Stalin is trending

User avatar
kidoftheblackhole
Posts: 318
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Stalin is trending

Post by kidoftheblackhole » Thu Jul 19, 2018 5:18 pm

Hey BP, we should hit up the Left Forum some year.

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Stalin is trending

Post by blindpig » Thu Jul 19, 2018 9:12 pm

kidoftheblackhole wrote:
Thu Jul 19, 2018 5:18 pm
Hey BP, we should hit up the Left Forum some year.
You think? I've gotten the impression that's a bit of a circus. NYC, yes? Or am I thinking of something else? Or is that why you want to go? Is someone gonna propose starting the party we desperately need? I dunno but am proly 'in'.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
kidoftheblackhole
Posts: 318
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Stalin is trending

Post by kidoftheblackhole » Thu Jul 19, 2018 9:47 pm

blindpig wrote:
Thu Jul 19, 2018 9:12 pm
kidoftheblackhole wrote:
Thu Jul 19, 2018 5:18 pm
Hey BP, we should hit up the Left Forum some year.
You think? I've gotten the impression that's a bit of a circus. NYC, yes? Or am I thinking of something else? Or is that why you want to go? Is someone gonna propose starting the party we desperately need? I dunno but am proly 'in'.
I don't know all of the particulars but I do know that a large swath of like minded leftists attend (BAR, MLToday, etc). Sentiment seems to be growing towards "an independent left party" -- and from all sides. Perhaps it is premature, but maybe not.

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Stalin is trending

Post by blindpig » Thu Jul 19, 2018 10:49 pm

kidoftheblackhole wrote:
Thu Jul 19, 2018 9:47 pm
blindpig wrote:
Thu Jul 19, 2018 9:12 pm
kidoftheblackhole wrote:
Thu Jul 19, 2018 5:18 pm
Hey BP, we should hit up the Left Forum some year.
You think? I've gotten the impression that's a bit of a circus. NYC, yes? Or am I thinking of something else? Or is that why you want to go? Is someone gonna propose starting the party we desperately need? I dunno but am proly 'in'.
I don't know all of the particulars but I do know that a large swath of like minded leftists attend (BAR, MLToday, etc). Sentiment seems to be growing towards "an independent left party" -- and from all sides. Perhaps it is premature, but maybe not.
Seems like last year or one before there was a big brouhaha over Zizek, who some participants were celebrating, to the dismay of people who were sane(at that time anyway). It just past, haven't seen any reports but I may not as am on the outs with certain NYC Maoists who previously provided great detail.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Stalin is trending

Post by blindpig » Wed Nov 21, 2018 2:19 pm

Thirteen quotes of Stalin - the leader of the crisis of capitalism
11/17/2018 68

Any social system has its “birthmarks”, problems that cannot be solved within its framework. Capitalism is no exception. No matter how his wrapper changes, its essence does not change. Therefore, reading the words of clever people of the past, said about capitalism, we see what they say about today. The words of Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin about the crisis of capitalism sound extremely relevant ...


And remembering which way the West chose to get out of the large-scale crisis of the beginning of the twentieth century, one inevitably wants to study all this in more detail.

After all, then they started a war. They are preparing it now.

Source: lib.ru

(the author is a selection of quotes V.Kuvshinov)

Quote 1

"Remember the state of affairs in capitalist countries 21/2 years ago. The growth of industrial production and trade in almost all countries of capitalism. The growth of production of raw materials and food in almost all agrarian countries. The halo around the USA as the country of the most full-blooded capitalism. Victory songs about" prosperity ". Slavery before the dollar. Glorification in honor of the new technology, in honor of capitalist rationalization. Announcement of the era of" recovery "of capitalism and the unshakable strength of capitalist stabilization." "Noise and din about the" inevitable death "of the Land of the Soviets, about the" inevitable collapse "of the USSR.
So it was yesterday.

What is the picture now?

