LWDT IX: Discussing the Left From All Engels

[Kubra]

Don't forget the wholesale reintroduction of tsarist era geopolitical objectives and the russification policies pursued among the outlying SSR's.
And as I am a good marxist, piece wage. Horrible bit, that. No good, nasty sort of wage. Pure reactionaryism.

Deportation of nations: https://espressostalinist.com/the-real- ... f-nations/

Maaaaan I wasn't even referring to deportations, russification manifested itself in compulsory russian language education and cyrillisation.

[Hanafuridake]

Imagine defending the treatment of the Kalmyks.

Horseshoe theory is nonsense but that's quite Nazi tier.

[Byeclase]

Imagine defending the treatment of the Kalmyks.

Horseshoe theory is nonsense but that's quite Nazi tier.

If I'm shown I'm wrong, I'll rectify my position, I don't want to hurt nationalities.

Maaaaan I wasn't even referring to deportations, russification manifested itself in compulsory russian language education and cyrillisation.

I think an imposed language from a foreign nation is bad, at the same time I think more than 1 national language can coexist and be used in education with other languages if it's done voluntarily.

[Cekoviu]

Deportation of nations: https://espressostalinist.com/the-real- ... f-nations/

Maaaaan I wasn't even referring to deportations, russification manifested itself in compulsory russian language education and cyrillisation.

Except no Cyrillic script for Armenia and Georgia, oddly. And it isn't a Caucasus thing, because Azerbaijan and indigenous North Caucasians had to adopt it (despite the latter's languages often being better suited to the Georgian script than the Cyrillic one).

[Novus America]

Deportation of nations: https://espressostalinist.com/the-real- ... f-nations/

For a crowd who complains so heavily about Western imperialism, it's quite fascinating how quickly you jump to justify Soviet imperialism in the Caucasus and Asia. :thinking:

Also one of the sources is Molotov justifying the crimes of his own regime. Sounds legit.
And it is quick to point out that some ethnic groups had members that collaborated with the Nazis (racial collective punishment is fucked up still though) but fails to ask WHY!

Maybe is Stalin has be less of a dick fewer people would want to collaborate with the Nazis against him...

By this logic we could argue for placing African Americans in camps/forced resettlement because they are convicted of more crimes on average, but that fails to ask WHY they might disproportionately be convicted of crimes!

Also it gets darker, Nazis tried to justify mass crimes against Jews, especially Polish Jews by pointing out several had rebelled in the German revolution.

And before I read (well skimmed it TBH) I knew it would whatabout, and it did not disappoint.

Yes the US tossed ethnic Japanese (and some others) in racist concentration camps. But that was also pretty fucked up. Also the deportations/concentration camps ran from 1930–1952 so the whole “any crime is justified to defeat the Nazis” argument falls apart.

[Kubra]

Maaaaan I wasn't even referring to deportations, russification manifested itself in compulsory russian language education and cyrillisation.

Except no Cyrillic script for Armenia and Georgia, oddly. And it isn't a Caucasus thing, because Azerbaijan and indigenous North Caucasians had to adopt it (despite the latter's languages often being better suited to the Georgian script than the Cyrillic one).

cyrillisation was largely aimed at latin scripts, some of which had actually been adopted in the 20's. I believe for some reformers of the 20's adopting latin letters was seen as akin to adopted metres as a unit of measurement.

[Novus America]

For a crowd who complains so heavily about Western imperialism, it's quite fascinating how quickly you jump to justify Soviet imperialism in the Caucasus and Asia. :thinking:

Antifascism isn't imperialism.

On Stalin and science Lysenko...

Oh and banning cybernetics which massively set back the Soviet ability to develop early computers.

True, errors contributing to the fall. There's an actual article defending Lysenko in Spanish as the criticism as pure propaganda, but I won't defend it as I'm not sure of it/didn't read enough.

Imperialism justified by other terms is still imperialism. Imperialism is not exclusive to any one ideology. We went over this before. Simply slapping a new label on the actions does not change the action.

But at least you are admitting there were real mistakes made by Stalin. That is a start.

