Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 10:52:03 -0500 (EST)
From: SHAWGI TELL <v600a8e6-AT-ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu>
Subject: Re: Young Liberal Fascist (XII)




On Sat, 10 Feb 1996, Kevin Cabral wrote:

> On Sat, 10 Feb 1996 Godenas-AT-aol.com wrote:
> 
> > But, Mark, if Stalin's ideas were such anathema, why did the anti-colonial
> > revolutions (based largely on Lenin-Stalin) of that era succeed to such an
> > astonishing degree?  And if anti-Stalinism (beginning with Kruschev) was
> > really what was needed to keep "communism" from "going down the toilet"
> > (anti-communists on this list seem to have a penchant for scatological
> > references--re: the editor of "Shiny Shit"), why did the {expletive deleted}
> > hit the fan forty years after Stalin's death?  Could it be that you've got it
> > ass-backwards?
> 
> 	The shit hit the fan because Lenin had earlier established the
> entire precendent for Stalin, and the totalitarian anti-socialist
> Soviet system when, after the revolution, he proceeded to dismantle the
> Soviets, and make the unions mere tools of the party. 
> 
> 	It wasn't just Stalin who can be held accountable for the
> destruction of the "Great Russian Experiment", a certain amount of blame
> has to rest of Lenin's shoulders for setting the precident for Stalin with
> his organizational, and social policy. Stalin meerly took advantage of
> Lenin's cult, and multiplied its influence in his own name. 
> 
> 	The Soviet system started becoming regressive within a year or two
> of the revolution. While hostile circumstances, such as the
> Imperialist/White cooperative invasion, made things worse than they should
> have been, it was Lenin's top-down approach which ended up killing the
> revolution until the Soviet system degenerated into its puppet condition
> when Krushchev inherited it. 					
> 
> Kevin
> Cols, Oh
> 

Kevin, given what I have studied, what you are saying is manifestly false.  
Again, there is ample data to substantiate how remarkably progressive the  
Soviet Union was up until 1953, even till the end of the 50s.  Lenin and  
Stalin, with the support of millions, approached their situation in one 
of the few feasible ways that they could.  

Many anti-Communists, anti-Bolsheviks and revanchist racists continue to 
incessantly defame the soviet people.  They repeatedly fail to appreciate 
the utter vastness of Soviet achievements.  The ultra-reactionary 
imperialist bourgeoisie knew early on that the Soviet Union held the 
future for millions of exploited people.  For decades they have been 
smearing anything remotely Leninist, Stalinist and Dialectical Materialist 
(e.g., Eurocentrism and American Exceptionalism).

Myths about inefficiencey and cruelty to millions of people are just that 
- myths.

Too many anti-Communist agents continue to apply perfectionist models to 
the Soviet Union that are not applied elsewhere.  This makes them blind 
to any positive developments in the Soviet Union.  Also, like absolute 
idealists, these anti-Communists and repressively anti-people agents 
misunderstand the nature of violence, failing to contextualize it in an
appropriate way.

Finally, Khrushchev created the conditions for capitalist restoration.  
He opposed all the developments made by the Soviet people under Lenin's 
and Stalin's leadership.  His latter-day, mafia-connected disciples, 
Breshnev, Gorbachev and Yeltsin only further expedited the restoration of
capitalist-revisionist forces.

Before we can even polemicize and argue and debate, we should make an 
effort to get the historical record straight first.  We should remember that 
the ultra-parasitic imperialist bourgeoisie are the ones who benefit from 
anti-Stalin and anti-Soviet concoctions.  The working class does not 
benefit from Hitlerite lies.


Shawgi Tell
University at Buffalo
Graduate School of Education
V600A8E6-AT-UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU


     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------