I haven't read that one, just Montefiore (Court of the Red Tsar) and now on this Kotkin one. Fascinating figure from any angle.
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:07 (seven years ago) link
An excellent book about the "team" or "gang" dynamic of the inner circle of power within The Bolsheviks is Fitzpatrick's On Team Stalin, which I'll probably read again while waiting for the 2nd Kotkin volume - which he seems to be endlessly fucking about with.
― calzino, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:26 (seven years ago) link
I read her Russian Revolution book twice, because it is a classic.
― calzino, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:28 (seven years ago) link
in Deutscher’s hands, Stalin is a monster—but he is not simply a monster and Deutscher tried to understand Stalin’s motives. “It is not necessary to assume that he acted from sheer cruelty or lust for power,” Deutscher wrote in his biography. “He may be given the dubious credit of the sincere conviction that what he did served the interests of the revolution and that he alone interpreted those interests aright.”
ideology is the handmaiden to atrocity
― Mordy, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:35 (seven years ago) link
Autocrats act to strengthen their own position, in part by seeking to strengthen their nation's power and government's stability. The two aims, both the personal and national, become hopelessly entangled. Stalin's actions can be seen in either light and to a degree the resulting interpretations of his power-seeking and self-protection will be both correct and incorrect simultaneously.
The purges and show trials are a good example of this. They solidified his personal power, but because he and his inner circle were the government, they also solidified the government's power and stability. This unchallenged power was used to full effect during WWII.
― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:36 (seven years ago) link
it is pretty funny that during the military purge he told Marshal Budionny - who was a bit of an eejit, “Don’t worry: they’re only arresting the clever ones”
― calzino, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:42 (seven years ago) link
one of kotkin's insights produced by access to the soviet records is that behind closed doors stalin and lenin talked like they did to the public - they believed everything they said. it's pretty clear as well that terminating the NEP was entirely an ideological act and presumably if you are interested in strengthening a nation and stability you don't starve millions of people in a misguided pursuit of true communism. the nazis diverted support and money from the frontlines to the death camps late in the war; which isn't to say that they could've beaten the allies if they had their priorities in order but again ideology is what animates the greatest atrocities. to kill millions of people you have to believe in something that makes their deaths worthwhile.
The interviewer asked “What that comes down to is saying that had the radiant tomorrow actually been created, the loss of fifteen, twenty million people might have been justified?”Eric Hobsbawm, who died yesterday aged 95, replied instantly; “Yes”
Eric Hobsbawm, who died yesterday aged 95, replied instantly; “Yes”
― Mordy, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:45 (seven years ago) link
Lets never have ideology then. That's good.
― xyzzzz__, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:05 (seven years ago) link
Ideology created the government Stalin ruled and ideology gave it whatever legitimacy it had, so that starving millions of people in the name of that ideology can be seen as a perverse effect of a practical imperative: not to undermine the very ideological foundation the government stood upon. Our own liberal-democratic ideology condemns this as antithetical to good government, but we do not threaten our ideological underpinning by making this condemnation, whereas the Stalinist government would have seen major concessions to bourgeois liberalism as tantamount to overthrowing themselves.
― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:28 (seven years ago) link
whew who knew it was so easy
― Mordy, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:54 (seven years ago) link
and the world will be as one
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:56 (seven years ago) link
fp'd for mindcrime
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:56 (seven years ago) link
er thoughtcrime
shit
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:57 (seven years ago) link
^^^secret queensrÿche fan
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:58 (seven years ago) link
Totting up deaths is pretty fucking gross u guys
― virginity simple (darraghmac), Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:07 (seven years ago) link
What u should do is work out the average worth of the dead in each group
― virginity simple (darraghmac), Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:08 (seven years ago) link
https://www.iraqbodycount.org/
there is an argument for sites like this though, but measuring the death tolls of atrocities like you are playing trump cards is bollocks.
― calzino, Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:11 (seven years ago) link
against each other*
― calzino, Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:12 (seven years ago) link
Nonetheless, defending Stalin is stupid.
― Bill Teeters (Tom D.), Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:20 (seven years ago) link
captain save-a-stalin over here
― officer sonny bonds, lytton pd (mayor jingleberries), Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:29 (seven years ago) link
Easy from over there tbf
― virginity simple (darraghmac), Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:37 (seven years ago) link
on the one hand:
Ideology created the government Stalin ruled and ideology gave it whatever legitimacy it had, so that starving millions of people in the name of that ideology can be seen as a perverse effect of a practical imperative: not to undermine the very ideological foundation the government stood upon. Our own liberal-democratic ideology condemns this as antithetical to good government, but we do not threaten our ideological underpinning by making this condemnation, whereas the Stalinist government would have seen major concessions to bourgeois liberalism as tantamount to overthrowing themselves.― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
on the other:
corbynbro @no_talent_shan Feb 14Replying to @investmntwankerpeace negotiations have stalled after I repeatedly asked "which one was Stalin? the hot one?" in a diplomatic meeting
peace negotiations have stalled after I repeatedly asked "which one was Stalin? the hot one?" in a diplomatic meeting
― xyzzzz__, Wednesday, 5 April 2017 20:23 (seven years ago) link
This is sorta interesting:
If you think Stalin was a "dictator" please read this thread on how he fought to democratize the government of the Soviet Union.— Chris Aaron☭ (@EternalBolshie) August 19, 2017
― xyzzzz__, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:14 (six years ago) link
i mean i buy that at one point in time he might've been interested in democratization but c'mon gmafb
― Mordy, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:19 (six years ago) link
What Mordy said.
