|
|
Post by joegolferg on Oct 11, 2019 18:24:30 GMT
Here is a stone cold fact.
The EU would never have existed if it wasn't for the efforts of the USSR in WW2.
Here's how grateful they are..
|
|
|
|
Post by jacko on Oct 11, 2019 18:51:46 GMT
Yeah, the cheek of them, how dare they point out the other indisputable fact that Stalin was a bad dude... 
|
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Oct 11, 2019 21:16:11 GMT
Yeah, the cheek of them, how dare they point out the other indisputable fact that Stalin was a bad dude...
Conflating communism with nazism and pinning the blame for WW2 on equal footing with Germany, is an attempt to rewrite history. And this coming from an institution only made possible because of the actions of the brave people of the USSR, 12 million of which, died protecting Europe from a fascist takeover. This isn't about Stalin, it's about trying to stamp out even the thought communism/socialism from the EU's neo liberal club. Ignorance, lies and intellectual laziness seems to be running the EU. |
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Oct 14, 2019 7:11:45 GMT
Stalin wasn't a communist.
There's also a lot of myths spread about his time in power; a good place to start being the numbers of "murdered" people during his time in power, often a major part of the "communism kills" trope.
Just to be clear, I despise Stalin; doesn't mean I'm not going to challenge complete inaccuracies though...
|
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Oct 14, 2019 8:38:41 GMT
Stalin wasn't a communist. There's also a lot of myths spread about his time in power; a good place to start being the numbers of "murdered" people during his time in power, often a major part of the "communism kills" trope. Just to be clear, I despise Stalin; doesn't mean I'm not going to challenge complete inaccuracies though... I'm currently studying the topic of Stalin because I really don't know much about his leadership and once had the same subconsciously implanted bullshit in my head that you hear so often about him. I decided to dive into the topic if Stalin after seeing a CIA written analysis of the truth about gulags based on recently recovered documents from the classified Soviet archives. I was one of the believers that over ten million people died in the gulags and that they were no different from Nazi concentration camps. Turns out according to the CIA's own conclusion that gulags were just the Soviet version of a prison/work camp and the total deaths that occurred in these was 1.4 million (if I remember correctly) and the absolute majority of these deaths happened during WW2 when rations were extremely scarce. Mortality rates for the gulags in peacetime were at 4%. There are prisons in the capitalist world today that have worse mortality rates. After seeing that reveal I decided to buy two Stalin biographies, one is anti Stalin and the other pro Stalin. On top of that there are some great podcasts with links to sources and link to expose the sources used in anti Stalin biographies and documentaries, pretty much all of the sources used in these books and films were either western intelligence service agents, Ukrainian fascists or actual German Nazis. This has become a highly suspect topic for me and does edge towards being one of the biggest smear jobs in history. I'll only come to a definite conclusion once I've read both sides thoroughly with the inclusion of checking as many sources as possible in realtion to the claims of "crimes" committed by Stalin. On the question of if Stalin was a communist, I'd certainly say in theory he was an extremely militant communist who was pushing for the end goal, it's just that the geo political conditions severely halted his revolutionary vision for the USSR. It's a fact that Stalin was a fierce Marxist back in his younger days back in Georgia where he was expelled from priest school for radicalizing the other students into Marxists. Despite what the documentaries tell you Stalin was extremely intelligent, even the anti biographies point this out. He wasn't on the same level as Lenin but he wasn't far out. There is no doubt that he was a communist but the actions he took were influenced by western opposition and the rise of fascism. In practice this led to him leading the USSR as revolutionary nationalist but there is absolutely no doubt that he was building communism, he was clearly well read on Marx and his work about industrial conditions in relation to the transition to communism. In a nutshell, I think Stalin was the biggest threat to capitalism that world had ever seen (in practice) and the west knew it, that is why after his death they were forced to denounce every single thing he did and the truth was covered with lies. I think it's possible that this topic may be the most nuanced of all topics when it comes to Soviet history and equally as fascinating once you manage to pull yourself out of the cold war hangover propaganda. |
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Oct 14, 2019 9:04:41 GMT
The modern Stalin 😂
|
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Oct 14, 2019 16:20:09 GMT
The one that changed my view on Stalin was delightfully simple.
All you have to is look at the population figures for Russia! Figures that are completely unchallenged by ANY source.
Russia's population grew (broadly speaking) steadily throughout his time in power. For him to have "murdered" anywhere NEAR the numbers people always claim, Russia would have had to have had a birth-rate 2-4 times higher than has EVER been achieved ANYWHERE in the world at ANY time through history. In other words, he quite clearly didn't kill people as is the common perception in the western world.
As to his political views/style, you seem to have some good in depth knowledge I don't have; and a lot of what I say is repeated from stuff (very knowledgeable to be fair!) People have told me.
