Thread: Stalin was right and Trotsky a criminal

Results 1 to 20 of 291

  1. #1
    Join Date Feb 2015
    Location Europe
    Posts 67
    Organisation
    Ministerium für Staatssicherheit
    Rep Power 3

    Post Stalin was right and Trotsky a criminal

    Troskyism, in the fight for working class, is to be exposed and fought against as an unscientific and reactionary thought. Leon Trotsky himself was an arrogant petty-bourgeois who was expelled from the Communist Party and the Soviet Union for attempting to form factions within Soviet society. As an ideology, Trotskyism is revisionism; it is the perversion of Marxism-Leninism to suit the needs of the exploiters as well as Leon Trotsky. Trotskyites claim that Lenin and Trotsky were comrades before the Russian Revolution who were very much in agreement with one another. Nothing can be further from the truth.

    Trotsky’s arrogance in his own claims of ideological superiority can be summed up by Trotsky himself the best:


    “Among the Russian comrades, there was not one from whom I could learn anything…The errors which I have committed . . always referred to questions that were not fundamental or strategic. . . In all conscientiousness I cannot, in the appreciation of the political situation and of its revolutionary perspectives, accuse myself of any serious errors of judgment”.


    “At the moment when it seized the power and created the Soviet republic, Bolshevism drew to itself all the best elements in the currents of Socialist thought that were nearest to it’. Can there be even a shadow of doubt that when he spoke so deliberately of the best representatives of the currents closest to Bolshevism, Lenin had foremost in mind what is now called ‘historical Trotskyism?’ . . Whom else could he have had in mind?” (Trotsky, 353).


    Lenin also saw through Trotsky’s arrogance:


    “Trotsky is very fond of explaining historical events . . in pompous and sonorous phrases, in a manner flattering to Trotsky”
    “What a swine this Trotsky is — Left phrases and a bloc with the Right! He ought to be exposed”


    Trotskyism is not a scientific system of philosophical, economic and socio-political views like those that make up the world outlook of the working class. It must be asserted that the theory and practice of Trotskyism is diametrically opposed to Marxism-Leninism. Marxism-Leninism is a scientific system of philosophical, economic and socio-political views that make up the world outlook of the working class. It is a science of revolutionary transformation of the world, concerned with the laws that form the development of nature, society, thought and class society. It provides a guide to action to overthrow capitalism. It is the ideology that has had the only proven success to build socialism. It is a living and breathing theory, a theory forged from the experience of the struggle and creative actions of the masses, and an indispensable guide to action.
    Trotskyites do not uphold the the scientific theories pounded by Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, nor do they hold onto any unity or principles, as can be shown in their political parties which are known and famous throughout the world for forming factions within factions. Marxist-Leninists, unlike Trotskyites, have never, at any point of history or today, recognized the Trotskyite “Fourth International” as a body of communists. Trotsky was extremely adventurist and his advocacy for spreading revolution by foreign intervention would have inevitably been to the detriment of the working class.


    His false political line against the socialist Soviet Union is echoed to this day by all reactionaries in the capitalist media, television and in the CIA and Washington. Even in the few short years after Trotsky’s counterrevolutionary scribbles were published it became fashionable for big capitalists to abandon open hatred of communism and instead adopt the position of Trotsky, or criticizing the Russian Revolution “from the left.” While the world faced the full onslaught of blitzkrieg and the genocidal bombing campaigns of the Nazi forces in World War II, and when the USSR with the guidance of the Communist Party and Joseph Stalin was almost single-handedly fighting this threat on behalf of all of humanity, the left-opposition led by the exiled Trotsky did all they possibly could to sabotage and wreck the USSR, even openly advocating terrorism and massive military attacks against the Soviet Union to destroy the Bolsheviks. Trotsky in his own public pronouncements openly called for the overthrow of the Soviet state and speculated that a foreign invasion might provide the catalyst for a takeover by himself. Yes, he wanted to ride to power on the back of German tanks.
    Wachregiment "Feliks E. Dzierzynski" - Schild und Schwert der Partei

    Under Lenin's banner, forward to victory!
  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to OnFire For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Join Date Oct 2016
    Posts 363
    Rep Power 1

    Default

    Oh yes, and marxism-leninism is SO it. Stop following leaders, and especially leaders from a hundred years ago. But yes, you are right, we should fight Trotskism because it advocates state power.
    "I am vegan because I have compassion for animals; I see them as beings possessed of value not unlike humans. I am an anarchist because I have that same compassion for humans, and because I refuse to settle for compromised perspectives, half-assed strategies and sold-out objectives. As a radical, my approach to animal and human liberation is without compromise: total freedom for all, or else."

