Left-Wing Discussion Thread

[Seylland]

If you call state bureaucrats owning the means of production socialism, then sure, go on ahead.

Giving the state the means of production temporarily was necessary for the conditions of which the USSR faced.

What? Was the working class and laborers too ignorant or untrustworthy for handling such means? That isn't socialism, that's just capitalism under the control of the state.

[Pandeeria]

No it isn't, the silencing dissenting opinions however, is Authoritarian. Stalin participated in the purges of these people, people he classified as counter-revolutionaries.

Revolution is authoritarian. Read Engels.

Revolution is one of, if not, the greatest expressions of freedom, violently overthrowing a super structure. It is freedom.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

He was a tyrant, a tyrant that killed millions so as to sate his own paranoia.

He was a leader that successfully industrialised his country and made it among the most powerful in the world, and he successfully spread socialism to eastern europe.

He was also a man that committed a number of atrocities against his peoples.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

No it isn't, the silencing dissenting opinions however, is Authoritarian. Stalin participated in the purges of these people, people he classified as counter-revolutionaries.

Revolution is authoritarian. Read Engels.

So it proves my point that Stalin was Authoritarian.

[United Marxist Nations]

Revolution is authoritarian. Read Engels.

Revolution is one of, if not, the greatest expressions of freedom, violently overthrowing a super structure. It is freedom.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/w ... hority.htm

>forgetting On Authority

Shiggy Diggy. You need a refresher course.

[Trotskylvania]

Over one million party members were arrested, tortured, forced to sign confessions under extreme duress, and executed by the state security apparatus Stalin personally created and served as patron to. That is the sine qua none of tyranny

Not at all. This is called rooting out the Trotskyite scourge.

Bullshit. They were "Trotskyites" only because NKVD troikas ripped their fingernails out, starved them, beat them, deprived them of sleep, and threatened to kill their families until they were broken enough to confess to being Trotskyites, English spies, or anything else. These were good, loyal party members, many of whom had never supported Trotsky, who fought bravely in the revolution, who ended up being murdered based on denunciations from petty rivalries, Stalin's paranoia, or others trying to save themselves by denouncing others. Many of the troikas outright fabricated denunciations, as Colonel K. K. Rokossovsky's own trial attests. The only reason he survived is that he endured horrific torture without confession, and was able to prove that the man supposedly denouncing him had been dead for years.

[Pandeeria]

Revolution is one of, if not, the greatest expressions of freedom, violently overthrowing a super structure. It is freedom.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/w ... hority.htm

>forgetting On Authority

Shiggy Diggy. You need a refresher course.

I don't consider myself a Marxist. I think Engrls considering revolution as authoritarian was a dumb statement on his part.

[Bojikami]

Revolution is authoritarian. Read Engels.

So it proves my point that Stalin was Authoritarian.

My argument was that he was not Totalitarian. I fully recognise the authoritarian nature of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the socialist state.

[United Marxist Nations]

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/w ... hority.htm

>forgetting On Authority

Shiggy Diggy. You need a refresher course.

I don't consider myself a Marxist. I think Engrls considering revolution as authoritarian was a dumb statement on his part.

No it wasn't, it makes complete sense. How is a revolution not imposing one group's authority on another?

[Pandeeria]

I don't consider myself a Marxist. I think Engrls considering revolution as authoritarian was a dumb statement on his part.

No it wasn't, it makes complete sense. How is a revolution not imposing one group's authority on another?

It's not, it's stopping a group from imposing it's will on the people (the group in this context being states officials).

[United Marxist Nations]

No it wasn't, it makes complete sense. How is a revolution not imposing one group's authority on another?

It's not, it's stopping a group from imposing it's will on the people (such as the state).

Revolution creates another state to destroy the existing state.

[Pandeeria]

It's not, it's stopping a group from imposing it's will on the people (such as the state).

Revolution creates another state to destroy the existing state.

Revolution is also the act of disagreeing with the current state, which is freedom. Revolution is dissent; revolution is freedom.

