Results 41 to 60 of 128
It was more like rape at gunpoint.Love determines whether or not it's only a marriage of convenience.
Oooh, I expect you can back that up.
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
Absurd? All of Eastern Europe was under the Soviet yoke. Troops were stationed in Eastern bloc countries. Not to mention Afghanistan. Everybody was forced to learn Russian. I have lots of relatives who would be willing to tell you exactly how "absurd" it actually was.
"This is my test of character. There you have the despotic instinct of men. They do not like the cat because the cat is free, and will never consent to become a slave. He will do nothing to your order, as the other animals do." — Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
"The intellectual and emotional refusal 'to go along' appears neurotic and impotent." — Herbert Marcuse.
"Our blight is ideologies — they are the long-expected Antichrist!" — Carl Gustav Jung
Yeah, read the Pilsudski link.
"This is my test of character. There you have the despotic instinct of men. They do not like the cat because the cat is free, and will never consent to become a slave. He will do nothing to your order, as the other animals do." — Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
"The intellectual and emotional refusal 'to go along' appears neurotic and impotent." — Herbert Marcuse.
"Our blight is ideologies — they are the long-expected Antichrist!" — Carl Gustav Jung
I did. Can't see where Rosa was wrong, Poland could be a tool of German imperialism, or a tool of Russian imperialism. It became a tool of German imperialism, thereby vindicating Rosa's prognosis.
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
I'm sorry but I just skimmed a bunch of Wikipedia and I can't see where Poland was a "tool of German imperialism." Are you angry that they defeated the Bolsheviks or something?
"This is my test of character. There you have the despotic instinct of men. They do not like the cat because the cat is free, and will never consent to become a slave. He will do nothing to your order, as the other animals do." — Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
"The intellectual and emotional refusal 'to go along' appears neurotic and impotent." — Herbert Marcuse.
"Our blight is ideologies — they are the long-expected Antichrist!" — Carl Gustav Jung
By the way - this position wasn't unique to Luxemburg. Lenin also cautioned against the Polish left raising the slogan of Polish independence. Where Lenin and Luxemburg differed is that Lenin considered Polish independence a possible democratic demand, whereas Luxemburg did not. But of course neither thought democratic demands are absolute - unlike some "Leninists" who turn the slogan of national self-determination into a parody of itself.
No one was forced to learn Russian, although Russian was a very popular subject (as was French, at least in Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia). And the presence of troops is not imperialism - that requires certain economic mechanisms outlined by Leftsolidarity.Originally Posted by argeiphontes
Really? Try reading more.I'm sorry but I just skimmed a bunch of Wikipedia and I can't see where Poland was a "tool of German imperialism." Are you angry that they defeated the Bolsheviks or something?
'angry that they defeated the Bolsheviks'... the Bolsheviks that I've already described as imperialists and utterly wrong to invade Poland, you mean?
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
"Russian was a popular subject" implies that everybody was in love with the Soviet Union. In reality their would have been pressure to learn it. People in Poland hated Soviet domination and they did in the rest of the Eastern bloc as well. The Russian teacher was not the most popular person in school, contrary to what you're saying.
In Yugoslavia they learned English instead of Russian, thanks to Tito's independence from the Soviet Union. I've been there and heard this from the people there. This was probably not coerced IIRC.
You can redefine Imperialism to mean anything you like, but that doesn't change the facts of Soviet domination. You can add it to the list of redefined terms like 'idealism' and 'utopian'.
"This is my test of character. There you have the despotic instinct of men. They do not like the cat because the cat is free, and will never consent to become a slave. He will do nothing to your order, as the other animals do." — Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
"The intellectual and emotional refusal 'to go along' appears neurotic and impotent." — Herbert Marcuse.
"Our blight is ideologies — they are the long-expected Antichrist!" — Carl Gustav Jung
You'll have to point it out to me, otherwise the null hypothesis holds.
Yes, those Bolsheviks.
"This is my test of character. There you have the despotic instinct of men. They do not like the cat because the cat is free, and will never consent to become a slave. He will do nothing to your order, as the other animals do." — Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
"The intellectual and emotional refusal 'to go along' appears neurotic and impotent." — Herbert Marcuse.
"Our blight is ideologies — they are the long-expected Antichrist!" — Carl Gustav Jung
Why would be angry at Poland defeating the Bolsheviks, if I thought that the Russian invasion of Poland was an act of imperialism?
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
Because you would support the Bolsheviks over some nation's right to self-determination. Communists don't believe in national self-determination, remember? Maybe you would blame lack of revolution in Germany on Polish independence because Russian troops couldn't march into Germany to aid it.
edit: Maybe you would adopt the definition of imperialism offered above, where only capitalist nations can be imperialist, by definition?
"This is my test of character. There you have the despotic instinct of men. They do not like the cat because the cat is free, and will never consent to become a slave. He will do nothing to your order, as the other animals do." — Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
"The intellectual and emotional refusal 'to go along' appears neurotic and impotent." — Herbert Marcuse.
"Our blight is ideologies — they are the long-expected Antichrist!" — Carl Gustav Jung
Actually, never mind. I'm falsely accusing you of siding with the Soviet invasion. I apologize. Too little coffee...