Now - the economic crisis in almost all industrial countries of capitalism. Now - the agricultural crisis in all agrarian countries. Instead of "prosperity" - the poverty of the masses and a huge increase in unemployment. Instead of the rise of agriculture - the ruin of the vast masses of the peasantry. Illusions about the omnipotence of capitalism in general, the omnipotence of North American capitalism in particular, are crumbling. Victory songs in honor of the dollar and capitalist rationalization are becoming weaker. The pessimistic howls about the “mistakes” of capitalism are becoming ever stronger. And the "universal" noise about the "inevitable death" of the USSR is replaced by a "universal" angry hiss about the need to punish "this country", which dares to develop its economy when the crisis prevails around.

Such is the picture now.

It turned out exactly as the Bolsheviks said about two or three years ago.
The Bolsheviks said that the growth of technology in capitalist countries, the growth of productive forces and capitalist rationalization, with limited living standards for millions of workers and peasants, should inevitably lead to a cruel economic crisis. The bourgeois press laughed at the "original prophecy" of the Bolsheviks. The right deviators disassociated themselves from the Bolshevik forecast, replacing the Marxist analysis of liberal chatter about "organized capitalism." And what happened in practice? It turned out as the Bolsheviks said.
These are the facts.

("The Political Report of the Central Committee to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (b)" t.12 p.235.)

Quote 2

The basis of economic crises of overproduction, their cause lies in the very system of the capitalist economy. The basis of the crisis lies in the contradiction between the social nature of production and the capitalist form of appropriating production results. The expression of this basic contradiction of capitalism is the contradiction between the tremendous growth of the productive capacity of capitalism, designed to obtain the maximum capitalist profit, and the relative reduction in effective demand from millions of working people whose capitalists always keep the standard of living at the extreme minimum. To win in competition and squeeze out more profits, capitalists are forced to develop technology, rationalize, strengthen the exploitation of workers and increase the production capacity of their enterprises to the extreme. In order to keep up with each other, all capitalists are forced one way or another to embark on this path of frantic development of production capabilities. But the domestic market and the external market, the purchasing power of the vast masses of workers and peasants, who in the last analysis are the main buyers, remain at a low level. Hence the crises of overproduction. Hence, the well-known results, which recur more or less periodically, by virtue of which the goods remain unsold, production is reduced, unemployment increases, wages decrease and, thus, the contradiction between the level of production and the level of effective demand becomes even more acute. The crisis of overproduction is a manifestation of this contradiction in violent and destructive forms.

(“The Political Report of the Central Committee to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (B.)” V.12 p.243.)

Quote 3

In studying the crisis, the following facts are striking: First of all, the following facts:
1. The current economic crisis is a crisis of overproduction. This means that more goods are produced than the market can absorb. This means that the manufactory, fuel, factory-made products, food items are produced more than the main consumers can buy for cash, i.e. the masses, whose incomes remain low. And since the purchasing power of the masses under capitalism remains at a minimally low level, the capitalists leave the “surplus” of goods, manufactory, grain, etc., in warehouses or even destroy them in order to keep prices high, reduce production, count workers, and the masses are forced to live in misery because too many goods are produced.

2. The current crisis is the first post-war global economic crisis. It is a world crisis not only in the sense that it covers all or almost all industrial countries of the world, and even France, which systematically injected billions of reparation payments in Germany into its body, could not escape the well-known depression, which should, according to all data, go to a crisis. It is a world crisis in the sense that the industrial crisis coincided with the agricultural crisis, covering the production of all types of raw materials and food in the main agricultural countries of the world.

3. The current world crisis is developing unevenly, despite its universal nature, hitting certain countries at different times and with different strengths. The industrial crisis began first in Poland, Romania, and the Balkans. He deployed there throughout the past year. There were clear signs of the beginning of the agricultural crisis already at the end of 1928 in Canada, in the USA, in Argentina, in Brazil, in Australia. For all this period the industry of the USA goes uphill. By mid-1929, industrial production in the USA reached almost a record height. It was only in the second half of 1929 that the turnaround began, and then a rapid crisis of industrial production unfolded, dropping the USA to the 1927 level. Following this is the industrial crisis in Canada, in Japan. Then come the bankruptcies and the crisis in China and the colonial countries, where the crisis is aggravated by the fall in silver prices and where the crisis of overproduction is combined with the destruction of the peasant economy brought by the exploitation of the feudal lords and excessive taxes until complete exhaustion. As for Western Europe, there the crisis begins to come into force only at the beginning of this year, and not everywhere with the same force, and France, even during this period, continues to show growth in industrial production.

