Results 281 to 300 of 604
And this is coming from a male. So your opinion doesn't matter a single bit, no matter how little you care about womens basic rights.
For student organizing in california, join this group!
http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1036
http://socialistorganizer.org/
"[I]t’s hard to keep potent historical truths bottled up forever. New data repositories are uncovered. New, less ideological, generations of historians grow up. In the late 1980s and before, Ann Druyan and I would routinely smuggle copies of Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution into the USSR—so our colleagues could know a little about their own political beginnings.”
--Carl Sagan
Nowhere does that post say the Soviet Union was right for outlawing abortion. It merely explains the reasoning behind so doing without making any kind of judgment call on that reasoning. Is it not physically possible for a Trot to just keep calm and give someone the goddamned benefit of the doubt?
No it isn't possible, his tone gave the impression that he was serious. He was justifying it, because of you and Ismail.
For student organizing in california, join this group!
http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1036
http://socialistorganizer.org/
"[I]t’s hard to keep potent historical truths bottled up forever. New data repositories are uncovered. New, less ideological, generations of historians grow up. In the late 1980s and before, Ann Druyan and I would routinely smuggle copies of Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution into the USSR—so our colleagues could know a little about their own political beginnings.”
--Carl Sagan
So it's my fault you decided someone was defending the outlaw of abortion? #trotlogic
I was answering a question on the relevance of population in the USSR in relation to planning in response to the query of the post above mine. I wasn't stating an opinion, position or endorsement.
By the way: you never sourced your made up quote about the Comintern being "for the purpose of foreign policy."
You gave him an impression to. Trying to justify the wrongs of Stalin and his authoritarian dictatorship. There is no possible way you can defend the logic of sending gays to the gulag for simply being gay. Stalin was a homophobe. Lenin and Trotsky banned the anti-sodomy laws of the old Csarist Russia, Stalin reinforced them on the USSR. Forcing gays to go into concentration camps, just like what the Csars did. And Stalin had no right to ban abortion. It's not his body, it is the woman's body. It falls under the category of female rights. Which Stalin seemed to have also neglected.
lol I bet if Stalin did ever eat babies, his Stalinist would try to justify it....
There are several things wrong with this, so I'm going to try to address them one by one:
- No one is defending the treatment of gay people under Stalin.
- No one is defending the neglect of women's rights through the criminalization of abortion.
- Trotsky had exactly nothing to do with taking sodomy laws of the books, and not once has anyone demonstrated the contrary.
- It is no one's fault that someone decided anyone was defending Stalin in these cases.
And I'm sure Trots will bend over backwards trying to prove that Trotsky was responsible for every orgasm ever had by anyone in the U.S.S.R. That still doesn't mean anyone has tried to justify Stalin's actions in these cases.lol I bet if Stalin did ever eat babies, his Stalinist would try to justify it....
Here's a gem from Stalin, regarding the League of Nations, and more or less stating his opinion on how the U.S.S.R. was doing, in regards to the friends of peace, the former entente:
“I think that the position of the friends of peace is growing stronger; the friends of peace can work openly, they rely upon the strength of public opinion, they have at their disposal such instruments, for instance, as the League of Nations.”
From the Revolution Betrayed:
Roy Howard tried to get a little illumination on this point also. What is the state of affairs – he asked Stalin – as to plans and intentions in regard to world revolution?
“We never had any such plans or intentions.” But, well ... “This is the result of a misunderstanding.”
For student organizing in california, join this group!
http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1036
http://socialistorganizer.org/
"[I]t’s hard to keep potent historical truths bottled up forever. New data repositories are uncovered. New, less ideological, generations of historians grow up. In the late 1980s and before, Ann Druyan and I would routinely smuggle copies of Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution into the USSR—so our colleagues could know a little about their own political beginnings.”
--Carl Sagan
You guys have more or less tried to justify it, we've had to argue against you in this thread. If you didn't try to justify it, or just included in a post, "However I don't support this and Stalin was dead wrong for doing it," this conversation wouldn't be happening.
Also find me proof that Lenin had something to do with taking off homosexuality laws, or Stalin for that matter! They might not of written the bill, but they obviously approved of it, seeing as they didn't oppose it.
Stalin physically got rid of those laws.
For student organizing in california, join this group!
http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1036
http://socialistorganizer.org/
"[I]t’s hard to keep potent historical truths bottled up forever. New data repositories are uncovered. New, less ideological, generations of historians grow up. In the late 1980s and before, Ann Druyan and I would routinely smuggle copies of Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution into the USSR—so our colleagues could know a little about their own political beginnings.”
--Carl Sagan
For one, you decided we tried to justify it. And now that you know we weren't, you still can't let it go.
And your "gem" from Stalin: what's that got to do with anything? Were you hoping to distract us from the ass you made of yourself?
I was responding to him.
For student organizing in california, join this group!
http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1036
http://socialistorganizer.org/
"[I]t’s hard to keep potent historical truths bottled up forever. New data repositories are uncovered. New, less ideological, generations of historians grow up. In the late 1980s and before, Ann Druyan and I would routinely smuggle copies of Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution into the USSR—so our colleagues could know a little about their own political beginnings.”
--Carl Sagan
Although I am no particular fan of Stalin, you're actually taking this out of context.
