before stalin

anonymous asked:

You have no idea how much my family fucking suffered, how much we fucking lost to Stalin. You're a genuinely horrible fucking person and I wholeheartedly sincerely hope you get cancer and die.

I’m just legitimately never going to have sympathy for people who “suffered” under Stalin. I know this is like not relatable for new communists but decades of studying Soviet history and hearing case after case and it always ends up being a “we threw the jade in the river” situation or “my poor grandpa was just trying to get by that’s why he hoarded goods to sell at outrageous prices I can’t believe we had to flee :’(”. Sometimes its “my dad was a contra” like ana Navarro lol

We’re actually suffering under capitalism and the capitalists keep telling everyone how evil Stalin was so that we won’t get any ideas. Sorry I’m not here for it. Whatever antisocial shit your family did to be punished, they deserved it, and random exiles can’t ever stand up to our heroes

(Besides if you really did want to stand up to the “red menace” you’d come off anon and tell us what your grandpa did)

government-mandated-robo-gf  asked:

You are aware that globally communism has killed more than the Holocaust right?

Nope, that’s historical revisionism used to excuse Nazi warcrimes on the Eastern front and slaughter of Jewish people and partisans by Nazi sympathizing governments. 

 It’s not uncommon for those statistics to come directly from Nazi propaganda.  There are other common statistical bullshit as well, such as blaming the Soviets for Soviets who died in WWII fighting Nazis, deaths that should be attributed to the Nazi invasions, counting Nazis as “victims”, or assuming that 50s China should have had longer life expediencies than 1990s UK.  Some of the numbers attributed to Stalin are so high he would have had to kill the entire population of the Soviet Union.

But let’s specifically talk about this myth regarding the Holocaust, the Soviet Union, WWII and the notion of “double genocide”.

The Communists killed more Nazis than anyone in WWII, stopped the Nazis from being able to take the rest of Europe, including the UK, and actively armed aided Jewish resistances as well as other anti-Nazi resistance movements, the Soviets killed Hitler, and a multitude of other actions that took down the Nazis.  As part of denying the crucial role that the Soviet Union played in defeating Nazism, Western capitalists and European Nazi sympathizers needed to insist the Soviet Union was worse and therefore not praiseworthy.  The US also sheltered Nazis, brought Nazi warcriminals to the US, hid evidence of warcriminals, and used Nazis as spies against the Soviets after WWII, so the narrative that the Soviets were worse pops up to excuse to the US government who was utilizing Nazi warcriminals to get an edge against the Soviets.

But there’s also a specificly antisemitic narrative that has been pushed since WWII wherein Nazis and rightwingers in Eastern Europe tried to blame Jewish people for starting WWII and insisted that Jewish people had committed (fictional, maliciously false) crimes against gentiles in Eastern Europe and therefore “deserved” murder.  Typically here, communist and Jewish are conflated regardless of the politics of the Jewish people involved, Jewish living conditions under the Soviet Union, or anything to do with the Soviet government (other than Soviet anti-Nazism).

The myth of “double genocide” serves to try to rehabilitate the image of collaborators and murderers of Jewish people in Eastern Europe.  A good example is the rightwing Ukrainian government that considers known Nazi supporters and murderers of Jewish people (and murderers of ethnic Poles) as “victims” of communism.  Here’s a quote about how the “double genocide” myth functions in regards to Lithuanian history:

Claims that Jews committed genocide against Lithuanians had begun in June, 1941, when pro-Nazi Lithuanians spread rumors that Jews had deported Lithuanians to the Soviet Union, that Jewish snipers had fired on Lithuanian civilians, and that Jews had drawn up lists of Lithuanians for death squads to execute. This adaptation of the Nazi myth that Jews had “stabbed the nation in the back” helped to assuage the Lithuanian sense of inferiority, resulting from their occupation by Poland for twenty years before Stalin invaded in 1940, and their holding out for only eight hours before handing the Memel territory back to Hitler’s Germany.

Rightwing Lithuanians began to blame the Jews for the Soviet invasion. “Jew” meant “Communist,” “Communist” meant “Jew,” they were “one gang of bastards,” according to Lithuanian Activist Front propaganda distributed before, during and after the German invasion. When even the Nazis expressed shock at the barbarity Lithuanians used in massacring Jews at the Lietukis garage in Kaunas (June 27th, 1941), it was explained that some of the perpetrators had lost family members during the Soviet deportations. When the tide of war turned and Germany pulled back from Stalingrad, Germans in Vilnius and Kaunas blamed the Jews both for the defeat and for starting World War II.

If you have something specific to talk about that isn’t reguritated Nazi propaganda, go for it.

I’m not saying that no Communist government ever, or no Soviets ever, did anything bad, but this specific mythos is absolutely rooted in disgusting rightwing and Nazi lies.