(“The Political Report of the Central Committee to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (B.)” V.12 p.237.)

Quote 4

The original relationship established between the victorious countries and Germany could be depicted as a pyramid, on top of which America, France, England, etc., are sitting like a master, with Jung’s plan in their hands, with the inscription: “Pay!” and at the bottom of Germany is sprawled out of control and forced to pull all the forces out of itself in order to fulfill the order to pay billions in indemnities. Do you want to know what it is? This is the "spirit of Locarno." To think that such a situation can be a gift for world capitalism is to understand nothing in life. To think that the German bourgeoisie will be able to pay 20 billion marks in the next 10 years, and the German proletariat, living under the double yoke of its “own” and “alien” bourgeoisie, will let the German bourgeoisie squeeze out of these 20 billion without serious fighting and upheavals, means go crazy Let the German and French politicians pretend that they believe in this miracle. We Bolsheviks do not believe in miracles.

(“The Political Report of the Central Committee to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (B.)” V.12 p.249.)

Quote 5

... I talked about the crisis that engulfed all branches of production. But there is one industry that is not captured by the crisis. This industry - the military industry. It grows all the time, despite the crisis. Bourgeois states are furiously arming and rearming. For what? Of course, not for conversation, but for war. And the imperialists need war, since it is the only means for the redistribution of the world, for the redistribution of markets, sources of raw materials, spheres of capital investment.
It is quite clear that in this situation the so-called pacifism is living its last days, the League of Nations is rotting alive, “disarmament projects” fall into the abyss, and conferences on the reduction of naval armaments turn into conferences on renewing and expanding the navy.
This means that the danger of war will grow at an accelerated pace.
Let the Social Democrats talk about pacifism, peace, the peaceful development of capitalism, etc. The experience of social democracy in power in Germany and England shows that pacifism is only a mask necessary to cover the preparation of new wars.

(“The Political Report of the Central Committee to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (B.)” V.12 p.249.)

Quote 6

The growing economic crisis cannot but increase the pressure of the imperialists on the colonies and dependent countries, representing the main markets and raw materials. And indeed, the pressure increases to the last degree. It is a fact that the European bourgeoisie is now at war with “its” colonies in India, in Indochina, in Indonesia, in North Africa.

... The crisis of overproduction in agriculture reached the point that for the sake of maintaining high prices and profits of the bourgeoisie in Brazil 2 million bags of coffee were thrown into the sea, America was drowned instead of coal with corn, in Germany millions of poods of rye were turned into feed for pigs, regarding cotton and wheat, all measures are being taken to reduce the acreage by 10-15 percent.

(“The Political Report of the Central Committee to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (B.)” V.12 p.241.)

Quote 7

... an economic system that does not know what to do with the "surplus" of its production, and is forced to burn them at a time when there is need and unemployment among the masses, hunger and ruin - such a economic system pronounces the death sentence itself.

(“The Political Report of the Central Committee to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (B.)” V.12 p.323.)

Quote 8

It must be admitted that bourgeois economists have become bankrupt in the face of the crisis. Moreover, they have been deprived of even the minimum of the instinct of life, in which their predecessors cannot always be denied. These gentlemen forget that crises cannot be regarded as an accidental phenomenon in the system of capitalist economy. These gentlemen forget that economic crises are the inevitable result of capitalism. These gentlemen forget that crises were born with the birth of the rule of capitalism. For more than a hundred years, periodic economic crises occur, repeating every 12-10-8 and less years. During this period, the bourgeois governments of all ranks and colors, bourgeois leaders of all degrees and abilities, all without exception, tried to try their hand at the subject of "warning" and "destroying" crises. But they all suffered defeat. Were defeated, because you can not prevent or destroy economic crises, while remaining within the framework of capitalism. What's so surprising if the current bourgeois leaders also fail? What is surprising, then, if the measures taken by bourgeois governments lead in fact not to alleviating the crisis, not to alleviating the position of millions of working people, but to new explosions of bankruptcies, to a new wave of unemployment, to absorbing less powerful capitalist associations by stronger capitalist associations?