    "It takes no more time to be a vegetarian than to eat animal flesh.... When non-vegetarians say ‘human problems come first’ I cannot help wondering what exactly it is that they are doing for humans that compels them to continue to support the wasteful ruthless, exploitation of farm animals."
  4. The Following User Says Thank You to IbelieveInanarchy For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Join Date Feb 2015
    Location Europe
    Posts 67
    Organisation
    Ministerium für Staatssicherheit
    Rep Power 3

    Default

    Oh yes, and marxism-leninism is SO it. Stop following leaders, and especially leaders from a hundred years ago. But yes, you are right, we should fight Trotskism because it advocates state power.
    Comrade, in sharp contrast to the principles of Marxism-Leninism, your anarchism stands, first of all, for the elimination of every kind of state, including the state of working class political power, the dictatorship of the proletariat. You Anarchists preach abstention from political activity, and since anarchism rejects the principles of scientific socialism and dialectical materialism, it can play only a negative, reactionary, disruptive role in the struggle for socialism.

    This is well illustrated by the activity of the anarchist Makhno Movement in Soviet Russia after the socialist revolution of November 1917. It was led by the Nestor Makhno (Anarchism wants to abolish hierarchies and still has leaders and idols like Bakunin and Makhno?), and from 1918 to 1921, fought the Red Army without respite.

    The development of the ideal side, the development of consciousness, is preceded by the development of the material side, the development of the external conditions: first the external conditions change, first the material side changes, and then consciousness, the ideal side, changes accordingly.

    Thus, the history of the development of nature utterly refutes so-called idealism.

    The same thing must be said about the history of the development of human society. So first we must abolish the conditions that lead to the formation of a bourgeois capitalist state before states at all can be abolished, first the state under the rule of the workers vanguard must grow stronger before it can be allowed to wither away. This stage which leads to communism is what we call socialism.
    Comrade, I do not doubt your committment to the cause of overthrowing the filthy capitalists, but Anarchism never led a successful revolution and never will. Anarchism is a tool of anti-socialism.

    If you have any questions, feel free to ask me.
    Wachregiment "Feliks E. Dzierzynski" - Schild und Schwert der Partei

    Under Lenin's banner, forward to victory!
  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to OnFire For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date Jun 2014
    Location Canada
    Posts 871
    Rep Power 5

    Default

    Marxist Leninist are ridiculous. You worship a idea half written by a racist nationalist who believed that the English working class would rule a socialist empire and wanted to exterminate the Slavs (engles) but call it scientific socialism and insist despite over 100 years of hard evidence on the contrary that it would work.

    Not only was Marx's works not meant for Russia/China or anywhere at the time but Lenin's ideas amount to nothing more then state capitalism.

    So at this point we can prove you adore a book written by a German philosopher and a racist national "socialist" who belied in English superiority and was then misused my a Russian madman who called for a capitalist totalitarian state.

    Yall are super smart and totally will bring about the socialist revolution and communism any day now. Fucking jokes the lot of you.
    "It is only by the abolition of the state, by the conquest of perfect liberty by the individual, by free agreement, association, and absolute free federation that we can reach Communism - the possession in common of our social inheritance, and the production in common of all riches." ~Peter Kropotkin
    "Let us fight to free the world - to do away with national barriers - to do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness. Soldiers! in the name of democracy, let us all unite!" ~Charles Chaplin
    "Communism is Anarchy. You can't regulate or reform your way to communism; it can only be achieved by direct action against state, class and capital."
  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to (A) For This Useful Post:


  9. #5
    Join Date Jul 2016
    Posts 95
    Rep Power 1

    Default

    OP openly identifies with a hierarchical repressive organization of violence that has always acted on the behalf of the bureucratic elites of a fallen capitalist state that was not established as a consequence of an authentic proletarian revolution. Liberalism at its finest. (But it's red so it must be good)

    (On both sides here, actually. I mean come on (A), I think you know too that you are either blatantly misreading or exaggerating the views of Engels. He indeed rambled a bit about how the Slavic people were "reactionary", and even contrasted them to the "revolutionary" Hungarians and whatnot, but these were just temporary ramblings and not his serious theoretical work. Of course these kind of things are unacceptable today, but it is you, not Engels, who takes it to the extremes now.)
  10. #6
    Join Date Oct 2016
    Posts 363
    Rep Power 1

    Default

    Comrade, in sharp contrast to the principles of Marxism-Leninism, your anarchism stands, first of all, for the elimination of every kind of state, including the state of working class political power, the dictatorship of the proletariat. You Anarchists preach abstention from political activity, and since anarchism rejects the principles of scientific socialism and dialectical materialism, it can play only a negative, reactionary, disruptive role in the struggle for socialism.