― Le Bateau Ivre, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:21 (six years ago) link
From that thread its more than "at one point".
― xyzzzz__, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:23 (six years ago) link
buried the lede -
The purges were good and correct. Class traitors, careerists and double dealers have no business in a communist party. pic.twitter.com/1oC5Uteryy— Chris Aaron☭ (@EternalBolshie) August 19, 2017
― louie mensch (milo z), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:27 (six years ago) link
that thread literally has the poster defend the great purge in which estimates suggest 600,000 people were killed
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:27 (six years ago) link
i think it's important to balance what he actually did with cherry picked dalliances in speeches/texts since actions spoke louder than words. xxp
― Mordy, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:28 (six years ago) link
fucking quit it julio
― mark s, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:28 (six years ago) link
i guess it's useful to know who the tankies among us are tho since that's important context when discussing politics on other threads
― Mordy, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:29 (six years ago) link
neo-stalinism boggles my mind. read a fucking book for christ sake.
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:29 (six years ago) link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOzYT4lcXuM
― the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:30 (six years ago) link
or like talk to someone who lived in the DDR or the Soviet Union or Yugoslavia, or Cuba. Jesus
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:30 (six years ago) link
we went through Cuba when El Jefe died.
― the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:31 (six years ago) link
oh i recall, shouldn't have mentioned it haha
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:32 (six years ago) link
The 20th century didn't invent propaganda, but it did expand the number of highly trained practitioners and the number of venues for delivering it by a couple orders of magnitude. Stalin had a small army of devoted propagandists to rationalize and justify his actions and transform them into shining virtues. There isn't an especially large market (or appetite) for that stuff today, but it still exists and for those who are susceptible, it still does its job.
― A is for (Aimless), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:38 (six years ago) link
concur. I have tankie friends and I treat them like I treat Trump-voting family - smile, nod, change the subject, they're too stupid to be argued with
― she carries a torch. two torches, actually (Joan Crawford Loves Chachi), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:41 (six years ago) link
my left wing pals tend to rip the pish out of tankies. It's usually the best way to deal with them other than just ignoring them.
― starving street dogs of punk rock (Odysseus), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:45 (six years ago) link
Hey all I genuinely found some of that stuff in the thread interesting - sourced and commented on. Yes I saw all of the apologist crap below that but there was an account of stuff that you don't usually hear from that era. I haven't had the energy to engage with but I don't mean to cause offense, and obviously I am a communist sympathiser.
In the end its just a link though.
― xyzzzz__, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:49 (six years ago) link
the 1936 constitution was infamous for bearing no resemblance whatever to the polity it attached to: i know you know this stuff when you haven't got yr adolescent edgelord hat on, trotsky wrote about it in books you lent me
historian zhukov is a well known reactionary nuisance
― mark s, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:56 (six years ago) link
Have never met or interacted with a 'tankie' in my life, tbh.
― Wewlay Bewlay (Tom D.), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:59 (six years ago) link
me neither, know a ton of trots mind you
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 24 August 2017 18:01 (six years ago) link
One problem with relentless propaganda, as we all can verify from personal observation of politics, is that every action and every decision is spun as equally excellent in its effect and profoundly moral in its constitution. Or, from the opposition pov, all are equally horrifying and morally bankrupt. They all get put through the same mill. In a landscape so flattened and robbed of distinctive features, it is very easy to get lost.
― A is for (Aimless), Thursday, 24 August 2017 18:02 (six years ago) link
almost* prefer tankies to trots - somehow they seem more honest to me? * but not really
― Mordy, Thursday, 24 August 2017 18:02 (six years ago) link
ugh, in the mid-90s i knew a whole gang of the pseudo-marxists in the RCP, which then became the libertarian take-churn machine spiked
(tho to be fair i don't know if they stayed with it all the way down the road)
(lol a french woman i know who had an affair w/one of them said he had the tiniest penis she had ever encountered)
― mark s, Thursday, 24 August 2017 18:04 (six years ago) link
One problem with relentless propaganda, as we all can verify from personal observation of politics, is that every action and every decision is spun as equally excellent in its effect and profoundly moral in its constitution. Or, from the opposition pov, all are equally horrifying and morally bankrupt. They all get put through the same mill. In a landscape so flattened and robbed of distinctive features, it is very easy to get lost.― A is for (Aimless), Thursday, August 24, 2017 6:02 PM (forty-seven seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― A is for (Aimless), Thursday, August 24, 2017 6:02 PM (forty-seven seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
OTM. It's "the single greatest decision, the best action, tremendously good" vs "Fake news. Sad!"
― Le Bateau Ivre, Thursday, 24 August 2017 18:08 (six years ago) link
the first woman i ever loved is one of the most prominent trots in scotland (not tommy sheridan)
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 24 August 2017 18:12 (six years ago) link
i know you know this stuff when you haven't got yr adolescent edgelord hat on, trotsky wrote about it in books you lent me
OK, sure - certain other accounts (like that twitter thread) do pass me by, and that's a minefield (as er my revival clearly demonstrates), but I like to balance out from the way this stuff is written about by most ppl in the UK where the agenda behind it is to maintain the status quo in UK politics (Applebaum, Sebag Montefiore, people like that).
― xyzzzz__, Thursday, 24 August 2017 18:13 (six years ago) link
(not tommy sheridan)
ron howard voice: it was t
― mark s, Thursday, 24 August 2017 18:18 (six years ago) link