[Cekoviu]

Except no Cyrillic script for Armenia and Georgia, oddly. And it isn't a Caucasus thing, because Azerbaijan and indigenous North Caucasians had to adopt it (despite the latter's languages often being better suited to the Georgian script than the Cyrillic one).

cyrillisation was largely aimed at latin scripts, some of which had actually been adopted in the 20's. I believe for some reformers of the 20's adopting latin letters was seen as akin to adopted metres as a unit of measurement.

Many of those languages which adopted the Latin script were written in Arabic/Perso-Arabic beforehand; the change to Latin was itself, if I'm not mistaken, aimed to "de-Islamify" the affected languages. I'm not certain if "reforms" to the Mongolian orthography were similarly motivated, but I do know that early communist Mongolia clashed heavily with the Soviets over the issue of Buddhism.

[Kubra]

cyrillisation was largely aimed at latin scripts, some of which had actually been adopted in the 20's. I believe for some reformers of the 20's adopting latin letters was seen as akin to adopted metres as a unit of measurement.

Many of those languages which adopted the Latin script were written in Arabic/Perso-Arabic beforehand; the change to Latin was itself, if I'm not mistaken, aimed to "de-Islamify" the affected languages. I'm not certain if "reforms" to the Mongolian orthography were similarly motivated, but I do know that early communist Mongolia clashed heavily with the Soviets over the issue of Buddhism.

Yes and no. Latinisation was a pretty popular concept among the russian intelligentsia, including of course the socialist sections of it. You read about far eastern party cadre's in siberia, doing among other things trying to make the folks write in latin script, and you get a real missionary vibe. They seemed to really mean it.
But as for the push to do it among the higher populations in the islamic bits of the soviet union, well, once upon a time the greater east-asian co-prosperity sphere was a well-meaning liberal idea.

[Hanafuridake]

Once upon a time the greater east-asian co-prosperity sphere was a well-meaning liberal idea.

[Salus Maior]

Once upon a time the greater east-asian co-prosperity sphere was a well-meaning liberal idea.

Japan to Asia: Congratulations, you are being united with your Asian brethren. Please do not resist.

[Northern Davincia]

For a crowd who complains so heavily about Western imperialism, it's quite fascinating how quickly you jump to justify Soviet imperialism in the Caucasus and Asia. :thinking:

Antifascism isn't imperialism.

Why didn't the Soviet Union allow its satellite states to hold democratic elections on their own?

[Salus Maior]

For a crowd who complains so heavily about Western imperialism, it's quite fascinating how quickly you jump to justify Soviet imperialism in the Caucasus and Asia. :thinking:

Antifascism isn't imperialism.

Tell that to the Baltic states, Finland, and Poland.

[Novus America]

Antifascism isn't imperialism.

Tell that to the Baltic states, Finland, and Poland.

Apparently it is not imperialism if you do it to “fight the bourgeoisie (TM)” or something
It is basically “imperialism is only when the other side does it”...

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Antifascism isn't imperialism.

Why didn't the Soviet Union allow its satellite states to hold democratic elections on their own?

Because Stalinism is fascism using the blood-dyed skin of Lenin as a banner to fool everyone into thinking they're socialists.

[Dahyan]

Still more believable than self-proclaimed leftists who go out of their way to condemn every single actual Socialist nation that ever existed, and jump on every single reactionary bandwagon they can find.

Your twisting of yourselves into knots to defend some of the worst regimes in history is not anything of the sort that could be described as "believable".

Nor is it believable when so-called leftists decide to accept at face value the most ordinary imperialist vitriol about resisting nations.

[Senkaku]

Your twisting of yourselves into knots to defend some of the worst regimes in history is not anything of the sort that could be described as "believable".

Nor is it believable when so-called leftists decide to accept at face value the most ordinary imperialist vitriol about resisting nations.

A pathological inability for self-examination and self-criticism and an unwillingness to confront naked historical facts do not make you edgy, they just make you look foolish and in bad faith.

[Dahyan]

Why didn't the Soviet Union allow its satellite states to hold democratic elections on their own?

Because Stalinism is fascism using the blood-dyed skin of Lenin as a banner to fool everyone into thinking they're socialists.

Ah, so we have arrived here again. Fantastic.

[Dahyan]

Nor is it believable when so-called leftists decide to accept at face value the most ordinary imperialist vitriol about resisting nations.

A pathological inability for self-examination and self-criticism and an unwillingness to confront naked historical facts do not make you edgy, they just make you look foolish and in bad faith.