    This is well illustrated by the activity of the anarchist Makhno Movement in Soviet Russia after the socialist revolution of November 1917. It was led by the Nestor Makhno (Anarchism wants to abolish hierarchies and still has leaders and idols like Bakunin and Makhno?), and from 1918 to 1921, fought the Red Army without respite.

    The development of the ideal side, the development of consciousness, is preceded by the development of the material side, the development of the external conditions: first the external conditions change, first the material side changes, and then consciousness, the ideal side, changes accordingly.

    Thus, the history of the development of nature utterly refutes so-called idealism.

    The same thing must be said about the history of the development of human society. So first we must abolish the conditions that lead to the formation of a bourgeois capitalist state before states at all can be abolished, first the state under the rule of the workers vanguard must grow stronger before it can be allowed to wither away. This stage which leads to communism is what we call socialism.
    Comrade, I do not doubt your committment to the cause of overthrowing the filthy capitalists, but Anarchism never led a successful revolution and never will. Anarchism is a tool of anti-socialism.

    If you have any questions, feel free to ask me.
    You say this while promoting your ideology which is named after two idols. Anarchists constantly and consequently say that there should be no leader and no hierarchy, just because there was a group who called themselves anarchists had an hierarchy(while at war against totalitarians) does not mean that anarchist actually DO want hierarchy. Marxism-leninism has been tried and utterly failed because it sets up a system for exploitation of the working class just like capitalism does. Anarchist societies don't collapse because of inherent contradictions in their practice, they collapse because totalitarians, be they nazi, stalinist or capitalist, come with an army and kill them. Examples are the paris commune and anarchists in spain. All statists come together when anarchists rise up, because they inherently are against worker self-control. I am sure a big part of Marxist-leninists are genuine in their struggle for the working class, but their struggle is in vain.

    "I am vegan because I have compassion for animals; I see them as beings possessed of value not unlike humans. I am an anarchist because I have that same compassion for humans, and because I refuse to settle for compromised perspectives, half-assed strategies and sold-out objectives. As a radical, my approach to animal and human liberation is without compromise: total freedom for all, or else."

    "It takes no more time to be a vegetarian than to eat animal flesh.... When non-vegetarians say ‘human problems come first’ I cannot help wondering what exactly it is that they are doing for humans that compels them to continue to support the wasteful ruthless, exploitation of farm animals."
  11. #7
    Join Date Jun 2014
    Location Canada
    Posts 871
    Rep Power 5

    Default

    OP openly identifies with a hierarchical repressive organization of violence that has always acted on the behalf of the bureucratic elites of a fallen capitalist state that was not established as a consequence of an authentic proletarian revolution. Liberalism at its finest. (But it's red so it must be good)

    (On both sides here, actually. I mean come on (A), I think you know too that you are either blatantly misreading or exaggerating the views of Engels. He indeed rambled a bit about how the Slavic people were "reactionary", and even contrasted them to the "revolutionary" Hungarians and whatnot, but these were just temporary ramblings and not his serious theoretical work. Of course these kind of things are unacceptable today, but it is you, not Engels, who takes it to the extremes now.)
    I am whole hardheartedly tired of online authoritarians zealously spreading the holy words of Marx and Lenin; completely devoid of any scientific evidence despite their claim of "scientific socialism".
    What an insult to use the word science in such a way. Pretending to have an intellectual authority over humanity while doing nothing more then mindlessly agreeing with Lenin, Trotsky, Mao, Stalin or Castro.
    The saints of the "soviet" empire are sad heroes to worship. When talking about the "Soviet" empire I cant even rightly use the term soviet which means workers counsel.

    The Soviet Union was neither a Union of Soviets nor a socialist state. It was a capitalist state founded by social democrats that like all Liberal republics fell to corruption and precipitated the rise of a fascist dictatorship under the rule of the KGB. The same has occurred or is occurring in every state that was founded on the principles of Marxist-leninism.

    Marxist-Leninism was an abject failure.

    All it is good for now is proving that Anarchism is the only path to communism.

    It is only by the abolition of the state, by the conquest of perfect liberty by the individual, by free agreement, association, and absolute free federation that we can reach Communism - the possession in common of our social inheritance, and the production in common of all riches.