[Bojikami]

No it wasn't, it makes complete sense. How is a revolution not imposing one group's authority on another?

It's not, it's stopping a group from imposing it's will on the people (the group in this context being states officials).

Socialist Revolution creates a dictatorship of the proletariat to impose the will of the proletariat as opposed to the traditional dictatorship of the bourgeois.

[United Marxist Nations]

Revolution creates another state to destroy the existing state.

Revolution is also the act of disagreeing with the current state, which is freedom. Revolution is dissent; revolution is freedom.

Freedom is an abstract concept.

[Zudril]

Revolution creates another state to destroy the existing state.

Revolution is also the act of disagreeing with the current state, which is freedom. Revolution is dissent; revolution is freedom.

Is a fascist revolution freedom?

[Pandeeria]

It's not, it's stopping a group from imposing it's will on the people (the group in this context being states officials).

Socialist Revolution creates a dictatorship of the proletariat to impose the will of the proletariat as opposed to the traditional dictatorship of the bourgeois.

That's assuming the workers even own the means of production, which didn't happen at all under Stalin.

[Pandeeria]

Revolution is also the act of disagreeing with the current state, which is freedom. Revolution is dissent; revolution is freedom.

Is a fascist revolution freedom?

Yes it is, until it takes powers and no longer is a revolution.

[Bojikami]

Socialist Revolution creates a dictatorship of the proletariat to impose the will of the proletariat as opposed to the traditional dictatorship of the bourgeois.

That's assuming the workers even own the means of production, which didn't happen at all under Stalin.

We aren't discussing Stalin here. We are discussing the concept of revolution as a whole now.

[Pandeeria]

Revolution is also the act of disagreeing with the current state, which is freedom. Revolution is dissent; revolution is freedom.

Freedom is an abstract concept.

Everything is an abstract concept.

[Trotskylvania]

No it isn't, the silencing dissenting opinions however, is Authoritarian. Stalin participated in the purges of these people, people he classified as counter-revolutionaries.

Revolution is authoritarian. Read Engels.

Engels is playing a semantic argument that he ultimately loses though.

Because anarchists don't mean authoritarian in that sense.They mean it in the same sense as Marxists mean class domination, a permanent regime enforced by violence. Even in On Authority, Engels makes it quite clear that the dictatorship of the proletariat's only purpose is to dismantle class rule itself.

[United Marxist Nations]

Is a fascist revolution freedom?

Yes it is, until it takes powers and no longer is a revolution.

You're just inventing definitions right now. Revolution is the act of toppling a societal order and imposing a new one.

[Mattopilos]

It's not, it's stopping a group from imposing it's will on the people (such as the state).

Revolution creates another state to destroy the existing state.

Not always. Anarchy doesn't. Marxist-Leninist communism does, but not anarcho-collectivism or anarcho-communism, or anarcho-syndicalism. Or any anarchic systems, really (except AnCap, but we shall not talk of them).

[Pandeeria]

That's assuming the workers even own the means of production, which didn't happen at all under Stalin.

We aren't discussing Stalin here. We are discussing the concept of revolution as a whole now.

No, I'm discussing Stalin with the Stalin apologist, which is you. You should just concede that the purges weren't to stop Trotsky, and that he never spreaded Socialism at all.

[Bojikami]

Revolution creates another state to destroy the existing state.

Not always. Anarchy doesn't. Marxist-Leninist communism does, but not anarcho-collectivism or anarcho-communism, or anarcho-syndicalism. Or any anarchic systems, really (except AnCap, but we shall not talk of them).

All Anarchistic societies created states in one form or another, they merely gave them fancy names.

[United Marxist Nations]

Revolution creates another state to destroy the existing state.

Not always. Anarchy doesn't. Marxist-Leninist communism does, but not anarcho-collectivism or anarcho-communism, or anarcho-syndicalism. Or any anarchic systems, really (except AnCap, but we shall not talk of them).

Anarchist revolution in a nutshell
>make a state
>claim it isn't a state
Prove me wrong. Pro-tip, you can't.