. I think the descision that gave the bolshevik party members more than 50% of a vote or so, effectively destroying the democracy of the soviets was in 1921 or 23. Either way, after the war."

Yes, but the old rulers still planned to use the fractionality of the revolution to defeat it entirely, I think the lessons of Febuary played a part in Lenin's thinking at the time.


"maybe, but the initial siezure of power with the bolsheviks storming the duma was. Sort of a coup-to revolution and civil war"

Listen, revolutions are not benine things. They are bloody, brutal affairs, as that is the only way, when it comes down to it to defeat rulers, who'll stop at nothing to maintain power.

(Edited by YouKnowTheyMurderedX at 11:55 pm on May 17, 2003)

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Dark Capitalist on 4:17 am on May 16, 2003
Ny Times is left-wing.


What in the same way that bill gates is a povery stricken cast out of US socioty?

LOL you a funny guy DC

[Kwisatz Haderach]

I wonder how much the Bush administration paid them to write that...

[Liberty Lover]

Edric O,

Why would the Bush administration pay someone to write an article denouncing a man who symbolises an ideology that is now followed only by teenagers with no world experience who spend too much time on the internet?

David Remnick, the articles author, is a Russian immigrant who knows first hand the horrors of Soviet tyranny.

(Edited by Liberty Lover at 4:04 am on May 18, 2003)

[CubanFox]

There has never been a true commie country. Russia was for the most part Stalinist and Cuba is socialist.

[YKTMX]

Quote: from Liberty Lover on 4:03 am on May 18, 2003
Edric O,

Why would the Bush administration pay someone to write an article denouncing a man who symbolises an ideology that is now followed only by teenagers with no world experience who spend too much time on the internet?

David Remnick, the articles author, is a Russian immigrant who knows first hand the horrors of Soviet tyranny.

(Edited by Liberty Lover at 4:04 am on May 18, 2003)


Please don't comment on a movment you're obviously not part off. And I suppose by world experience, you mean Investment bankers who only leave Suburbia to pick up hookers?

[antieverything]

an ideology that is now followed only by teenagers with no world experience who spend too much time on the internet?LOL, good one!