    Peter Kropotkin
    "It is only by the abolition of the state, by the conquest of perfect liberty by the individual, by free agreement, association, and absolute free federation that we can reach Communism - the possession in common of our social inheritance, and the production in common of all riches." ~Peter Kropotkin
    "Let us fight to free the world - to do away with national barriers - to do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness. Soldiers! in the name of democracy, let us all unite!" ~Charles Chaplin
    "Communism is Anarchy. You can't regulate or reform your way to communism; it can only be achieved by direct action against state, class and capital."
  12. The Following User Says Thank You to (A) For This Useful Post:


  13. #8
    Join Date Feb 2017
    Location California
    Posts 13
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    I am whole hardheartedly tired of online authoritarians zealously spreading the holy words of Marx and Lenin; completely devoid of any scientific evidence despite their claim of "scientific socialism".
    What an insult to use the word science in such a way. Pretending to have an intellectual authority over humanity while doing nothing more then mindlessly agreeing with Lenin, Trotsky, Mao, Stalin or Castro.
    The saints of the "soviet" empire are sad heroes to worship. When talking about the "Soviet" empire I cant even rightly use the term soviet which means workers counsel.

    The Soviet Union was neither a Union of Soviets nor a socialist state. It was a capitalist state founded by social democrats that like all Liberal republics fell to corruption and precipitated the rise of a fascist dictatorship under the rule of the KGB. The same has occurred or is occurring in every state that was founded on the principles of Marxist-leninism.

    Marxist-Leninism was an abject failure.

    All it is good for now is proving that Anarchism is the only path to communism.

    liberal bullshit.jpg
  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to comrada For This Useful Post:


  15. #9
    Join Date Feb 2015
    Posts 516
    Rep Power 9

    Default

    Its a shame the moderators are no longer active/useless. If they had done their work IBiA and (A) would be banned. But never mind that. I find it absolutely hysterical that you cry and cry about Stalin's "totalitarianism" (just FYI I am by no means a Stalinist), as if those noble Chomskykite scum-fucking trashheaps did not kill (proportionally) more people in Catalonia than the "evil Bolsheviks" did in 1917-1921, lmao. The "worker's self-control" totally "non-state" the CNT (1 party rule; but that only matters when the Judeo-Bolsheviks are in power) that made masturbation a capital offense and forced nuns and priests to fuck each other so they wouldn't be killed.

    What a bad fucking joke. And Noam Chomsky. LOL! Noam Chomsky. That says it all. A liberal telling these clowns they are the "true" Socialists. That Lenin is nothing more than a "Capitalist" while Bertrand Russel and Adam Smith and all the other cretins he idolizes are the "real progressives". Cringe-worthy.

    So at this point we can prove you adore a book written by a German philosopher and a racist national "socialist" who belied in English superiority and was then misused my a Russian madman who called for a capitalist totalitarian state.
    Well mate, if Engels was a "racist" (first time I've heard this charge tbh; why not just accuse him of killing your precious foxes?) then your god-king Bakunin was a motherfucking anti-christ incarnate. Yes, Bakunin, the same monkey Chomsky idolizes and intellectually spearheaded the Anarchists in Spain. The same one that called, openly, for an extermination of Jews and is still, to this day, quoted vociferously by Neo-Nazis. Let me actually quote good Bakunin, lover of freedom and predictor of Marxist slavery! :

    This whole Jewish world, comprising a single exploiting sect, a kind of blood sucking people, a kind of organic destructive collective parasite, going beyond not only the frontiers of states, but of political opinion, this world is now, at least for the most part, at the disposal of Marx on the one hand, and of Rothschild on the other...
    Cute how a motherfucker that spewed the 'Jewish-Communism'/Nazi line avant la lettre is the "true" Communist.
  16. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Antiochus For This Useful Post:


  17. #10
    Join Date Jun 2014
    Location Canada
    Posts 871
    Rep Power 5

    Default

    Its a shame the moderators are no longer active/useless. If they had done their work IBiA and (A) would be banned. But never mind that. I find it absolutely hysterical that you cry and cry about Stalin's "totalitarianism" (just FYI I am by no means a Stalinist), as if those noble Chomskykite scum-fucking trashheaps did not kill (proportionally) more people in Catalonia than the "evil Bolsheviks" did in 1917-1921, lmao. The "worker's self-control" totally "non-state" the CNT (1 party rule; but that only matters when the Judeo-Bolsheviks are in power) that made masturbation a capital offense and forced nuns and priests to fuck each other so they wouldn't be killed.

    What a bad fucking joke. And Noam Chomsky. LOL! Noam Chomsky. That says it all. A liberal telling these clowns they are the "true" Socialists. That Lenin is nothing more than a "Capitalist" while Bertrand Russel and Adam Smith and all the other cretins he idolizes are the "real progressives". Cringe-worthy.
    There is a big difference between casualty's of war and building a prison complex that ground threw an untold amount of Soviet citizens and innocent people; not to mention true socialist political prisoners.
    More people died in the war because it was a war against nationalism; the same fascism that Stalin was perpetrating in the name of communism.
    Lenin held a small coup on an already defeated monarchy. There is no comparison between the two.