PS: Killing Nazis is good and is not genocide.  “Nazi” isn’t an ethnic group, it’s a political ideology that calls for the murder of millions.



He awoke in a bed during the darkest of eve
Surrounded by the prettiest walls he ever did see
Four corners perfectly angled at ninety degrees
With latches on windows for one’s own safety
How he arrived in this position he could not recall
But the whitest of white radiated from these walls
And suicide is something that is not mentioned here
For fear those will not adhere their warnings’ sneers
From across the hall he heard the sounds of anguish
By another man who had been subdued and languished
People screaming and running down the halls can be seen
Like children who were given obscene doses of caffeine
Women tearing shades and men breaking frames
Punching holes in walls and tossing board games
A woman swallowed a rook and a man took the Queen
And shoved it in his eye so he could not see the scene
On a television set that was hanging on a wall
Before the man shattered the screen with a baseball
Supervisors had to separate the brawl on the floor
Before Hitler and Stalin started another war
Of course these men were not actually present
But in a place like this one’s mind can reinvent
The strongest of patients took apart white kitchen sinks
And linked the pipes together so no one could drink
The remainder of the faucets they smacked into shrinks
Who ran away as fast as those on ice skating rinks
Therapy according to the clock must be in session
A steady progression to relieve others’ aggressions
A compression of confessions set in one period of time
Is thought to leave impressions on one’s fragile mind
Because the longer suppressed the more obsessions can rise
Into stages of depression, anxiety, and or demise
Tucked under sheets and strapped to the metal
This poor man’s heart settled as he stared at the petals
From flowers in pictures of meant to relieve the tension
Of those caught in ascension of their selfish conventions
And the bell he used to signal his nurse had fell
Off of the shelf and away from his cell
Where it feels like hell if one can imagine the felling
Where all the yells can never nurture the healing
In a place like this where one is supposed to reclaim
The mind he slowly lost each and every passing day
Can lead one more insane and without a finger to blame
Except for those doctors who are critically acclaim
To talk to their patients who say they are lost
And then ruin them further with medicine at all cost
So quick to label and diagnose are these white-coated men
No wonder people are crazier then when they first began
To seek help and refuge but how quickly things turn awry
By others opinions that do not nor ever will comply
And finally this lady has entered his room
Bloomed to perfection in her nurse’s costume
He loomed over the metal with doom and such gloom
When he saw in her hand the solution to consume
A life which he thought was never as bad
As the doctors made it seem as if he never had  
And once they grab you they never let you go
As they feed more medicine to slowly eat your soul
But now he cringed as he saw the syringe
And thought back to those days when he used to binge
On beverages which made him happier than a fox
Assigned to guard a henhouse unwatched and unlocked
And so his body sprung up and he tore the bonds that held
His swelled body in place like a turtle stuck in its shell
His rejection of the injection went soundly with a twist
As he tore the needle out and stabbed the nurse in the wrist
He ran as fast as he could barefoot down the halls
Past the security and the kitchen and the white bathroom stalls
He saw freedom through a door but sadly fell short
When he was shot in the leg like a hunter and his sport
The sounds of car horns and trucks quickly disappeared
As he was carried away back to the bed that he feared


Shostakovich - Symphony no. 2 in B Major, “To October”

This symphony isn’t very popular compared to his others, most likely because of the chorus [since music requiring larger forces are less often programmed], and specifically because it’s text is Soviet propaganda. But also, because of how weird it is. The music is a shocking difference from the first. Instead of thin chamber textures with lyrical whimsical melodies, we get a dulled full bodied orchestra layering polyphonic scales over each other like dizzying waves of sound. The end of the symphony is a clearer, conventionally tonal choral praise for Lenin and the Bolshevik Revolution, and the supposed good years to follow. However, the symphony seemed too non-conventional, too experimental, and because later Stalin’s Party didn’t approve of experiments in music, the symphony quickly fell out of favor. Ironically at its premiere, the audience who were enthusiastic with support for the recent revolution, enjoyed the unique atmospheric orchestral sections but felt cold to the over emotional choral section. Cheap sentimentality. So yes, combined with that history, the expense for the large orchestra, and the outdated text, this symphony doesn’t feel relevant enough to perform. Though I have to say, it does show two major things. The first was that Shostakovich had quickly become a composer who was ready to push limits, considering this work came only three years after the premiere of his first symphony. The second is that this is a clear example of the direction 20th century Russian music was going [think of Prokofiev’s early music as well, or perhaps the futurist music of Nikolai Roslavets] before Stalin and The Party began censoring art.

This work is one movement divided into four sections:

1. Largo

2. [quarter note = 152]

3. Poco meno mosso. Allegro molto.

4. Chorus: “To October!” [Text by Alexander Bezymensky]

Friendly reminder that Nazism is not comparable to anything other than Nazism.

