-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
1917 Centenary Lessons
- Thread starter rocala
- Start date
rocala
Well-Known Member
@Sartre I pretty much agree with what you have written. Certainly not all problems are military.
For me I have always found the infighting hard to bear. Reading about Kronstadt near broke my heart as a teenager. Events in the English and Spanish civil wars too. You may win a war but you have almost certainly lost the revolution when you start shooting your former comrades.
For me I have always found the infighting hard to bear. Reading about Kronstadt near broke my heart as a teenager. Events in the English and Spanish civil wars too. You may win a war but you have almost certainly lost the revolution when you start shooting your former comrades.
I certainly hope so, although we will need to sort out a lot of problems so things run more smoothly. I've bought a ticket for the CPGB-MLs 100th Anniversary of the October Revolution event in London. I'm not absolutely certain whether I will be going but thought that just for the hell of it, it may be a nice way of commemorating the 100th anniversary and meeting fellows Commies. Although there will be portraits of Stalin and the North Korean ambassador attending based on previous years, so I'm not sure what to feel about that.
rocala
Well-Known Member
Hi Laika
Have you ever been to one of the annual Marxism festivals hosted by the SWP, Timetable | Marxism 2017 ?
I am rather ashamed to say I have never made it to one yet, but I hear they are extremely good.
I'm afraid not. I think there may well be several events like that hosted by different parties as there is a "Communist University" conference by one of the Marxist-Leninist Parties in the UK. I'm still on the mailing list for the Young Communist League so I got an e-mail about their Summer Camp for 2017 and was tempted to go as I would to too old to do so next year but I decided not to. it would have been nice to be around Communist my age but I just wasn't in the spirit of things and it seemed odd to go when I was having doubts.
Trotsky was essentially correct, a fact which, sadly, did not (and does not) prevent centrifugal ideological forces from rendering the Fourth International almost comically impotent.
you could always start a thread on Trotsky if you want? he certainly would deserve a thread in the sub-forum given his record and contribution to the Russian Revolution.
Thanks, but it's been decades since I seriously studied Lenin and Trotsky, and such a thread deserves far more effort and focus than I'm willing or able to give at this point.
Just adding this here for everyone's benift. The CPUSA did a short article calling for an "honest and balanced" assessment of the October Revolution. It's fairly short so I'm just going to copy it here and it may add something to this thread is anyone want to pull it apart and critique it.
Various political parties are dealing with the interpretation of the Russian October Revolution, its history, lessons and perspectives in a very different ways. While the conservative parties and social-democrats are focussing on the shortcomings and mistakes of the revolution the left tries to present a balanced picture one closer to the historic truth. Here are some of my thoughts:
1. The October Revolution was a groundbreaking world-historical event that opened an epoch. For the first time in history, in Russia itself and after 1945 in other European and non-European countries, a post-capitalist, socialist society was created. Various achievements were won in the fields of economics, social policy, culture and education, which were not conceivable in capitalist countries. The USSR and the other socialist countries had an unmistakable influence on world development, peace and emancipation from colonialism. Limits were imposed on imperialism. It was the socialist USSR, which made the the main contribution to the defeat of fascism in the Second World War.
2. In the course of these developments negative phenomena unfolded in socialism which were expressed in deficient human rights and crimes. There was also insufficient democracy, arbitrariness in the exercise of political power and intellectual narrowness and dogmatism.
3. Corrections and reforms, as well as feasible strategies for the further development of socialism were urgently necessary in the end. If implemented socialist measures could have contained the inner erosion processes and the anti-socialist forces within and from abroad. Because these measures were not taken what resulted was the upheavals after 1989 – socialism was replaced by a restoration of capitalism in the countries concerned.
4. The liquidation of the socialism in Europe and the dissolution of the USSR from today’s point of view, that is, in the year of the 100th anniversary of the October Revolution, raises numerous questions for communists and socialists:
Recently, a leading comrade delivered an attempt to point out the main reasons of our defeat, but he was once again too much dealing with the interference of the enemy. It seems to me that we are not yet in a position to find the main reasons for our failure inside our real existing socialist system. As long as the former leaders live we still neglect the shortcomings.