    Well mate, if Engels was a "racist" (first time I've heard this charge tbh; why not just accuse him of killing your precious foxes?) then your god-king Bakunin was a motherfucking anti-christ incarnate. Yes, Bakunin, the same monkey Chomsky idolizes and intellectually spearheaded the Anarchists in Spain. The same one that called, openly, for an extermination of Jews and is still, to this day, quoted vociferously by Neo-Nazis. Let me actually quote good Bakunin, lover of freedom and predictor of Marxist slavery! :



    Cute how a motherfucker that spewed the 'Jewish-Communism'/Nazi line avant la lettre is the "true" Communist.
    Never read his work; I think Bakunin was a stupid shit. Does not mean he did not have a grasp of oppressive hierarchy's... him being a nationalist and all.

    I dont go around calling myself a Kroptkinite because I dont worship people like saints. Leninists, Maoists, Stalinainsts, Trots or whatever; you are the problem. Sectarianism and reaction is all you will get from Liberals; socialist or otherwise.
    "It is only by the abolition of the state, by the conquest of perfect liberty by the individual, by free agreement, association, and absolute free federation that we can reach Communism - the possession in common of our social inheritance, and the production in common of all riches." ~Peter Kropotkin
    "Let us fight to free the world - to do away with national barriers - to do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness. Soldiers! in the name of democracy, let us all unite!" ~Charles Chaplin
    "Communism is Anarchy. You can't regulate or reform your way to communism; it can only be achieved by direct action against state, class and capital."
  18. #11
    Join Date Feb 2017
    Location California
    Posts 13
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    Stalin did nothing wrong.
  19. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to comrada For This Useful Post:


  20. #12
    Join Date Feb 2015
    Posts 516
    Rep Power 9

    Default

    There is a big difference between casualty's of war and building a prison complex that ground threw an untold amount of Soviet citizens and innocent people; not to mention true socialist political prisoners.
    HAHAHA. Casualties of "war"? I just explained to you the Anarchists in Spain EXECUTED over 8,000+ people (Catalonia had a population of around 2.3 million back then), this is by their OWN admission, and that was in 1 (!) year (1936), as opposed to the period of 1918-1921. Do the math. It would be the equivalent of the Bolsheviks killing 700,000+ people, a number even conservative historians don't try to put forward at this point.

    And how cute! You must be the interlocutor from the sky that determines who is guilty (the people killed by Anarchists in Spain) vs the innocent (Those killed by the Bolsheviks). Pathetic.

    not to mention true socialist political prisoners.
    A canard. I mean, Kerensky claimed he was a 'true socialist'. So did Atlee in 1945. Besides their words, what proof could one have of whether they were "true" socialists or not? Are you forgetting that significant numbers of Anarchists eventually joined the Bolsheviks anyway? You are also pretending as if large numbers of these Mensheviks and SRs didn't literally fight alongside the Whites, you are pretending as if they merely stood around picking daisies until they were cruelly guillotined.


    I dont go around calling myself a Kroptkinite because I dont worship people like saints. Leninists, Maoists, Stalinainsts, Trots or whatever; you are the problem. Sectarianism and reaction is all you will get from Liberals;
    I don't follow a stupid religion like Christianity or Islam. I only listen to the wise words for L. Ron Hubbard. As if people like Kroptopkin and Bakunin didn't, during their lifetimes, have cults of personalities among their cliques.
  21. #13
    Join Date Jun 2014
    Location Canada
    Posts 871
    Rep Power 5

    Default

    The Soviet empire killed over a Million people in its prison system. 8000 people killed during a revolution Vs millions killed by the soviet prison system.
    Huge fucking difference.

    You willfully follow the stupid religion of Marxist-Leninism. An idea that has no bearing on today. I have no problem with Marxism on its own but Leninism and its fellow Liberal socialists need to go away.
    It is worth nothing more today then a guideline as what NOT to do.
    Luckily modern revolutionary's are abandoning it for real social revolution in the form of Libertarianism.
    "It is only by the abolition of the state, by the conquest of perfect liberty by the individual, by free agreement, association, and absolute free federation that we can reach Communism - the possession in common of our social inheritance, and the production in common of all riches." ~Peter Kropotkin
    "Let us fight to free the world - to do away with national barriers - to do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness. Soldiers! in the name of democracy, let us all unite!" ~Charles Chaplin
    "Communism is Anarchy. You can't regulate or reform your way to communism; it can only be achieved by direct action against state, class and capital."
  22. #14
    Join Date May 2015
    Location Virgo Supercluster
    Posts 632
    Organisation
    PerfectPontiff 8th degree
    Rep Power 5

