The Busheviks' Great Leap Forward

[deutsey]

http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/08/1758353.php

[David__77]

1. This is uncalled for, in my opinion.

It is deeply insulting a the historical socialist movements, without which there would still be child labor, six-day work weeks and other injustices in the developed world. The Bolsheviks who seized power in 1917 were immeasurably better than the Bush regime.

[deutsey]

2. As a socialist and a "Groucho Marxist"

I think it's funny and ironic.

There's a difference between the genuine socialist movements that helped those of us in the working class overcome the injustices you list and the fanatical ideologues who rose to power on the backs of these movements, unleashed purges, and set up propaganda ministries, secret police networks, concentration camps, gulags, and re-education centers.

In my opinion, the leftist zealots among the Bolsheviks are as humorless and fucked in the head as are the rightist zealots among the Busheviks.

I do realize, though, that irony doesn't appeal very much to ideologues, regardless of their political stripe.

[The Jacobin]

4. I, for one, like it.

And there is never any call for defending the Bolsheviks.

[David__77]

5. I disagree.

If it were not for the Bolsheviks, the working people's rights movements could never have advanced very far. The Bolsheviks were simply the only political force that had the courage to stand against the carnage of the first world war while other "progressives" fell into the trap of "fighting for one's fatherland" in a reactionary, "patriotic" frenzy.

[deutsey]

16. Read "The Long Detour" by James Weinstein

The late Weinstein is also the founder of "In These Times" (www.inthesetimes.org). There's a nice memorial page to him here:

http://inthesetimes.com/site/archives/jimmy/

The book is available at

http://www.thelongdetour.com/


The Long Detour...
is a challenging reinterpretation of the history and prospects of the political left in the United States, made possible by the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. Weinstein is a lifelong socialist and one-time Communist. He has been active in left politics since the age of 14, and has written extensively about the left in the U.S. In the Long Detour, he looks briefly at the isolated utopian communities of socialism's early years in the New World, at the heyday of working people's engagement with the makers of corporate America, and at the left's prospects in our current de-industrializing era. He contends that after the Russian Revolution--as Communists diverted the traditional left into sterile disputes about the nature of the Soviet system--the political movement for socialism in the United States was sidetracked. With the demise of "real existing socialism" (which is what the Soviets called their system), however, the left has been presented with a new opportunity. Now, he argues, the humane social principles articulated by Marx and the leaders of the old movement can once again come to the fore in the struggle to realize the promise of American democracy.

[TankLV]

10. I totally disagree. Read up on the Bolshevikis.

The world would have been a lot better if they had prevailed and not been killed-off by Lenin and his gang of thugs.

Theirs was a true ideal revolution that got horribly hijacked.

"white" russians vs. "red" russians.

[htuttle]

9. I agree with Emma Goldman

"If I can't dance I don't want to be in your revolution."

That being said, here's a Marxist joke:

Chico: "I heard that there's a million dollars hidden in the house next door."
Groucho: "But -- there is no house next door."
Chico: "No? Well then let's build one!"

[Catholic Sensation]

3. Yes, like Stalin

amazing

[David__77]

6. Almost all will disagree, but indeed Stalin was better than Bush.

Bush is a fascist and waging war against the people in a struggle to gain domination for US capital. Stalin rather successfully defended his country against fascism and led the Red Army in defeating fascism in Europe. His merits outweigh his demerits, in my opinion. But 99.9% of this forum disagrees, I realize.

[kodi]

7. the bolsheviks were gangsters who used ideology for personal gain

in that they are akin to the busheviks, both types driven by personal power who used ideology to mask their intentions.

lenin, then stalin murdered millions in their consolidation of power. there is no excuse for that, and there is no excuse either for anyone to proclaim their admiration other than some sick fucks whose knowledge of history wouldn't stuff an ant's asshole.

[TankLV]

11. You don't know your history. Lenin was NOT a bolshevik.

The bolsheviks were not driven by personal power or any other type of power - they were the ones who fought for the republic and agains the royality and other criminals.

They hardly had time to even begin their idea of society or government, because Lenin sabotaged their efforts and had them all executed.

Lenin was the first and stalin was his successor - thugs and criminals all - but definitely not "bolsheviks" in any way shape or form.

Please do some heavy reading and don't repeat nonsense.

[kodi]

12. your remarks are plain unfarnished horseshit

the bolsheviks, and lenin, and stalin all attempted to consolidate power by the liquification of their political enemies.

go read a fucking book you are mistaking the mensheviks for the bolsheviks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolshevik

[Catholic Sensation]

8. this is, without a doubt, the most disgusting post I've ever seen

First things first: your post makes me ashamed to be a liberal. I hate to think among the people who shares my views on society, econommics, foreign policy, domestic policy, etc. is someone who would honestly make such a vile, and downright stupid claim.