But once again back to the Russian Revolution. Within this process of evaluation a big role must be played by Rosa Luxemeburg’s criticism vis-a-vis the October Revolution and her dissent with Lenin on issues of the ways and means of its implementation, such as missing democracy, the role of force, the revolutionary terror, the missing privatisation of land for the peasants, the mistakes within the Brest-Litovsk Treaty with Germany. But it was also Luxemburg who remarked that this handicapped child of revolution is ours and we should take care of it.
The October Revolution needs an honest, balanced assessment
Fair enough. this sub-forum could really use more active members as its going to waste otherwise so I'm just scrambling to find people who might use it whatever their views. Having a Trotskyist or Trotsky-sympathiser would make things much more interesting through a healthy and informed difference of opinion.
Various political parties are dealing with the interpretation of the Russian October Revolution, its history, lessons and perspectives in a very different ways. While the conservative parties and social-democrats are focussing on the shortcomings and mistakes of the revolution the left tries to present a balanced picture one closer to the historic truth. Here are some of my thoughts:
1. The October Revolution was a groundbreaking world-historical event that opened an epoch. For the first time in history, in Russia itself and after 1945 in other European and non-European countries, a post-capitalist, socialist society was created. Various achievements were won in the fields of economics, social policy, culture and education, which were not conceivable in capitalist countries. The USSR and the other socialist countries had an unmistakable influence on world development, peace and emancipation from colonialism. Limits were imposed on imperialism. It was the socialist USSR, which made the the main contribution to the defeat of fascism in the Second World War.
2. In the course of these developments negative phenomena unfolded in socialism which were expressed in deficient human rights and crimes. There was also insufficient democracy, arbitrariness in the exercise of political power and intellectual narrowness and dogmatism.
3. Corrections and reforms, as well as feasible strategies for the further development of socialism were urgently necessary in the end. If implemented socialist measures could have contained the inner erosion processes and the anti-socialist forces within and from abroad. Because these measures were not taken what resulted was the upheavals after 1989 – socialism was replaced by a restoration of capitalism in the countries concerned.
4. The liquidation of the socialism in Europe and the dissolution of the USSR from today’s point of view, that is, in the year of the 100th anniversary of the October Revolution, raises numerous questions for communists and socialists:
- What is the historical place of the October revolution in the history of the workers’ movement from today’s point of view?
- What has real socialism achieved on a world scale?
- What is the historical record of real, failed socialism?
- What were the main causes of the failure of socialism, which had arisen in the wake of the October Revolution in the USSR and other countries in Europe?
- What became of the international communist movement?
- Do the upheavals of 1989-1991 force communists and socialists to a new beginning, or was only a process interrupted in its continuity?
Recently, a leading comrade delivered an attempt to point out the main reasons of our defeat, but he was once again too much dealing with the interference of the enemy. It seems to me that we are not yet in a position to find the main reasons for our failure inside our real existing socialist system. As long as the former leaders live we still neglect the shortcomings.
But once again back to the Russian Revolution. Within this process of evaluation a big role must be played by Rosa Luxemeburg’s criticism vis-a-vis the October Revolution and her dissent with Lenin on issues of the ways and means of its implementation, such as missing democracy, the role of force, the revolutionary terror, the missing privatisation of land for the peasants, the mistakes within the Brest-Litovsk Treaty with Germany. But it was also Luxemburg who remarked that this handicapped child of revolution is ours and we should take care of it.
The October Revolution needs an honest, balanced assessment
Fair enough. this sub-forum could really use more active members as its going to waste otherwise so I'm just scrambling to find people who might use it whatever their views. Having a Trotskyist or Trotsky-sympathiser would make things much more interesting through a healthy and informed difference of opinion.
Seriously?