    Default

    Luckily modern revolutionary's are abandoning it for real social revolution in the form of Libertarianism.
    Ha! I knew it

    not the way your defining it... fuck man ive been reading a lot of the shit youve been posting and your one of those ron paul libertarians maybe just starting to get over it types.. but thats what you are man... ancap libertaryan shit

    I still love u though
  23. #15
    Join Date Feb 2015
    Location Europe
    Posts 67
    Organisation
    Ministerium für Staatssicherheit
    Rep Power 3

    Default

    What are we supposed to do? Be just as idealist as the anarchists and throw away the revolution? One has to safeguard the revolution and that takes hard choices. The other result would be the total destruction of socialism and the eradication of the peoples republic. The Paris commune and the Spanish "revolution" were crushed bc of their unwillingness to defend the revolution against the capitalists. The anarchist Makhno Movement in Soviet Russia from 1918 to 1921 fought the Red Army without respite and was allied in this fight against the Red Army with Kulaks and Black Hundreds of White Russia.

    One may believe that socialism and anarchism are based on the same principles and that the disagreements between them concern only tactics, so that it is quite impossible to draw a contrast between these two. This is a mistake as communists believe that the Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly Marxists-Leninists hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies. After the proletariat has conquered political power it has to destroy the old state machine and substitute for it a new one consisting of the organisation of armed workers while tthe anarchists deny that the revolutionary proletariat should utilise its state power, its revolutionary dictatorship.

    Karl Marx opposed this anarchist nonsense from the first day it was put forward by Bakunin. The whole internal history of the IWA is evidence of this. From 1867 onwards the anarchists were trying, by the most infamous methods, to conquer the leadership of the International - the main hindrance in their way were Marx and Engels. Anarchism rejects the principles of scientific socialism (Marxism-Leninism) and has only a very disruptive role in the struggle for socialism. It is an reactionary ally of imperialist capitalism.

    According to the founding statement of the Communist International in January 1919, the aims of Marxist-Leninists are that the working class must seize political power, establish its rule (‘the dictatorship of the proletariat’) and proceed to build a socialist society. The working class must first take possession of the organised political power of the state and by its aid crush the resistance of the capitalist class and organise society anew.

    The cornerstone of Marxism-Leninism is the proletariat, whose emancipation, according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation of the individual. That is to say, according to the tenets of Marxism-Leninism, the emancipation of the individual is impossible until the masses are emancipated. Accordingly, its slogan is: ‘Everything for the masses'.
    Wachregiment "Feliks E. Dzierzynski" - Schild und Schwert der Partei

    Under Lenin's banner, forward to victory!
  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to OnFire For This Useful Post:


  25. #16
    Join Date Jun 2014
    Location Canada
    Posts 871
    Rep Power 5

    Default

    Libertarianism as in the Zapatista, Kurdish democratic confederalism and other such Libertarian movements closely related to Anarchism and Libertarian socialism.
    I would not say Anarchists because neither of the two mentioned are self-described Anarchist movements; tho their anti-authoritarian stances against their respective states and the goal of creating self-managed community's makes them Libertarian.

    Not surprised you think libertarianism has anything to do with what you see in the U.S.
    Last edited by (A); 13th February 2017 at 19:50.
    "It is only by the abolition of the state, by the conquest of perfect liberty by the individual, by free agreement, association, and absolute free federation that we can reach Communism - the possession in common of our social inheritance, and the production in common of all riches." ~Peter Kropotkin
    "Let us fight to free the world - to do away with national barriers - to do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness. Soldiers! in the name of democracy, let us all unite!" ~Charles Chaplin
    "Communism is Anarchy. You can't regulate or reform your way to communism; it can only be achieved by direct action against state, class and capital."
  26. #17
    Join Date Jun 2014
    Location Canada
    Posts 871
    Rep Power 5

    Default

    What are we supposed to do? Be just as idealist as the anarchists and throw away the revolution? One has to safeguard the revolution and that takes hard choices. The other result would be the total destruction of socialism and the eradication of the peoples republic. The Paris commune and the Spanish "revolution" were crushed bc of their unwillingness to defend the revolution against the capitalists. The anarchist Makhno Movement in Soviet Russia from 1918 to 1921 fought the Red Army without respite and was allied in this fight against the Red Army with Kulaks and Black Hundreds of White Russia.

    One may believe that socialism and anarchism are based on the same principles and that the disagreements between them concern only tactics, so that it is quite impossible to draw a contrast between these two. This is a mistake as communists believe that the Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly Marxists-Leninists hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies. After the proletariat has conquered political power it has to destroy the old state machine and substitute for it a new one consisting of the organisation of armed workers while tthe anarchists deny that the revolutionary proletariat should utilise its state power, its revolutionary dictatorship.