Self-evaluation and self-criticism is a constant factor in Marxist-Leninist circles. That does not mean we need to throw away every single actual Socialist experience in the past, for the sake of milquetoast vaguely leftist-sounding reformism.

[Kubra]

A pathological inability for self-examination and self-criticism and an unwillingness to confront naked historical facts do not make you edgy, they just make you look foolish and in bad faith.

Self-evaluation and self-criticism is a constant factor in Marxist-Leninist circles. That does not mean we need to throw away every single actual Socialist experience in the past, for the sake of milquetoast vaguely leftist-sounding reformism.

it's funny because, let's be honest, stalin was not the self-critical sort
Like after the debacle on the Vistula hoooo boy he really dodged questions, he was not down to admit "k maybe I should have reinforced the faltering bits of the line" even though *everyone* knew he fucked up

[Duvniask]

Your twisting of yourselves into knots to defend some of the worst regimes in history is not anything of the sort that could be described as "believable".

Nor is it believable when so-called leftists decide to accept at face value the most ordinary imperialist vitriol about resisting nations.

The fuck does this mean. You people literally only accept "historical fact" when it comes from mouthpieces for your own narrow, esoteric worldview. You will deny anything to defend hideous totalitarian nightmares, because you LARP as communists and think a picture of Stalin on every wall is cool or some shit.

A pathological inability for self-examination and self-criticism and an unwillingness to confront naked historical facts do not make you edgy, they just make you look foolish and in bad faith.

Self-evaluation and self-criticism is a constant factor in Marxist-Leninist circles. That does not mean we need to throw away every single actual Socialist experience in the past, for the sake of milquetoast vaguely leftist-sounding reformism.

It never was a "socialist experience".

And you dismissing your detractors as reformists is rich.

[Byeclase]

Antifascism isn't imperialism.

Why didn't the Soviet Union allow its satellite states to hold democratic elections on their own?

I can answer this.
FIrst of all, you know there's the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat. This means that the proletariat dictates over the bourgeoisie, and so they have democratic organs in soviet democracy (soviet means council or assembly). Now, since the consciousness of the people isn't elevated yet coming from capitalism, the party of elected officials (represents the advanced class of the proletariat) needs purges to improve the party, the party advances as it gets rid of the elements which would slash the party (for example, people who just want to use the party to enrich themselves personally).
So behind this party you have people's assemblies, but not strictly liberal democracy (liberalism can come after consciousness is elevated). In the case of the Soviet Union it became a "one party state" as its natural development of the class struggle, since the other parties started doing terrorism against the state and had to be illegalized. However, it's true that they didn't legalize them after, they were considered a bourgeois remnant.

Then, in the case of the satellites, they also held elections; however, in the case of Hungary for example, as western marxists think that's a turning point to not support the USSR. They were led by former rightists as well as the consequences of their demands is the destruction of socialism in the country, and that has to be repressed, it shows it's a bourgeois remnant (The Comintern must strike as a single fist).

Nonetheless, there are legitimate demands, that although not "pure" so to speak, they come from the proletariat whose consciousness isn't totally elevated yet and are crucial for their support until their total education, which is a reason of why the invasion of Czechoslovakia had to be opposed (there are national circumstances). By 1956 the revisionist clique enters the Soviet Union and also with Brezhnev they start trying to force militarily revolutions abroad. In this period they were invasive and they were denounced by both Hoxha and Mao as "social imperialists", they have red flags but they act as imperialists.

If you want more details, you can check this book part II and part III: https://mltheory.files.wordpress.com/20 ... z-1937.pdf

Why didn't the Soviet Union allow its satellite states to hold democratic elections on their own?

Because Stalinism is fascism using the blood-dyed skin of Lenin as a banner to fool everyone into thinking they're socialists.

What fascism improves the condition of women, rejects racism, condemns invasions, eliminates the bourgeoisie and gives the product of work of the worker, and then beat actual fascists in WW2? Fascism is a doctrine which is also spiritual and not materialist, and it's designed as an eternal state instead of a transitory state, its aim is to unify the proletariat and bourgeoisie under the totalist eye of the state so there isn't any worker rebellion and capitalists can get richer. ML also condemned nazbols, they were warmongers. If something, if what you said were true, it'd be more accurate calling it degenerate workers' state, deformed workers' state, state capitalism or bureaucratic collectivism as all leftcom and trot theories point out.