The actual context of the question is whether the Soviet Union intended to spearhead a more literal war on the capitalist countries of the world and impose their interpretation of socialism from above. Of course you'd also be extremely naive if you actually thought that Stalin wasn't interested in spreading the Stalinist system across the world. After the failure of international revolution to take off, the Soviet Union found itself increasingly isolated and captive to the interests of the West. Do you honestly believe that he is saying that, yes, the continued proliferation of bourgeois democracy is beneficial for the Soviet state?
And then of course your opinion also contradicts what Stalin has privately said in his letters, which were never intended for public consumption. There is simply no question that, within his own mind, he believed that the actions of the Soviet state were guided towards of the proliferation of what he interpreted to be socialism. The real question(although it's not much of a question in my opinion, and I'm sure you'd agree) is whether the policy of the Soviet Union, irrespective of what the bureaucracy believed it to be, really was in the advancement of socialism.
Ghost Bebel is at least right about things being taken out of context.
You kinda are.... Considering we spent the last two pages arguing about it. And if you weren't then Ismail was. Even if you're not defending it, I haven't hear you condemn is actions. Especially for forcing gays into the gulag, which you seemed to ignored after I gave you the link.
Again, you two (or at least Ismail) was arguing that the Soviet Union needed population growth. So they took away women's rights to do so. There is no justification of Stalin outlawing Abortion back then, just like there is no justification of it now.
Umm he kinda did. After the Revolution, headed by Lenin and Trotsky, the Bolsheviks were responsible for re-writing the country's laws. (Less capitalist, more socialist) and the head of the Bolsheviks made new law that was fitting after the revolution. Trotsky was one of these heads. So he did take part in taking anti-sodomy laws out of the book
Try going back a few pages. I've already been pretty open about my opinion as to how fucked up the whole situation was.
I can't speak for Ismail, but the only time I've mentioned abortion on this website is in regards to how fucked up it is to ban it. (I describe things as being "fucked up" frequently.)
Prove, with any evidence whatsoever, that Trotsky had anything to do, at all, with the removal of sodomy laws from the books. Do more than just assert that he was only one of two men responsible for heading the Revolution and extrapolating from that assertion that Trotsky had anything at all to do with the removal of said laws.
Since this is the Stalin thread and not just the Stalin and Soviet abortion policy thread... (and for the record because you're trying really really hard to stain peoples' image here with zero factual basis - I guess that's just Trotskyite historical method - I agree that Kamo Zed's characterization of Soviet anti-abortion and anti-homosexuality laws as "fucked up" is completely accurate and I don't believe there exists a "justification" for it. I'm 100% pro-choice and anti-homophobe in my beliefs. For that matter I did not even enter into the debate on Soviet policy, I wrote one post on how population demographics were of major issue to the situation of socialist construction, and pointed out a recent book that deals with it.)
What's so extraordinary about this? Do you think Trotsky when he still had currency in the Bolshevik party and the state did not profess peace and seek cooperation with certain bourgeois states for the defence of the USSR (or what Trotsky thought was the "defence of the USSR")?
Here's one:
Originally Posted by E. H. Carr, "Socialism in One Country" Volume 3, Book 1A yes, classic quote that gets pulled out every few months here. Trotky was a hell of a quote artist no doubt. Here's some context:
Originally Posted by http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1936/03/01.htm
Again, I didn't even enter into the debate proper, but I think you're simply confounding the difference between a normative and a descriptive argument. Describing the historical circumstances of something with factual evidence is not a personal endorsement of the thing you're describing. I think most people, at least when describing history, try to choose their words carefully to convey something specific, so you should pay attention to it. If people aren't clear it's their own fault perhaps, but I think it's more likely that you're following the narrative you chose to follow.
What?
That's your rebuttal? Criticizing my narrative skills? Let me make it clear for you. Stalin is a homophobe, who made homosexuality illegal and forced gays into gulag camps where the were basically enslaved and treated like prisoner. Just because they were gay. Do you understand it now?
The narrative I was referring to was your insistence that somehow we agreed with or justified repression of homosexuals in the USSR without us having said so and with repeated denials. I didn't attempt to rebutt any claim about repression of homosexuals which is well known to have been a policy. I said you should improve your reading skills, not writing skills.
Sigh* Dude why are you trying to defend Stalin when you know what he did was wrong? That would be like me defending a murderer. He killed someone and I don't approve of it but yet I am defending him. Do you understand now?
If you admit that Stalin was homophobic then how come you still manage to stand by his side? Stalin forced gays into the gulag for being gay. They were treated like criminals, when they were guilty of no crime but being born sexually attracted to the same gender. Stalin didn't care about LGBT rights and showed no intent that he had any plan to remove his anti-sodomy laws. But rather he kept sending them to the gulag. And the restriction of abortion is only the tip of the iceberg when it came to women's rights. With all that went on, it seems that Stalin was making a Soviet Union that was pleasing to him and not to the proletariat. And with Trotsky's part on taking anti-sodomy laws out of the books. I thought I couldn't of made that more simple. After the Russian Revolution ended, the leaders of the Bolsheviks were responsible for getting rid of the laws of the Csars. The anti-sodomy law was one of these laws. Trotsky was among the leadership of the Bolsheviks who helped changed the Csarsist laws.