    Karl Marx opposed this anarchist nonsense from the first day it was put forward by Bakunin. The whole internal history of the IWA is evidence of this. From 1867 onwards the anarchists were trying, by the most infamous methods, to conquer the leadership of the International - the main hindrance in their way were Marx and Engels. Anarchism rejects the principles of scientific socialism (Marxism-Leninism) and has only a very disruptive role in the struggle for socialism. It is an reactionary ally of imperialist capitalism.

    According to the founding statement of the Communist International in January 1919, the aims of Marxist-Leninists are that the working class must seize political power, establish its rule (‘the dictatorship of the proletariat’) and proceed to build a socialist society. The working class must first take possession of the organised political power of the state and by its aid crush the resistance of the capitalist class and organise society anew.

    The cornerstone of Marxism-Leninism is the proletariat, whose emancipation, according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation of the individual. That is to say, according to the tenets of Marxism-Leninism, the emancipation of the individual is impossible until the masses are emancipated. Accordingly, its slogan is: ‘Everything for the masses'.
    You are so wrong Its like you are from a backwards reality or something. Is Trump a socialist in your imaginary backwards world where the U.S.S.R was a good idea?
    Even Marx thought it was a stupid idea. The entire idea of Marxist Leninism; seizing the state is flawed.

    If you use a oppressive machine (state/law) against your own community you become the bourgeoisie and need to be eliminated. Soviet cops for instance prove that the U.S.S.R. was not in any way revolutionary.
    If you need police to oppress your own community then they have not had a revolution against the capitalist state but a political coup to replace it with a new one.

    Leninism only proves that you CANT retain the use of the state during a socialist revolution. It finally proved that reformism (using the state mechanism to make political change) can not lead to communism!

    Leninist's are Reformers and revisionists. Completely abandoning Marxs works in favor of a social democrat who was far more akin to the founding fathers of the U.S. then any revolutionary I would call Comrade. Leninism is reformism and has no place on a revolutionary form. We are not here for shit ass political coups but for revolution against capitalism.
    "It is only by the abolition of the state, by the conquest of perfect liberty by the individual, by free agreement, association, and absolute free federation that we can reach Communism - the possession in common of our social inheritance, and the production in common of all riches." ~Peter Kropotkin
    "Let us fight to free the world - to do away with national barriers - to do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness. Soldiers! in the name of democracy, let us all unite!" ~Charles Chaplin
    "Communism is Anarchy. You can't regulate or reform your way to communism; it can only be achieved by direct action against state, class and capital."
  27. #18
    Join Date Jun 2014
    Location Canada
    Posts 871
    Rep Power 5

    Default

    No government in the world fights fascism to destroy it. When the bourgeoisie sees power slipping from its grasp, it has recourse to fascism to maintain itself.
    ~Durruti
    This pretty much sums up the fate of the U.S.S.R.
    "It is only by the abolition of the state, by the conquest of perfect liberty by the individual, by free agreement, association, and absolute free federation that we can reach Communism - the possession in common of our social inheritance, and the production in common of all riches." ~Peter Kropotkin
    "Let us fight to free the world - to do away with national barriers - to do away with greed, with hate and intolerance. Let us fight for a world of reason, a world where science and progress will lead to all men’s happiness. Soldiers! in the name of democracy, let us all unite!" ~Charles Chaplin
    "Communism is Anarchy. You can't regulate or reform your way to communism; it can only be achieved by direct action against state, class and capital."
  28. #19
    Join Date May 2015
    Location Virgo Supercluster
    Posts 632
    Organisation
    PerfectPontiff 8th degree
    Rep Power 5

    Default

    What are we supposed to do? Be just as idealist as the anarchists and throw away the revolution? One has to safeguard the revolution and that takes hard choices. The other result would be the total destruction of socialism and the eradication of the peoples republic. The Paris commune and the Spanish "revolution" were crushed bc of their unwillingness to defend the revolution against the capitalists. The anarchist Makhno Movement in Soviet Russia from 1918 to 1921 fought the Red Army without respite and was allied in this fight against the Red Army with Kulaks and Black Hundreds of White Russia.

    One may believe that socialism and anarchism are based on the same principles and that the disagreements between them concern only tactics, so that it is quite impossible to draw a contrast between these two. This is a mistake as communists believe that the Anarchists are real enemies of Marxism. Accordingly Marxists-Leninists hold that a real struggle must be waged against real enemies. After the proletariat has conquered political power it has to destroy the old state machine and substitute for it a new one consisting of the organisation of armed workers while tthe anarchists deny that the revolutionary proletariat should utilise its state power, its revolutionary dictatorship.