(“The Political Report of the Central Committee to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (B.)” V.12 p.242.)

Quote 9

Capitalism succeeded somewhat in alleviating the position of industry at the expense of workers — by deepening their exploitation through increasing the intensity of their labor, at the expense of farmers — by pursuing a policy of the lowest prices for the products of their labor, food, and partly for raw materials, at the expense of peasants in the colony and economically weak countries - by further reducing prices for the products of their labor, mainly for raw materials and then for food.

Does this mean that we are dealing with a transition from a crisis to a simple depression, which entails a new rise and flourishing of industry? No, ne means. In any case, at present there are no such data, direct or indirect, that would speak about the upcoming rise of industry in capitalist countries. Moreover, apparently, such data and can not be, at least in the near future. It cannot be, since all those unfavorable conditions continue to act, which do not allow the industry of capitalist countries to rise any more.seriously up. We are talking about the continuing general crisis of capitalism, in the context of which the economic crisis runs, about the chronic underload of enterprises, about chronic mass unemployment, about the intertwining of the industrial crisis with the agricultural crisis, about the absence of a tendency towards any serious renewal of fixed capital etc.

Obviously, we are dealing with a transition from the point of the greatest decline of industry, from the point of greatest industrial crisis - to depression, but not ordinary depression, but to a special kind of depression that does not lead to a new rise and flourish of industry, but does not return its to the point of greatest decline.

("Report to the XVII Congress of the Party on the work of the Central Committee of the CPSU (B.)” V.13 p.290.)

Quote 10

If capitalism could adapt production not to maximize profits, but to systematically improve the material conditions of the masses, if it could pay profits not to satisfy the whims of parasitic classes, not to improve operating methods, not to export capital, the situation of workers and peasants, then there would be no crises. But then capitalism would not be capitalism. To destroy crises, it is necessary to destroy capitalism.

(“The Political Report of the Central Committee to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (B.)” V.12 p.244.)

Quote 11

The current crisis can not be regarded as a simple repetition of old crises. It occurs and unfolds in some new conditions that need to be revealed in order to get a complete picture of the crisis. It is complicated and deepened by a number of special circumstances, without understanding of which it is impossible to get a clear idea of ​​the current economic crisis.
What are these special circumstances?
These special circumstances boil down to the following characteristic facts:
1. The crisis most strongly struck the main country of capitalism, its stronghold, the USA, concentrating in its hands at least half of the total production and consumption of all countries of the world. It is clear that this circumstance cannot but lead to a colossal expansion of the sphere of influence of the crisis, to an aggravation of the crisis and to the accumulation of super-estimated difficulties for world capitalism.

2. In the course of the unfolding of the economic crisis, the industrial crisis of the main capitalist countries did not simply coincide, but intertwined with the agricultural crisis in the agrarian countries, aggravating difficulties and predetermining the inevitability of a general decline in economic activity. Needless to say, the industrial crisis will aggravate the agricultural crisis and the agricultural crisis will delay the industrial crisis, which cannot but lead to a deepening of the economic crisis as a whole.

3. The current capitalism, unlike the old capitalism, is monopolistic capitalism, and this predetermines the inevitability of the struggle of capitalist associations for the preservation of high, monopoly prices for goods, despite overproduction. It is clear that this circumstance, making the crisis especially painful and ruinous for the masses, who are the main consumers of goods, cannot but lead to a dragging out of the crisis, cannot but slow down its resorption.

4. The current economic crisis is unfolding on the basis of the general crisis of capitalism, which arose during the period of the imperialist war, which undermined the foundations of capitalism and facilitated the onset of the economic crisis.