There is nothing healthy about supporting, or seeking to sanitize, Stalinism.Fair enough. this sub-forum could really use more active members as its going to waste otherwise so I'm just scrambling to find people who might use it whatever their views. Having a Trotskyist or Trotsky-sympathiser would make things much more interesting through a healthy and informed difference of opinion.
In the spirit of "honest and balanced" assessment, see ...
... and we haven't even touched upon sabotage in Spain, the facilitation of Hitler, or the Mao and Pol Pot regimes.
... and we haven't even touched upon sabotage in Spain, the facilitation of Hitler, or the Mao and Pol Pot regimes.
Having been at the receiving end of people's incoherent moral outrage for over ten years for essentially the same argument, its finally started to loose its impact. Its not that I don't care, its that I've found caring won't actually change anything. the camps in China and North Korea will stay open no matter how many time people say they are wrong and I don't share the desire to have a morality as ineffectual, impotent and hypocritical as that even if it is perhaps more reassuring. I want something that actually works and is closer to the truth, even if it is perhaps quite a bit darker. but how could the truth be anything but dark given that the "bad guys" can and do actually win and as long as they have the power, they will get away with it?
If you've got a better argument or would like keep going and let off some steam, I think I may have some time on my hands.
... i.e., it does not cohere with your Stalinist apologetics.
I seriously doubt that you're experiencing a newfound indifference, but be it newfound or carefully sculpted, I suspect that your indifference say more about you than about Stalinism.
Well done. you're absolutely right.
Maybe you can use that empathy to start with the assumption that I didn't wake up one day and decide that "wow, today is a great day to fill a mass grave of basically innocent people and defend those who do"?
I've read the accounts of the NKVD getting high on cocaine because they couldn't cope with the amount of death they were causing; I know the statistics of the famines, the gulags and the killing fields; I've watched the films of people breaking down in tears as they revisit the torture centres and of concentration camp survivors who escaped north Korea trying to process the emotional trauma. And I've seen the photos of the mass graves. I do not need a lecture.
Maybe you'd like to debate Communism and not give me the hysterical knee-jerk argument that "your system is evil because it killed more than mine"? If that is too difficult for you, stop trying to debate it with me.
That's fine. I'm still simmering but I am trying to be rational.
I am giving Jay every conceivable opportunity to take a step back and realise he does have alternatives to provoking me and make sure he does understand that is exactly what he's doing. If he wanted to stir me up, the "morality" of Stalinism was THE area where I am most sensitive and volatile because there isn't a clear way to reconcile my beliefs with my own conscience.
It is also a subject that is deeply taboo to contemplate the possibility that there could be justifications for it. Having that shoved down my throat in the Communist subforum is really the final straw where there should be "some" mutual respect. I try to manange the vulnerability on that subject but there is no easy solution with anyone, anywhere as no-one wants to take the "other" side [even Communists]. That should be something another communist could understand given its connected with morality and issues over life and death (the latter are sensitive to practically everyone). If he wants to debate it- he can do so. If he wants a license to insult me, then I have every right to lose it.
I have ALREADY had Jay on ignore for a variety of short-tempered one line insults on the main forums that I thought I couldn't report as I'm fairly certain they wouldn't technically break the rules. Jay is extremely skilled at it and probably gets a real kick out of it. But as he is now posting in the communist sub-forum and quoting my posts I am put into a position where I feel I have to give a response. it feels much more of a violation to have to put up with it here than on the main forums where it could be expected. I will kick this upstairs for the admins to deal with if necessary as I've run out of options. This feels personal and I want it settled somehow.
Its good advice, and is probably the right thing to do, but I would like this to be settled in some form or another, preferably without any action by staff. I am willing to debate Jay, listen to his arguments and give him a chance to get whatever it is out in the open and defend my own position (hoping it will let off steam on both sides so we can reach a sort of understanding). I think that is more than generous under the circumstances and is the most reasonable way to settle it if is absolutely sincere in his criticisms. I'm open to any alternatives at this point but I think it is highly likely Jay will chose either not to respond or to dismiss it as yet another way to show his contempt and disrespect. my expectation have sunk very low and my tolerance isn't far behind.