Particracy Forum

TheTsar wrote:

Corvo Attano wrote:I am a marxist leninist in real life do i need to say my opinion?

And I am a constitutional monarchist, and my opinion is that Lenin sucks, and Milyukov is the best. Also, the White generals were heroes - Denikin, Kolchak, Wrangel, Yudenich, Miller, Pepelyaev, Markov, Drozdovskiy, Kappel etc.

Who doesn't like people that don't understand that their country is a failed state and needs a total revamping to survive.

TheTsar wrote:

Aquinas wrote:Any thoughts on Lenin? He seems to be being discussed a lot in history magazine articles and stuff.

Some people say it wasn't inevitable the Communist regime would become as awful as ended it up becoming. Personally, I think the seeds of what was to come were there right from the start. It was never going to be a real so-called "people's revolution". At heart, it was always about autocratic power.

Trotsky (unsurprisingly) was a Trotskyist. Trotskyism is one of the many forms of libertarian communism. Trotsky would not have been an autocrat.

Well thats utter bullshit if I ever heard any.

Trotsky put down the Krostant Rebellion and executed hundreds if not thousands of people he would have killed people too.No wait let rephrase that.

He killed people too.

Corvo Attano wrote:

TheTsar wrote:

Corvo Attano wrote:I am a marxist leninist in real life do i need to say my opinion?

And I am a constitutional monarchist, and my opinion is that Lenin sucks, and Milyukov is the best. Also, the White generals were heroes - Denikin, Kolchak, Wrangel, Yudenich, Miller, Pepelyaev, Markov, Drozdovskiy, Kappel etc.

Who doesn't like people that don't understand that their country is a failed state and needs a total revamping to survive.

TheTsar wrote:

Aquinas wrote:Any thoughts on Lenin? He seems to be being discussed a lot in history magazine articles and stuff.

Some people say it wasn't inevitable the Communist regime would become as awful as ended it up becoming. Personally, I think the seeds of what was to come were there right from the start. It was never going to be a real so-called "people's revolution". At heart, it was always about autocratic power.

Trotsky (unsurprisingly) was a Trotskyist. Trotskyism is one of the many forms of libertarian communism. Trotsky would not have been an autocrat.

Well thats utter bullshit if I ever heard any.

Trotsky put down the Krostant Rebellion and executed hundreds if not thousands of people he would have killed people too.No wait let rephrase that.

He killed people too.

Someone definitly is edgy here.

Mbites wrote:
Someone definitly is edgy here.

I am a Marxist leninist yeah Stalins reign led to a lot of peoples death but let us not forget no man rules alone and that everyone else would probably have been equally worse.

.

jamescfm wrote:

Corvo Attano wrote:I am a Marxist leninist yeah Stalins reign led to a lot of peoples death but let us not forget no man rules alone and that everyone else would probably have been equally worse.

This is perhaps the most mind-boggling comment I have ever heard. Stalin committed genocide; there are plenty of people who would not have done that. Your diminishing of the pain and suffering of the people living under Soviet rule is horrifying.

Nice red scare propaganda you got there.

Stalin did a lot of bad things and introduced a lot of policies that failed but he did not commit any genocides.

.

jamescfm wrote:

Corvo Attano wrote:Nice red scare propaganda you got there.

Stalin did a lot of bad things and introduced a lot of policies that failed but he did not commit any genocides.

I've been told I'm a lot of things but I think this is the first time someone's accused me of being subject to 'red scare propoganda'. Honestly, it seems that you're so blinded by ideology you can't critically evaluate the situation but here's a link nonetheless.

I know that? I already that stalin purged groups of people that undermined his rule I am not saying he didn't just that it ain't genocide.

Actually lets stop I know I am espousing quite extreme views and neither of us will agree so lets end this here.

The whole thing was a mess, it was a coup - not a "revolution" - and the Bolshevik blight on Marxism will remain for decades to come, perhaps forever.
I have a lot of opinions about the Russian Revolution and the Tankies who have taken to defending it and its atrocities. It's in vogue now, particularly in the USA and among readers of Jacobin.

I'm not a fan.
But I sure have read a ton about Ioseph Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili, the Georgian seminarian, poet, bank robber, revolutionary and tyrant.
Lenin was no better and Trotsky certainly not.

Black Army 4 Lyfe!
Смерть всім, хто стоїть на перешкоді здобуття вільності трудовому люду!

I studied this topic once. I came to the conclusion that the October Revolution itself was simply a clever coup as opposed to a true people's revolution. That being said, it probably wouldn't have been possible if the conditions in Russia weren't so horrendous. The Incompetence of the Provisional Gov and the general state of affairs made its collapse inevitable. If someone like Kornilov had taken over, it is likely that the Bolsheviks would never be near power. Yet only the Bolsheviks at the time were actually capable of seizing power as they had a clearly defined membership and command structure which made them an effective force.


Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin were all tyrants. Stalin more than Lenin imo. Then again, the guys like Wrangel and Kolchak weren't angels either. Not sure that guys like Kolchak and Wrangel would have gone for genocide though.


February Revolution could be celebrated but the October one? Probably not.

Corvo Attano wrote:

jamescfm wrote:

Corvo Attano wrote:Nice red scare propaganda you got there.

Stalin did a lot of bad things and introduced a lot of policies that failed but he did not commit any genocides.

I've been told I'm a lot of things but I think this is the first time someone's accused me of being subject to 'red scare propoganda'. Honestly, it seems that you're so blinded by ideology you can't critically evaluate the situation but here's a link nonetheless.

I know that? I already that stalin purged groups of people that undermined his rule I am not saying he didn't just that it ain't genocide.

Actually lets stop I know I am espousing quite extreme views and neither of us will agree so lets end this here.

Stalin purged groups that he believed, or perhaps more accurately claimed were undermining his rule. The Purges of supposed counter-revolutionaries or so-called enemies of socialism were so extensive that no-one could reasonably argue that everyone caught up in the process was undermining Stalin's rule.

It becomes genocide when Stalin's purges target ethnic and religious groups, resulting in their mass arrest, deportation, killing or starvation. There's irrefutable evidence that this did occur in the Soviet Union.

And, even if it wasn't technically genocide, What's your point? Killing millions of people on charges of undermining the rule of a ruthless dictator is equally as reprehensable as genocide.