(“The Political Report of the Central Committee to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (B.)” V.12 p.245.)

Quote 12

The current economic crisis in capitalist countries differs from all similar crises, among other things in that it is the longest and longest. If earlier crises were exhausted in 1-2 years, then the current crisis continues for the fifth year already, devastating the economy of capitalist countries year after year and sucking the fat accumulated in previous years out of it. Not surprisingly, this crisis is the worst of all crises.
How can this unprecedentedly protracted nature of the modern industrial crisis be explained?
This is due primarily to the fact that the industrial crisis has seized all capitalist countries without exception, making it difficult for some countries to maneuver at the expense of others.
This is explained, secondly, by the fact that the industrial crisis intertwined with the agrarian crisis, which affected all agricultural and semi-agrarian countries without exception, which could not but complicate and deepen the industrial crisis.
This is explained, thirdly, by the fact that the agrarian crisis intensified during this time and covered all branches of agriculture, including animal husbandry, bringing it to degradation, to moving from machines to manual labor, to replacing a tractor with a horse, to a sharp decline and sometimes a complete rejection of the use of artificial fertilizers, which further prolonged the industrial crisis.

This is explained, fourthly, by the fact that the dominant monopoly cartels in industry are trying to maintain high prices for goods — a circumstance that makes the crisis particularly painful and interferes with the resorption of commodity stocks.
This is finally explained - and this is the main thing - by the fact that the industrial crisis was played out in the conditions of the general crisis of capitalism, when capitalism no longer has and can not have the strength and strength that it had in the main states or in the colonies and dependent countries before the war and the October revolution, when the industry of the capitalist countries inherited from the imperialist war the chronic underloading of enterprises and millions of armies of the unemployed, from which it could no longer free itself.

These are the circumstances that determined the deeply protracted nature of the current industrial crisis.

The same circumstances explain the fact that the crisis was not limited to the sphere of production and trade and also seized the credit system, currency, debt obligations, etc., breaking the traditionally established relations both between individual countries and between social groups in individual countries. .

("Report to the XVII Congress of the Party on the work of the Central Committee of the CPSU (B.)” V.13 p.284.)

Quote 13

There can be no doubt that, in connection with the developing crisis, the struggle for markets, for raw materials, for the export of capital will intensify with each passing month. Means of struggle: customs policy, cheap goods, cheap credit, the regrouping of forces and new military-political alliances, the growth of armaments and the preparation for new imperialist wars, and finally - war.

(“The Political Report of the Central Committee to the XVI Congress of the CPSU (B.)” V.12 p.248.)

https://nstarikov.ru/blog/98227

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Stalin is trending

Post by blindpig » Wed Mar 13, 2019 5:32 pm

In Novosibirsk, put a monument to Stalin

colonelcassad
March 13, 6:00 p.m.

Image

In Novosibirsk, local authorities agreed on the installation of a monument to Stalin.

Novosibirsk authorities gave the go-ahead for the appearance of a monument to Joseph Stalin in the city. On March 13, the artistic council of the Novosibirsk mayor's office agreed on a sketch of a sculptural composition with a bust of the Soviet dictator, which will be installed on Bolshevistskaya Street near the building occupied by the regional committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. The Communist Party represented by the initiators of the installation of the monument promises to complete all the necessary work already for the upcoming Victory Day.
"Eleven people voted in favor, three against, one abstained," the NGS portal quotes the words of Alexey Denisyuk, the head of the initiative group for the installation of sculpture.
According to him, “the issue is resolved,” the matter remains only for the construction work that will be held in the next two months.
Judging by the draft design, the bust of the leader of all times and peoples will be installed on a pedestal, on the sides of which it is supposed to hang plates with the glorification of the dictator in verse and quote from Joseph Stalin himself. However, according to Alexey Denisyuk, the content of the plates is still under discussion.
It is noted that the initiative group has been seeking permission to install the monument to Stalin for several years. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation is ready not only to finance the work on its creation and further maintenance, but also to provide the monument with video surveillance and, if necessary, round-the-clock security.

https://www.znak.com/2019-03-13/v_merii ... ka_stalinu - zinc

Comrades from Novosibirsk write that they plan to have time to open the monument by May 9.

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/4840200.html

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Stalin is trending

Post by blindpig » Thu Apr 04, 2019 2:44 pm

Understanding Stalin V. 2
Stalin Beyond the Myths: Understanding Stalin

by Hugo Turner
August 26, 2015

Dedicated to all those who are hated for fighting for justice

Special Thanks to Dennis Riches for a new edit


Few figures in history have been so thoroughly demonized as Joseph Stalin. He lives in the popular imagination as a bloodthirsty monster. When it comes to Stalin, propaganda takes the place of history in a transparent attempt to demonize socialism and the USSR. We must never again try to change the world, we are told, because it will all inevitably go bad. Tens of millions will die and we will live under conditions of tyranny and poverty.
Quite appropriately, from my perspective, Robert Conquest, the “historian” who made his name defaming the Soviet Union and Stalin, recently died. His death was amusing in its timing for me as it occurred while I was busy studying the history of the Soviet Union from a quite different perspective—one which revealed the undeniable greatness of Stalin.
Robert Conquest, incidentally, provides a perfect example of how and why the history of the Soviet Union has been falsified. Conquest began his career writing anti-Soviet propaganda for British intelligence at the Information Research Department (formerly the Communist Information Bureau) and was so good at it that the CIA brought him to America and financed his work through its fronts. His main sources, by the way, were fascist emigres especially from Ukraine. As anyone familiar with their mentality knows, they are some of the most outrageous liars on the planet. Conquest is responsible for vastly inflating the number of people killed during Stalin’s time from the less than 1 million of reality (according to the now declassified records) to 30 million and eventually to 100 million. It was just a small chapter in the CIA's cultural cold war when hundreds of well-known artists and intellectuals were wittingly and unwittingly employed to spread anti-Soviet propaganda. Although the impact of the CIA on the media is well known in alt-media circles, the CIA impact in academia is a lot less talked about but no less prevalent.
In researching Vietnam earlier this year I discovered that the CIA had funded thousands of books and articles on Vietnam giving the public a completely distorted view of the conflict there. If tiny Vietnam came in for such treatment, I can only imagine to what lengths they went to shape the writing of history of the USSR. Even today the study of the Soviet Union is carried out along the same propagandistic line. Stalin is hated by the capitalist imperialist nations because he built socialism, defeated fascism, helped North Korea and China defeat American imperialism during the Korean War, and oversaw the massive expansion of socialism in both Europe and Asia.

Stalin is hated by the capitalists for obvious reasons. However, he is also hated by treacherous elements on the left, which is why Stalin has had so few defenders. The first attacks came from the exiled Trotsky who was bitterly intent on revenge on both Stalin and the USSR. His version of events was actually trumpeted by the mainstream media at the time who gave this supposed revolutionary turned counter-revolutionary front page coverage and thousands of dollars to slander Stalin and the USSR and predict its imminent collapse. His version of events would become the basis of the popular mythical version of history embodied in Orwell's propaganda classic "Animal Farm" (the CIA financed it, turning it into an animated film with a new ending). Orwell was another paid propagandist of British intelligence, by the way. Orwell's book is appropriately "Orwellian," claiming at the end that the USSR under Stalin had secretly reinstated capitalism. Nothing could be further from the truth of course.
The second major attack on Stalin from supposed communists was launched by Khrushchev in his "Secret Speech." Khrushchev was planning to introduce dangerous new reforms and he needed to attack Stalin in order to carry on a new "Revisionist" line that would prove disastrous. These plans aimed to reverse what Stalin, and before him Lenin, had carried out. Under Gorbachev these attacks would be renewed as his "reforms" managed to destroy the Warsaw bloc, the USSR, and socialism.