Now here's why I'm going to be especially harsh: my mother was born in Poland in 1957. She had to endure 23 years of potentially being locked up for not being loyal to the state, for being somewhat religious when it was outlawed, for being a free thinker. She had to live in a country that was economically ravaged by Marxism abused. Had to suffer under domestic policy enforced by Warsaw and dictated by Moscow. Thank God she came to the United States under a student visa and the Communist government was removed before her visa expired.

Josef Stalin didn't defend SHIT. Josef Stalin was a war criminal murderer who killed easily 30 million people, all of them innocent. He created the Gulags. He was an unrelenting anti-Semite who killed thousands if not millions of innocent Russian Jews with his pograms. Josef Stalin was a dictator who, like Lenin, wasn't chosen by the people. Say what you want about George W. Bush he is a more legitimate leader of this country than any Soviet leader could ever claim. Stalin allowed absolutely no dissent in the Soviet Union and is responsible for massive hegemony in Eastern Europe by the Soviet Union.

I can't believe anyone would say something so horrible.

[David__77]

19. You may rest easy...

I am not a liberal, though I consider myself a progressive leftist. As a liberal, you needn't think were in the same camp, if you choose. This is more of a historical debate, since I would never advocate for Stalin's policies in the present age--we've learned so much since then. I'm sorry that your mother faced unjust persecution for her religious activities. In the Polish People's Republic, religion was not illegal in churches, though it was illegal to evangelize others outside the churches. Certainly certain opportunities were closed off to the religious. 1957 was four years after the death of Stalin, and I do not think that he would have followed the same policies as Krushchev and Brezhnev in eastern Europe, but I certainly understand many people who were not actively opposed to the government were unjustly persecuted.

[Redneck Socialist]

13. No he wasn't

Bush is awful but he's no stalin. Count me among the 99.9%

[JimmyJazz]

21. I'm also a socialist and I'm in the 99.9% group, too.

I HATE these kinds of posts. I hate it when people compare Bush to Stalin and/or Hitler. It makes me feel like I have to defend that son-of-a-bitch and that's really the last thing I feel like doing.

[ArtVandaley]

14. What???????

Count me in the 99.9%. Have you any sense of history at all?

[David__77]

18. Yes, I study history all the time.

But I do not agree with what the US textbooks say on most issues. The Soviet Union fell, for instance, because the ruling party lost faith in communism in the 1950s, not because "Reagan spent lots of money on defense." The nuking of Japan did not end the war there, it was the invasion of Manchuria by the Soviet Union, and the prospect of being liberated by the Red Army that frightened the Japanese to capitulate to the Americans.

And I freely acknowledge that many thousands of people unjustly were executed in the Soviet Union while a very real pro-German fifth column was rooted out. A poor, peasant country was transformed into an industrial bulwark that was unscathed by the great depression. From 1929 to 1953, in spite of the horrendous toll of the war against fascism, people's living standards appreciably rose. When Stalin died in 1953, people all over the world mourned and remembered his important role in defeating fascism--even many liberals in this country like Henry Wallace.

[mikelewis]

15. Stalin was much worse than Bush....

Stalin wasn't some wanna-be cowboy con-artist with a bank-roll. He brought an idealogy that inspired millions to openly rebel against thier governments and instill a new government that was beholden to his country. He was an empire builder and a tyrant who usurped the candy coated ideals of a failed philosphy. Stalin was no fuckin joke.


Bush may have grabbed a lot of power but he is still beholden to a higher power. Bush draws his power from a people who believe, no matter how misguidedly, that they are free. That freedom is defined not in our Constitution (that is designed to trade our power to the government so it can more effectively govern) but in the Declaration of Independence that defines our true power as a people. Every 4th of July, we do not celebrate Constitution Day, we celebrate Independence day.

Stalin brought a reign of terror that only Hitler could have rivaled. His draconian government enslave a freightened people who were devestated by war. Bush has a long way to go before he can claim that sort of evil. He has to murder a lot more innocents and a rip away a lot more freedoms for him to earn that title. He's an absolute cock-sucker, no doubt. But worse than Stalin? You gotta be joking.

[Daphne08]

23. Huh?

I must disagree with you on this. Stalin was responsible for millions of deaths!

[Neshanic]

17. Jeezuz! It's a freaking political cartoon that perfectly

decribes the propoganda of this nightmare administration.

Beautifully drawn and it's FUNNY!

[JimmyJazz]

20. As someone who can read cyrillic, these posters hurt my head!

The "O" with the line through it is similar to the "f" sound and the upsidedown "N" makes the "ee" sound. This is just stupid. Plus, there is no word for "the" in the Russian language. :(

[Davis_X_Machina]

22. North Korea a better analogy...

By Ruben Bollin/Tom the Dancing Bug.

[deutsey]

25. Very good!

:thumbsup:

[Taxloss]

24. Very good!

I like "Rugged individualism is strongest when we obey"

[yorgatron]

26. thanks deutsey,funny stuff.

as for you Stalinists,wake the fuck up.
he murdered MILLIONS of people,in numbers * and company can only aspire to.