However, my opinion has always been that yes, Stalin definitely was a revolutionary in his early life, but that later on his became more of a proto-fascist of a sort.
I hear what you're saying about changing geo politics, but going super nationalistic is a BIG move away from the core principles. As is the disregard for the worker/common man that seemed to develop over time. I don't think his personality suited the core tenets of communism, although it certainly wasn't easy leading a country like that.
It's my opinion that the stuff he stuck with he did so because he couldn't abandon them, and the fascistic stuff that was witnessed was stuff he decided to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Oct 15, 2019 8:37:21 GMT
The one that changed my view on Stalin was delightfully simple. All you have to is look at the population figures for Russia! Figures that are completely unchallenged by ANY source. Russia's population grew (broadly speaking) steadily throughout his time in power. For him to have "murdered" anywhere NEAR the numbers people always claim, Russia would have had to have had a birth-rate 2-4 times higher than has EVER been achieved ANYWHERE in the world at ANY time through history. In other words, he quite clearly didn't kill people as is the common perception in the western world. As to his political views/style, you seem to have some good in depth knowledge I don't have; and a lot of what I say is repeated from stuff (very knowledgeable to be fair!) People have told me. However, my opinion has always been that yes, Stalin definitely was a revolutionary in his early life, but that later on his became more of a proto-fascist of a sort. I hear what you're saying about changing geo politics, but going super nationalistic is a BIG move away from the core principles. As is the disregard for the worker/common man that seemed to develop over time. I don't think his personality suited the core tenets of communism, although it certainly wasn't easy leading a country like that. It's my opinion that the stuff he stuck with he did so because he couldn't abandon them, and the fascistic stuff that was witnessed was stuff he decided to do. I can see how people accuse him of having a fascist tendency of sorts but I think that's because people only see fascism as totalitarianism. That's the wrong way to describe the power structure of fascism. Fascism is a system of authoritarianism (which is different from totalitarianism) that seeks to protect and preserve capitalism through strict control and regulation. Stalin never implemented such a system. The Soviet Union under Stalin brought total state control of vital industry and services, worker co-ops were setup for smaller businesses, trade unions ran the factories, not private owners and the agrarian sector workers actually owned their lands communaly with other workers but were required to take part in collectivism with any surplus above the quota being kept to sell within the union. Fascism is fiercely opposed to all of the above. Let's not forget that both fascism and communism are not just about control, but more importantly, how an economy is structured. |
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Oct 15, 2019 15:39:59 GMT
The one that changed my view on Stalin was delightfully simple. All you have to is look at the population figures for Russia! Figures that are completely unchallenged by ANY source. Russia's population grew (broadly speaking) steadily throughout his time in power. For him to have "murdered" anywhere NEAR the numbers people always claim, Russia would have had to have had a birth-rate 2-4 times higher than has EVER been achieved ANYWHERE in the world at ANY time through history. In other words, he quite clearly didn't kill people as is the common perception in the western world. As to his political views/style, you seem to have some good in depth knowledge I don't have; and a lot of what I say is repeated from stuff (very knowledgeable to be fair!) People have told me. However, my opinion has always been that yes, Stalin definitely was a revolutionary in his early life, but that later on his became more of a proto-fascist of a sort. I hear what you're saying about changing geo politics, but going super nationalistic is a BIG move away from the core principles. As is the disregard for the worker/common man that seemed to develop over time. I don't think his personality suited the core tenets of communism, although it certainly wasn't easy leading a country like that. It's my opinion that the stuff he stuck with he did so because he couldn't abandon them, and the fascistic stuff that was witnessed was stuff he decided to do. I can see how people accuse him of having a fascist tendency of sorts but I think that's because people only see fascism as totalitarianism. That's the wrong way to describe the power structure of fascism. Fascism is a system of authoritarianism (which is different from totalitarianism) that seeks to protect and preserve capitalism through strict control and regulation. Stalin never implemented such a system. The Soviet Union under Stalin brought total state control of vital industry and services, worker co-ops were setup for smaller businesses, trade unions ran the factories, not private owners and the agrarian sector workers actually owned their lands communaly with other workers but were required to take part in collectivism with any surplus above the quota being kept to sell within the union. Fascism is fiercely opposed to all of the above. Let's not forget that both fascism and communism are not just about control, but more importantly, how an economy is structured. Very fair point on the economy. Hence why I said "proto" fascism. Unless I'm remembering wrong though, a lot of the worker power and local regulation (rather than central control) waned away as time went on, and as Stalin became more and more paranoid. Another key tenet of fascism is nationalism and military displays, and Stalin LOVED these; and they are not a communist tenet. It's that angle I come at most when calling him a fascist. He was pretty racist and small minded in that regard, and that was also going against key parts of the communist manifesto... Fascist is probably not the right word, I accept; but I feel he really moved against a lot of the key communist tenets as his time in power went on... |