    Karl Marx opposed this anarchist nonsense from the first day it was put forward by Bakunin. The whole internal history of the IWA is evidence of this. From 1867 onwards the anarchists were trying, by the most infamous methods, to conquer the leadership of the International - the main hindrance in their way were Marx and Engels. Anarchism rejects the principles of scientific socialism (Marxism-Leninism) and has only a very disruptive role in the struggle for socialism. It is an reactionary ally of imperialist capitalism.

    According to the founding statement of the Communist International in January 1919, the aims of Marxist-Leninists are that the working class must seize political power, establish its rule (‘the dictatorship of the proletariat’) and proceed to build a socialist society. The working class must first take possession of the organised political power of the state and by its aid crush the resistance of the capitalist class and organise society anew.

    The cornerstone of Marxism-Leninism is the proletariat, whose emancipation, according to its tenets, is the principal condition for the emancipation of the individual. That is to say, according to the tenets of Marxism-Leninism, the emancipation of the individual is impossible until the masses are emancipated. Accordingly, its slogan is: ‘Everything for the masses'.
    What your saying is mostly correct but I think your missing his point of what should we do today. our friend (A) here is not an anarchist, he's not even a liberal, he's a right-libertarian, similar to the strasserites. The american libertarian movement basically describes fascism but leaves out anything that might be deemed offensive. So by explaining the core principles of fascism but leaving out any comparison to a government or leader in the past, usually simply enough by saying just all governments are bad therefore anyone thats ever attempted fascism just didn't do it right. You too can respond in kind with nobody has ever tried communism anyone like stalin or mao just didn't do it right.

    Otherwise you just end up entrapped in a never ending spiral of historical apologia with measuring body counts, and war crimes with endless analysis on which ideology allowed this to occur the most. You end up discussing which ideology (or faith) is the least violent. You can describe Jesus as the original anarchist if you want, or even Lao tzu.

    So we end up really just discussing which political ideology and/or leader is the most christian. Which is not something any revolutionary leftist should be discussing. So while some of your argument might make real anarchists and trotskyist furious until they are red in the face. You really aren't having that discussion right now. You have too identify who you are arguing with before you can make a coherent argument.

    You would be much better off simply explaining the tenets of marxist leninism without labeling it as such or bringing up stalin or whoever these people have been brainwashed to fear more than anyone. Who Americans for generations have lived in fear of a nuclear holocaust from, who would train how to quickly crawl under their wooden desks in case the ruskies let the big one go. Who considered the berlin wall collapse to be the victory of american capitalism over soviet oppression, who are still taught to this day that socialism is evil in high school, and that capitalism is the only real choice. Until, if theyre lucky enough, they get some dem-soc professor who makes them read howard zinn and noam chomsky for the first time. who's parents and grandparents fought in vietnam and korea against what they feel was communism, who grew up watching movies from the original james bond to iron man 2 where russians and KGB spies are always behind some villainous plot to destroy them, or the world. That the american protagonist must fight righteously against in the name of freedom, democracy, justice, and children's laughter and smiles.

    You cant just have a historical argument with whoever you want, and if someone just read "stalin good" and then goes into some hysterical rant about stalin being the devil, you can't respond with "no stalin is not the devil he is god. The person responding wont accept responsibility for anything from the wealthiest robber baron to hitler to the sultan of oman because they are all a state/government so they didn't do fascism/capitalism right. Just respond with theory because their theory is incoherent and inconsistent, and if someone truly believes stalin ate the blood of innocent christian babies while sitting on a thrown of bloody skulls and you say "stalin was good", all they hear is "eating babies on a bloody skull thrown is good".


    there's a difference between these guys



    and these guys...



    and these guys.

    Attached Images
  29. #20
    Join Date Oct 2016
    Posts 109
    Organisation
    Socialist Worker Party
    Rep Power 1

    Default

    how about you actually read the revolution betrayed before critiscising trotsky I read the results of the first five year plan

Similar Threads

  1. Was Trotsky a revisionist?
    By BolshevikOG in forum Learning
    Replies: 248
    Last Post: 16th April 2014, 19:40
  2. Views of Stalin as a person and his actions?
    By Always Curious J in forum Learning
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 26th May 2013, 09:00
  3. Stalin’s spy in the Fourth International
    By Small Geezer in forum History
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 7th May 2012, 09:15
  4. Do you support Stalin?
    By Comrade1 in forum History
    Replies: 174
    Last Post: 12th May 2011, 10:04
  5. Hitler was a socialist - A good short essay.
    By Anonymous in forum Opposing Ideologies
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 25th February 2003, 23:28

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts