Re: Young Liberal Fascist (XII)

[Kevin Cabral <kcabral@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 10 Feb 1996 Godenas@xxxxxxx 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





     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

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