"This is my test of character. There you have the despotic instinct of men. They do not like the cat because the cat is free, and will never consent to become a slave. He will do nothing to your order, as the other animals do." — Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
"The intellectual and emotional refusal 'to go along' appears neurotic and impotent." — Herbert Marcuse.
"Our blight is ideologies — they are the long-expected Antichrist!" — Carl Gustav Jung
Imperialism refers to a specific stage in capitalist development, and has a distinguishable summation of social relations and the role of capital in geopolitics. The domination of one state over another, the "bullying" of a country alone is not imperialism, though often it is because it occurs within the context of capitalism.
To answer agriphones, great resistance would be unlikely considering the power of the socialist movement in Poland. And you're a fool, to add, when Napoleon conquered European territories he abolished serfdom. A war of revolutionary conquest would politically lay the basis for a polish dictatorship of the proletariat, it would defeat the organs of the polish bourgeois state that would repress an attempted revolution. The same goes for the rest of Europe.
[FONT="Courier New"] “We stand for organized terror - this should be frankly admitted. Terror is an absolute necessity during times of revolution. Our aim is to fight against the enemies of the Revolution and of the new order of life. ”
― Felix Dzerzhinsky [/FONT]
لا شيء يمكن وقف محاكم التفتيش للثورة
National autonomy... Cack! The autonomy of those in power to do as they please in their respective nations! In Germany, the proletariat determined the overthrow of the state, and they were crushed by the power of the state. How's that for national autonomy.
[FONT="Courier New"] “We stand for organized terror - this should be frankly admitted. Terror is an absolute necessity during times of revolution. Our aim is to fight against the enemies of the Revolution and of the new order of life. ”
― Felix Dzerzhinsky [/FONT]
لا شيء يمكن وقف محاكم التفتيش للثورة
I don't believe in national self-determination. I think it was idiocy on behalf of Lenin to allow the Polish and Finish bourgeoisies to create independent states in Poland and Finland, which coul then suppress the working class in Poland and Finland.
Having done it, to then attack them was lunacy.
I do think 'only capitalist states are imperialist' by definition, because there's no definition of 'socialist states'. But I've already said that the invasion was imperialist, because I think it was imperialist. The working class has no interest in imperialist wars. Whatever was positive in the Soviet Republic in 1917-18 had really been lost by 1920.
I don't want to say 'it served the Russians right' but I'm going to go back to saying that you can't export the revolution at the point of a bayonet. It was 'a huge mistake' at best and a failed imperialist adventure at worst.
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
No, it implies that Russian was a popular subject. Likewise, English is a popular subject now, although most people hold to some half-digested anti-Americanism.
Pressure arising from its use as a lingua franca of sorts in the USSR and throughout the Eastern block. Before WWI, a similar pressure to learn French existed - longer in Yugoslavia and other members of the Little Entente - but France didn't extend imperialist domination over the entire European continent.Originally Posted by argeiphontes
What "Soviet domination" might that be?Originally Posted by argeiphontes
Russian was popular in the forties, the fifties, the sixties and a good part of the seventies. After that, French seems to have been the most popular choice of second language - German in some areas, perhaps Italian - English was definitely present, from the fifties at least, but it wasn't as widespread as you allege.Originally Posted by argeiphontes
That's what "imperialism" means in Leninist theory. That's all.Originally Posted by argeiphontesYou can redefine Imperialism to mean anything you like, but that doesn't change the facts of Soviet domination. You can add it to the list of redefined terms like 'idealism' and 'utopian'.
None of THIS happened in your parallel universe I take it? Or is it just looked upon favorably by people who adopt Lenin's definition of imperialism? I personally recall that 1989 was a very happy year.
"This is my test of character. There you have the despotic instinct of men. They do not like the cat because the cat is free, and will never consent to become a slave. He will do nothing to your order, as the other animals do." — Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
"The intellectual and emotional refusal 'to go along' appears neurotic and impotent." — Herbert Marcuse.
"Our blight is ideologies — they are the long-expected Antichrist!" — Carl Gustav Jung
It did happen - it's just that this doesn't constitute "Soviet domination" by any stretch of the word. The Red Army ensured public safety in the states that would make up the Eastern Bloc, assisted in the pursuit of quislings and remnants of Nazi Forces, and refused to starve Germans in the SVAG territory. Sure, the Soviet government wasn't above extracting a favor or claiming some kind of benefit here and there. But the relation between the Soviet Union and the new states was much more complex than "Soviet domination".
Of course there is a lot to criticize about the conduct of the official communist parties - their alliances with the bourgeoisie for example. But presumably you would criticize them for the things they got right - at least as far as I'm concerned - such as nationalization, the smashing of quislings etc.Originally Posted by argeiphontes
I'm sure the millions of people who were impoverished by Freedom and Democracy would see it that way - along with the minorities in Estonia, women in Afghanistan, just about everyone but the emigres in Bosnia etc. etc.Originally Posted by argeiphontes
I have no idea what you are talking about, but I'd love to know more! Can you elaborate?
http://ppe.mercatus.org/
If you're back again liberlict, I'd like you to have a go at this please:
Critique of the Gotha Programme, Pt IV: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch04.htm
No War but the Class War
Destroy All Nations
Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC): "A man whose life has been dishonorable is not entitled to escape disgrace in death."
