|
Post by Andrei_X on Jan 2, 2004 18:53:21 GMT -5
Comrade StalinRevolution, please! This board is a board for open debate, and it is not something that should be controlled tyrannically and in which opposing viewpoints are opposed. I agree that Stalin was no "new tsar" who splurged the wealth of the masses, but if people have a different opinion, we should refute them with principled and ideologically-sound debate. This is the Marxist way of getting out the truth. Silencing dissenting thought is not the way, and I will not have it so on my board.
|
|
|
Post by eat da void on Jan 2, 2004 19:24:47 GMT -5
i think we should look at this as "our board" not as *your* board, andreix.
And the more important decisions should be decided collectively, not by you personally.
|
|
|
Post by Andrei_X on Jan 2, 2004 19:32:16 GMT -5
You're right, I'm being possessive. Forgive me.
|
|
|
Post by StalinRevolution on Jan 4, 2004 1:24:01 GMT -5
Comrades, I am sorry for this error.I will consult you all before modify or deleting any posts in the future unless they are total spam i.e. advertisements for a website that has free viagra or something of that sort.
|
|
|
Post by readpunk on Jan 4, 2004 8:44:16 GMT -5
The best part was that I am spreading capitalist lies simply because I am pointing out that there has never been equality amongst "communist leaders" and those they governed.
Speaking of "Comrade" Joseph, did it get under his skin that a real revolution was going down in Spain? Would a communist state without the state been a little too much for him to handle?
|
|
|
Post by eat the world on Jan 4, 2004 10:23:34 GMT -5
The very fact that (at our moment in human history) we still need leaders -- means that the movement for liberation can't have any simple or mechanical "equality" -- there are differences.
And who can deny that some people are more important to the cause (and the victory) and to the world, than others?
This is part of the results of emerging from class society -- with major differences (for example) between mental and manual labor etc.
Also: I think it is worth thinking about whether "equality" as such is really the goal of socialist revolution. I believe that even under communism, there will not be some magical "equality" and that if you imposed it, you would find that it recreated (in new form) earlier "bourgeois right." (As marx called it in his critique of the gotha program.)
If workers get exactly the same -- is it equal for their kids (some are only children and some live in families of six kids)? no.
If the marching soldiers complain it is unequal for the wounded to ride in trucks, are they right? yes. And some inequality is desirable.
In battle is it equal that some die to protect the retreat of themany? no. And such inequality of sacrifice is inherent in war.
And if you allow a situation where each person in the movement is the guardian of the "equality" of his sacrifice or the rigid equality of distribution -- you have no movement. You have the situation in spain where soldiers voted in one unit not to advance, while soldiers in their neibhoring unit were mowed down.
|
|
|
Post by Comrade Joseph on Jan 4, 2004 15:48:50 GMT -5
Would a communist state without the state been a little too much for him to handle? Direct-transitionism, from capitalism to a communistic society is too much for the real world to handle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2004 16:10:18 GMT -5
Direct-transitionism, from capitalism to a communistic society is too much for the real world to handle. I would agree with that, but the Marxist-Leninist model doesn't seem to ever even move closer to Communism. If anything, it leads to tighter dictatorial control of a party elite.
|
|
|
Post by StalinRevolution on Jan 4, 2004 18:20:54 GMT -5
How can you refer to the party as some sort of elite upper class when there were millions of members in the Marxist-Leninist countries,especially in Stalin's Soviet Union
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2004 19:09:22 GMT -5
I mean "party elite" as a single term referring to the upper leadership.
|
|
|
Post by readpunk on Jan 11, 2004 11:07:06 GMT -5
I would agree with that, but the Marxist-Leninist model doesn't seem to ever even move closer to Communism. If anything, it leads to tighter dictatorial control of a party elite. Give this revolutionary a high paying post in the greater red bureaucracy... I think we have a winner!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2004 12:37:25 GMT -5
Give this revolutionary a high paying post in the greater red bureaucracy... I think we have a winner! My first act would be to pass a resolution disbanding whatever commitee I'm on ;D
|
|
|
Post by jack sprat on Jan 15, 2004 22:49:57 GMT -5
I have seen people cite Another View Of Stalin by Ludo Martens a couple times in this thread.
Does Ludo Martens also go by Rolf Martens? I often see thier names together. And I know they both are associated with the anti-RIM, PTB.
If so, he has some funny views about cultural revolution maoism and the RCP.
I found this quote by Rulf Martens: " But later the CIA, through their Avakianist instruments the "RCP" in the USA and the "RIM" internationally, spread the lie that the 4-Gang had been "the real revolutionaries". This was and is in order to make propaganda for a certain erroneous ideology with which they want to fool the revolutionary forces and which is damaging for the proletariat.
Certain otherwise "progressive" people, including some who seem to be honsetly desiring revolution, to this day have been fooled by this CIA propaganda, because of their ignorance. Since I happen to know the facts on this historical matter and have access to many documents on it, I've written a great deal on it, to counteract that CIA disinformation. Those who've read what I've posted will now be able to see the facts. Some people no doubt will continue to make propaganda for the 4-Gang anyhow, just as some continue to make propaganda for Trotsky, for Khroushchev etc etc still today. But it will be clearly seen, then that those people are enemies of the proletariat.
Another dividing line, the one concerning the 4-Gang, thus.
There are so many frauds engaged in by the bourgeoisie in our century! That's why there are so many dividing lines. '
|
|
|
Post by eat the words on Jan 22, 2004 10:40:27 GMT -5
this was said: "Does Ludo Martens also go by Rolf Martens? I often see thier names together. And I know they both are associated with the anti-RIM, PTB."
This is wrong and confused.
Ludo Martens is the founding leader of a Belgian party (the PTB) that went from a form of Maoism, to a form of left pro-soviet-style revisionism.
Rolf Martens is a crackpot web-poster three-worldist living in Sweden, whose main trip is upholding nuclear power and insisting that any talk of the environment is reactionary.
Their politics are not remotely similar.
|
|
|
Post by KrasnayaArmeeya on Mar 18, 2004 18:06:20 GMT -5
This document, dated August 17, 1939, was first published in the Paris émigré newspaper Novqya Rossya of October 1, 1939. According to Roy Medvedev, Let History Judge, (p.257), in 1964 the author's widow, a resident of France, brought the original of the letter to Moscow. It circulated widely through samizdat channels in the mid-1960s. The translator is indebted to the Current Affairs Research Section of the BBC's External Services for a copy of the samizdat edition: www.marxists.org/history/ussr/government/red-army/1918/raskolnikov/ilyin/ch08.htmDown with Stalinism!
|
|