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Oct 15, 2019 17:48:41 GMT
I can see how people accuse him of having a fascist tendency of sorts but I think that's because people only see fascism as totalitarianism. That's the wrong way to describe the power structure of fascism. Fascism is a system of authoritarianism (which is different from totalitarianism) that seeks to protect and preserve capitalism through strict control and regulation. Stalin never implemented such a system. The Soviet Union under Stalin brought total state control of vital industry and services, worker co-ops were setup for smaller businesses, trade unions ran the factories, not private owners and the agrarian sector workers actually owned their lands communaly with other workers but were required to take part in collectivism with any surplus above the quota being kept to sell within the union. Fascism is fiercely opposed to all of the above. Let's not forget that both fascism and communism are not just about control, but more importantly, how an economy is structured. Very fair point on the economy. Hence why I said "proto" fascism. Unless I'm remembering wrong though, a lot of the worker power and local regulation (rather than central control) waned away as time went on, and as Stalin became more and more paranoid. Another key tenet of fascism is nationalism and military displays, and Stalin LOVED these; and they are not a communist tenet. It's that angle I come at most when calling him a fascist. He was pretty racist and small minded in that regard, and that was also going against key parts of the communist manifesto... Fascist is probably not the right word, I accept; but I feel he really moved against a lot of the key communist tenets as his time in power went on... That is exactly how it seems to me, on most parts but I'm certainly not qualified to be sure enough on the context of why he did things this way. Sure looking forward to hearing the other side of the argument. |
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Oct 16, 2019 7:25:11 GMT
For the record, my parents and, by extension me, are Trostskyists. And as I've delved into the online world on this (NOT always a good thing obviously!) I've discovered that "tankies" fucking HATE trotsky. It seems some of the hatred towards him being a "sell-out" may be well founded, but that probably partly depends (and we touch on your areas of geo politics here) whether you think full steam ahead with the soviet plan was the way forward for communism, or more of a worldwide partnership with south american and asian (even europe as well had a chance briefly) countries could've worked.
|
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Oct 16, 2019 20:18:09 GMT
For the record, my parents and, by extension me, are Trostskyists. And as I've delved into the online world on this (NOT always a good thing obviously!) I've discovered that "tankies" fucking HATE trotsky. It seems some of the hatred towards him being a "sell-out" may be well founded, but that probably partly depends (and we touch on your areas of geo politics here) whether you think full steam ahead with the soviet plan was the way forward for communism, or more of a worldwide partnership with south american and asian (even europe as well had a chance briefly) countries could've worked. Your parents are Trotskyists and your name is Leon... Surely there's a connection? Trotsky is another subject I'm looking forward to getting on. Apart from a few articles and the Netflix series 'Trotsky' I haven't done much research on him. I know that Stalinists and many other leftists are massively anti Trotsky but I'm definitely not one of those sectarian leftists. |
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Oct 18, 2019 7:00:44 GMT
For the record, my parents and, by extension me, are Trostskyists. And as I've delved into the online world on this (NOT always a good thing obviously!) I've discovered that "tankies" fucking HATE trotsky. It seems some of the hatred towards him being a "sell-out" may be well founded, but that probably partly depends (and we touch on your areas of geo politics here) whether you think full steam ahead with the soviet plan was the way forward for communism, or more of a worldwide partnership with south american and asian (even europe as well had a chance briefly) countries could've worked. Your parents are Trotskyists and your name is Leon... Surely there's a connection? Trotsky is another subject I'm looking forward to getting on. Apart from a few articles and the Netflix series 'Trotsky' I haven't done much research on him. I know that Stalinists and many other leftists are massively anti Trotsky but I'm definitely not one of those sectarian leftists. This is lifted straight from wiki, but is a good summation- Trotsky considered himself a "Bolshevik-Leninist", arguing for the establishment of a vanguard party. He considered himself an advocate of orthodox Marxism. His politics differed in many respects from those of Stalin or Mao Zedong, most importantly in his rejection of the theory of Socialism in One Country and his declaring the need for an international "permanent revolution". Numerous Fourth Internationalist groups around the world continue to describe themselves as Trotskyist and see themselves as standing in this tradition, although they have different interpretations of the conclusions to be drawn from this. Supporters of the Fourth International echo Trotsky's opposition to Stalinist totalitarianism, advocating political revolution, and arguing that socialism cannot sustain itself without democracy. My parents were in fourth international, as we're a lot of their friends. My mate's dad, who was a shop steward in a car factory, also was. So it wasn't just "champagne socialists," as is often portrayed; it was just normal people, when wanted to see revolution spread. (Not to say none of the criticisms of Trotsky have some merit...) |
|