There may be a plausible way to remove or somehow avoid people dying under Communism as it can take different forms, and still have some semblance of it’s doctrine for example. But if you take ethnic cleansing and the superiority complex away from Nazism, it wouldn’t be Nazism because it’s core tenets are rooted in hate. It is inherently evil.

Communism is not a “genocidal” idealogy/political stance. That would mean “targeting a specific group or groups for extermination.” Karl Marx has never advocated for murdering innocent people. However, Hitler has. And Nazism is literally defined as “an aggressive political and militaristic form of government including the use of international deceit and expansionism, the arbitrary suspension of the rule of law, eugenics or genocide.”

What happens with Communism is that the wrong, greedy, asshole unfit to be a leader rises to power, makes idiot choices and screws things over for everyone else that it leads to starvation, etc. And I’m in no way defending or sympathetic of these nasty dictators, nor attempting to downplay the tragedies allowed to occur under their rule.

There’s just a vast world of difference between a system that’s resulted in people’s deaths because it has failed (Communism) and a system that resulted in excess deaths because it succeeded (Nazism). No matter who’s leading the charge, the end goal of Nazism will always be to kill people. Purposely. That is the difference.

You can be a Communist or agree with some Communist policies without worshipping the USSR and assholes like Stalin or Mao. (People like this are called “Tankies” and no one really likes them, anyway.) This whataboutery is not at all useful and only impedes meaningful discussion. We share a common enemy right now and should be focusing on how to handle it.

Also, just because Antifa has some Communist members does not make it a Communist movement. It certainly doesn’t mean the Nazis are right or justified. With a group that large, there’s bound to be people of varied political spectrums and opinions. False equivalency.

You can hate Communism and Nazism without pretending they are the same or two sides of one coin. They can both just be bad and wrong on their own merits without needing to make inept comparisons. There has never been anything like the Nazis. The closest I would say is the situation in North Korea.

We should be able to say and unianimously agree that “Fascism is bad” without needing to bring up other things that detract from the seriousness of such a statement. Saying “this specific thing sucks a lot right now” is not implying other things don’t suck or never suck jfc.

If you can’t simply admit “yeah, Nazis are not good™” and have to interject or deflect with some other group to play devil’s advocate, I’m seriously wondering what kind of agenda you have and you’re definitely part of the problem.

anonymous asked:

hot take: much of what draws people to Trotskyism is the same as much of the draw for Maoism: a non-Stalinist (post-Stalinist?) take on the Marxist-Leninist tradition. (obvs there are very real differences between trots and maoists, but one of the big draws is the notion that they come from a history of working revolutions that aren't the stalinist ussr)

trotskyism is a total rejection of marxism-leninism, being not exactly post- but rather pre-ML and having a claim to existence and some degree of revolutionary cred before stalin, which plays into their mythology of the great soviet tragedy with trotsky and his followers as the primary freedom fighters against and ultimate victims of Evil Stalinism. i think that means it has a very different draw than maoism which is more of a post-ML tendency and relies to some extent on taking marxism-leninism seriously (every trotskyist i’ve ever known has referred to mao and maoism as “stalinist”) because it’s an immanent critique of it. the usual phrase i see thrown around these days is that maoism is a “continuity and rupture” with marxism-leninism, and i think that’s a good way to put it. also i think maoism comes across as far more controversial because “chairman mao” can be said to have “held power” and single-handedly killed 80 trillion innocent people whereas “the prophet trotsky” is easier to support because he’s said to not have that kind of baggage since he’s just taken as a sort of revolutionary critic that was unfairly sidelined by mean ole joe stalin.

anyway i think you’re pretty much right about trotskyism, which is very easy to support, but i don’t think marxism-leninism-maoism has that kind of draw at all

anonymous asked:

Why do you support Stalin?

Before addressing your question, we’d like to point out that our ‘support’ of Stalin, or any other relevant figure within Marxist history, is not based on the dogmatic upholding of every view set to stone by these people but rather acknowledging their faults, achievements, and how their actions shaped the ideological line we uphold today.

Stalin played a crucial role in developing Marxism-Leninism in the Soviet Union, in particularly overseeing the transition of state capitalism, as enabled by Lenin with the NEP, into a socialist state. This transition was accompanied by mass scale industrialisation and collectivisation of agriculture on a record time, in part influenced by the rising aggression of fascist states and the general concern of a future war between these states, and the Soviet Union. It goes without saying that there were several contradictions in the economic aspects of the Soviet Union to actually recognise it as a socialist state, and Stalin, as Mao pointed out, departed Marxist-Leninist dialectics when declaring that all class antagonisms and bourgeois elements in the Soviet Union had been eradicated.

Through Stalin’s leadership and the CPSU (b), we saw the Soviet Union struggling mostly on its own against a massive fascist threat, suffer heavy casualties, yet destroy Nazi Germany and liberate Europe from fascism as well aiding nations in Asia against Imperial Japan.

