It stopped the recreationist influence from the west. I wonder if it was its original purpose though.
Results 1 to 20 of 84
This is something I rarely see discussed on revleft and i'm curious to see what everybody's views are on it. Personally I think it was a bad idea as it greatly restricted the mobility rights of DDR citizens.
P.S- excuse my short post. I really need to sleep. I haven't had a decent night's sleep in days...
Economic Left/Right: -9.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.15
"There are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen." - Lenin
It stopped the recreationist influence from the west. I wonder if it was its original purpose though.
Barbaric. What sort of regime needs to build a wall to hide itself behind? The Israeli one, for example.
Ivan "Bonebreaker" Khutorskoy16.11.2009"We won't forget, we won't forgive"
So does USA and Mexico. The point of the wall was to held the political influence, if isolationist was socialist, would you support the infiltration by the west or let the people decide whom they want to reign?
DDR wasn't socialist. Nor was it democratic in any respect. This is shown by how many people tried to escape and were shot dead as they tried. This wall is unjustified, people have the right to move freely wherever they want.
Ivan "Bonebreaker" Khutorskoy16.11.2009"We won't forget, we won't forgive"
The wall was yet another big mistake of the USSR (Its first was allowing Stalin to be a part of it) the wall was there to keep people in because they screwed up those who benevelent occupyer thing and started killing and raping German citizens. The wall was bad because it truely made them look weak. I do not believe any country should have a huge wall around it unless it has invaders on all sides, people looking for help and a better life are not ninvaders contrary to the American belief.
[FONT=System]Welcome to the Revelution Line. Where we're on all the time. Giving a new meaning to "Red State."[/FONT]
[FONT=System][/FONT]
[FONT=System]"A revelution never comes with a warnin', a revelution never sends you an omen. A revelution just arrives like the mornin', sound the alarm and wake up the snorin' " - Micheal Franti[/FONT]
This described it pretty nicely. If people want to leave to West Germany, let them, why hold them back when being against holding back Mexicans going to the US? What makes the US-Mexico and German border issue any different besides the fact that East Germany called itself "Communist".
Not to make a full statement on the wall, but there were some reasons not being considered here. First, the wall wasn't built on the West-East German border, it was built around West Berlin. West Berlin was being heavily subsidized by the US, British and French (in declining order, of course), to the point where many denizens of West Berlin barely worked because they were paid just to live there. If you put that environment next to ANY city, be it New York, Buenos Aires, Paris or what have you, people are going to try to get inside because the lifestyle is so appealing. Further, the denizens of West Berlin were, in addition to getting most of their life subsidized, routinely going to East Berlin to shop in the subsidized (read: really cheap) shops there, which disrupted the East German system of central planning (more consumers than there were supposed to be, etc.). That imbalance was one of the reasons the wall was put up.
I don't think the wall was a good solution, and the 180-so deaths of people trying to cross (far less than most people think) were certainly tragic. However, it's a big mistake to think as though there weren't serious pressures on East Germany from the capitalists that demanded some sort of response. The wall was tragic, but in some ways valid, and we can never forget this in favor of comfortable black-and-white platitudes.
If you gotta build a wall to keep your people leaving, you're doing something wrong.
Perhaps, but like I said, if you stuck West Berlin during that period next to the Vatican, people would be trying to get in. Everything was subsidized.
It was two imperialist nations dividing a country as if it were pie.
If you think a wall would make them look weak, what do you think thousands of people leaving en masse would make them looK?
With saying that, I never really understood why the soviet union wasnt more adamant about bringing people there (to live, not to be trained and come back).
There is the whole risk of spies, cold war and all, but that has never prevented immigration. And its not like they already hadnt got some nationality issue.
i think that it was a bad idea and now has become a symbol against communism.
Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed.-Étienne de La Boétie
you hate Stalin's CCCP, so much so you call his regime "Impeiralist", yet you have Che, who was a Anti-Revisionist, quotes and your name is Che. The Berlin Wall was created by the Soviets to either keep Western influence out and maybe it was because the Soviet Troops and the Allied troops almost chot each other near Western Berlin. But remember the whole Cold War? Tensions rose and I'm pretty sure both the CCCP and the US were prepared to invade the other. Besides the Berlin wall wasnt built around the West/East border or else it would have been called the German wall. It surrounded Western Berlin for lets not forget the Soviets blockaged the Western Berlin for some time.
Marxism-Leninism-Maoism
“Congratulating Stalin is not a formality. Congratulating Stalin means supporting him and his cause, supporting the victory of socialism, and the way forward for mankind which he points out, it means supporting a dear friend. For the great majority of mankind today are suffering, and mankind can free itself from suffering only by the road pointed out by Stalin and with his help.” – Mao Tse Tung
Ah, yes...who could forget THAT little temper tantrum?
As for the wall, yes, it was a disgrace. As an anarchist, I don't have the luxury of engaging in the kind of moral relativism that some of our anti-revisionist friends seem to enjoy. But hey, at least the soldiers who manned the wall were only ordered to shoot to disable...gotta be thankful for the small things...
"Win, lose or draw...long as you squabble and you get down, that's gangsta."
Manic, I was aware that many West Berliners were crossing into East Berlin to shop in the subsidized stores and that it was a large factor in the construction of the wall, but I wasn't aware that West Berlin was so cushy... Do you know of any material I could read to get a little more in depth on that?
Siento que llegó nuestra hora, esta es nuestra revolución
Somos una luz cegadora, fuerte, mas brillante que el sol
Porque siento que este es el momento
De olvidar lo que nos separó y pensar en lo que nos une!
-Amaral
Kasama Project
Formerly Culture of a Peachy Nation
All accounts of CHe Guevara later in his life after he'd experienced the world more point to him being icnredibly critical of Stalin. He wasn't an anti-revisionist, he was simply a communist. Some have even alluded to him being a Trotskyist.
Ivan "Bonebreaker" Khutorskoy16.11.2009"We won't forget, we won't forgive"
Saint trotsky, now saint guevara, right?
As much as I like laughing at trotskyst propaganda, Guevara wasn't even close to a trotskyst. He was critical of stalin, as well as everything else (that and his libertarian socialist perspective of a revolution lead people to associate him wrongly with anarchism, which is much more accurate than an association with trotskysts), but his later life accounts show that he was incredibly critical of cuban proximity with the soviet union. Che's account of the revolution was that the cubans were to be free, not colonized by a new state.
"You know what he did? He torn Trotsky's books apart and threw them in the trashcan. There was no way to maintain a dialogue with Che Guevara. Then we left him on his own. We didn't report him to the authorities, they themselves found him and killed him."
Professor Francisco Carafa, trotskyst, on account of his last meeting with guevara in bolivia.
KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACERKILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACERKILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER KILLFACER
I'm sure everyone here will profusely disagree with it. All you can expect from an authoritarian capitalist regime.
"Direct Action is a notion of such clarity, of such self-evident transparency, that merely to speak the words defines and explains them. It means that the working class, in constant rebellion against the existing state of affairs, expects nothing from outside people, powers or forces, but rather creates its own conditions of struggle and looks to itself for its means of action. It means that, against the existing society which recognises only the citizen, rises the producer. And that that producer, having grasped that any social grouping models itself upon its system of production, intends to attack directly the capitalist mode of production in order to transform it, by eliminating the employer and thereby achieving sovereignty in the workshop – the essential condition for the enjoyment of real freedom.” Emile Pouget