The fuck does this mean. You people literally only accept "historical fact" when it comes from mouthpieces for your own narrow, esoteric worldview. You will deny anything to defend hideous totalitarian nightmares, because you LARP as communists and think a picture of Stalin on every wall is cool or some shit.

Totalitarian theory is a liberal and fictional farce like 1984's Orwell, fascists called themselves totalists and Hannah Arendt is just a fake socialist infecting political science (like Robert Dahl, Sartori and Habermas the liberal "reinventing soviets by calling them assemblies").

Towards a Critique of the Category of Totalitarianism by Domenico Losurdo https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f00f/8 ... df2769.pdf
The Myth of "Totalitarianism" https://theredphoenixapl.org/2009/09/10 ... tarianism/

Just because internet memes say MLs larp, it doesn't mean so. The communists movements in the world have been majoritarian ML movements and revisionist branches claiming ML legacy. Even to this day, trot parties are splitted in dozen internationals as well as leftcoms which are basically irrelevant and not even seen in real life. The reason is simple, their theory kills themselves into little parties (trots) and leftcoms are either economicists (Bordigists), liquidators with assemblies and liberals who take the label totalitarian for granted (council communists), pseudoanarchists (communizers) or people who want to wait for global revolution to happen (ICC and ICT).
Some leftcoms and trots who reject all the ML tendency for single errors, because they weren't fast enough in expropriation, etc. while replacing all the content with rightist propaganda attacking the international communist movement, others reject the entire tendency cherry picking texts of Marx and Engels to justify their state capitalist theories instead of reading the context and all as a whole.

Imagine not claiming the Paris Commune because it was idealist and was majoritarian Proudhonist and Blanquist.

The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living. And just as they seem to be occupied with revolutionizing themselves and things, creating something that did not exist before, precisely in such epochs of revolutionary crisis they anxiously conjure up the spirits of the past to their service, borrowing from them names, battle slogans, and costumes in order to present this new scene in world history in time-honored disguise and borrowed language.

-18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte.

A pathological inability for self-examination and self-criticism and an unwillingness to confront naked historical facts do not make you edgy, they just make you look foolish and in bad faith.

Self-evaluation and self-criticism is a constant factor in Marxist-Leninist circles. That does not mean we need to throw away every single actual Socialist experience in the past, for the sake of milquetoast vaguely leftist-sounding reformism.

It never was a "socialist experience".

And you dismissing your detractors as reformists is rich.

One can see the consequences of the detractors, which are "democratic socialism-socdem" Venezuela and the corpse of Allende, European imperialist socdems, letting the country be invaded with anarchists, killing the party with trots, not doing anything with leftcoms, doing conspiracies and left adventurism with leftcoms, liquidating the line with populist councils with leftcoms... Not to talk about rightists, the only alternative is clear.

Spain:
Maoist rapper imprisoned for "glorifying terrorism and insulting the crown"-> https://www.efe.com/efe/english/world/s ... 62-3540972 Fake trials.
Reconstrucción comunista (pro-Hoxha, they combatted ISIS in the International Freedom Battalion) illegalized in Operación Valle.
PCE (r) illegalized after considered a political wing of GRAPO (fake trial), their letters indicated that they were separate.
GAC (Grupos Anarquistas Coordinados) after publishing the book "Against Democracy" under the false pretext of antiterrorism.

And so on, this is only one country prosecuting far-leftists no matter if they're anarchists, maoists or MLs.

[Kubra]

Uhhhh, you know that passage from 18th brumaire?
Marx, um, he isn't saying that's a good thing. That's kind of central to the whole "then as farce" bit.

[Proctopeo]

Why didn't the Soviet Union allow its satellite states to hold democratic elections on their own?

Because Stalinism is fascism using the blood-dyed skin of Lenin as a banner to fool everyone into thinking they're socialists.

Though, do note that Lenin's skin was dyed red with the blood of innocents.

[Philjia]

Why didn't the Soviet Union allow its satellite states to hold democratic elections on their own?

Because Stalinism is fascism using the blood-dyed skin of Lenin as a banner to fool everyone into thinking they're socialists.

And Leninism is conservatism using an effigy of Marx to fool everyone into thinking they're democratic.