And despite contradictions and the party’s organised resistance to change and anti-careerist measures, Stalin did his best to maintain the Soviet Union on the path towards socialism, to a workers democracy.


A Clear and Present Danger.

Like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini before him and yes, even Vladimir Putin, Donald trump doesn’t just satisfy five of the Diagnostic Criteria for those suffering from “Narcissistic Personality Disorder,”, he meets ALL the criteria.

1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements.

2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.

3. Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions).

4. Requires excessive admiration.

5. Has a sense of entitlement (i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations).

6. Is interpersonally exploitative (i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends).

7. Lacks empathy, is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.

8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her.

9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.


Russian couple reunited after 60 years apart

When Anna Kozlov caught sight of the elderly man clambering out of a car in her home village of Borovlyanka in Siberia, she stopped dead in her tracks, convinced her eyes were playing tricks.

There, in front of her, was Boris, the man she had fallen in love with and married 60 years earlier. The last time she had seen him was three days after their wedding, when she kissed him goodbye and sent him off to rejoin his Red Army unit.

By the time he returned, Anna was gone, consigned by Stalin’s purges to internal exile in Siberia with the rest of her family as an enemy of the people. They left no forwarding address.

Frantic, Boris tried everything he could to find his young bride, but it was no good. She was gone.

Now, more than half a century later, they were reunited, an extraordinary coincidence leading them both to return to their home village on the very same day.

“I thought my eyes were playing games with me,” Anna said. “I saw this familiar looking man approaching me, his eyes gazing at me. My heart jumped. I knew it was him. I was crying with joy.”

Now 80 years old, Boris had returned to visit his parents’ grave. As he stepped out of the car, he looked up to see Anna standing by her old house, where they had lived for the few days after the wedding.

“I ran up to her and said: ‘My darling, I’ve been waiting for you for so long. My wife, my life…’”

They stayed up all night, talking about everything that had happened to them and the cruel circumstances that tore them apart. They met when he was secretary of the Young Communists and had to make a speech in the village.

Afterwards, she was standing there in a circle of friends, but he had eyes only for her. Her father had been purged by Stalin before the war for refusing to work in a collective farm, but Boris did not care. She was too beautiful for words. “I loved her and would always defend her,” he recalled.

So the romance blossomed. When he came home from the front, she was always there, waiting. In 1946, they married. It was a hasty wedding; there was no time for anything else and they could not afford anything grand in those hard years after the war.

Three days later, he had to return to his unit. “We kissed goodbye - but I never expected we wouldn’t see each other for more than half a century,” Anna said.

A little while later, the state caught up with her. Like her father, she was branded an enemy of the people and forced with the rest of her family into internal exile in Siberia.

“I threatened to commit suicide rather than go because I couldn’t live without him,” she said, “but in the end I was forced to go. It was the most miserable time of my life.”

On his return, Boris was distraught. “She was always waiting for me when I came home, but this time there was no sign of her,” he said. “Nobody knew where they were, or what had happened to Anna. That’s how we lost any track of each other”.

In their new village, Anna’s mother resolved that the girl should remarry. She told her that Boris had remarried. “She said he had forgotten about me - that’s why no letters came.

“I didn’t believe it and I longed for him so much. But one day I got back home from work at a timber plant and my mum had burned all his earlier letters, poems and pictures - including our wedding photographs.

“She told me this other man was coming to meet me - and that I should go out with him, and if I was lucky, he’d marry me. I burst into tears and rushed into the yard. The world turned black for me. I wanted to die and I got a clothes line and went into the hayloft intending to hang myself.

“My mother came in and slapped me in the face and told me not to be so stupid. She persuaded me to go out with this man, Nefed, and gradually he and my mother persuaded me that this was where my future lay.”

Boris, too, finally gave in and re-married. He became a writer, penning a book dedicated to the woman he’d married as a young soldier but only ever spent three nights with.

In time, their respective spouses died. With the demise of the Soviet Union, Anna was once more able to travel home. Then came the chance reunion. “I felt the same when we met last year,” Boris said. “I couldn’t take my eyes off her. Yes I had loved other women when we were separated. But she was the true love of my life.”

He suggested they marry again. Anna resisted, but says he talked her round. “What’s the point, I said, we can just live together they rest of our lives? But he insisted. I never thought I’d be a bride at my age but it was my happiest wedding.

“Since we found each other again, I swear we haven’t had a single quarrel. We’ve been parted for so long and who knows how much is left for us, so we just don’t want to lose time on arguing.”

anonymous asked:

who would win in a fist fight: john cena, or josef stalin?

Stalin. Before the fight the NKVD would take John Cena away and torture him, convincing him to throw the fight lest his family is taken away and sent to the gulags.