This would be a great place to introduce my source and inspiration for the following article, Harpal Brar. It was in his book "Perestroika: The Complete Collapse of Revisionism" that he laid out the this thesis, and I highly recommend you read the book yourself for a great examination of the disastrous policies that led to the collapse of the USSR, policies pursued by the revisionists like Khrushchev and Gorbachev. It also lays out brilliantly the successful policies pursued by Stalin. Stalin turned a backwards war-ravaged nation into a superpower. Regardless of whatever abuse his enemies have heaped upon him, this simple truth remains abundantly clear.
I came across one of Harpal Brar's lectures while reading E.H. Carr's "The Bolshevik Revolution 1917-1923" and I was instantly hooked and subscribed to the Proletarian TV Youtube channel run by the Communist Party of Great Britain--Marxist Leninist or CPGB-ML. They have great lectures on a variety of historical and theoretical topics from a number of people. They impressed me with their resolutely anti-imperialist stance and support for countries like Syria, Venezuela, Novorossia, and North Korea. Harpal Brar is an electrifying public speaker and also quite amusing. He is also an unapologetic defender of Stalin and the Soviet Union.
Basically, these sources aided me quite a bit in beginning to understand the complex theories of MarxismLeninisim and the history of the Soviet Union. Thus when I began to run out of Youtube videos I decided to order some books from the CPGB-ML.Org Website, including Harpal Brar's "Perestroika" and his epic "Trotskyism or Leninism." It is on these books as well as on Kenneth Neil Cameron's "Stalin Man of Contradiction" that I base this account of the Stalin Era. The history that follows owes everything to his brilliant and courageous analysis, although the inevitable mistakes are my own.

Having surveyed Stalin's enemies, the sources of the anti-Stalin myths, the imperialist countries, Trotskyites, and revisionists,and having introduced one of Stalin's defenders Harpal Brar, let me now proceed to present a more accurate view of Stalin and his accomplishments.
First, Stalin built socialism in the USSR. He industrialized the country. He collectivized the agriculture. In order to do this, he smashed the traitors to the USSR both within and without the Communist Party thus securing the gains of the revolution. These factors helped him to lead the USSR to victory against fascism, winning World War II. This victory helped in the spread of world revolution both in Europe and Asia. As the Cold War began, he stood up to US imperialism, helping to inflict the first defeat the US was to suffer. Any one of these accomplishments would surely, objectively speaking, earn Stalin a place as one of the great men of history. However, as we have seen, it is because of these accomplishments that he is instead attacked and demonized. Thus it is time for revolutionaries and anti-imperialists to follow Harpal Brar's example and defend Stalin instead of joining with his enemies in the attack on him. As Brar explains, it is a quite simple equation: our enemies attack Stalin to attack socialism. Conversely, one must defend Stalin in order to defend socialism.

Second, let us examine the situation in the Soviet Union around the time of Lenin's death. The USSR had been devastated first before the revolution during World War I, and then during the civil war when 14 countries waged war on what would become the USSR. During this war, the USSR had been forced to adopt "War Communism," which meant workers were often paid in food and harsh measures were sometimes used in the countryside to keep the grain flowing to the cities. After the war, Lenin had instituted the new economic policy, or NEP, which was meant to be a temporary retreat to capitalism in order to restore trade between the town and country. However, the NEP was only a temporary retreat and Lenin planned to begin the building of socialism. Lenin's vision of the future was for an expansion of collective agriculture, the electrification of the country, and the industrialization of the nation. Unfortunately, he died just as this new phase was beginning and suffered severe ill health in the final two years of his life. Thus Stalin was the one who would successfully carry though these reforms. That is why, incidentally, Stalin never approved of the term “Stalinism.” He saw himself as merely carrying forward Lenin's plans. This view of Stalin as being directly in line with Lenin is not merely Brar's view but also it is confirmed when reading the bourgeoisie historian E.H. Carr who gives a quite detailed examination of Lenin's economic policies in vol. 2 of his 3-volume "Bolshevik Revolution 1917-1923."


Who was Stalin? Stalin was the son of a serf, and life as a serf was practically a form of slavery. He was from Georgia, one of the many nations conquered by the Russian empire. His mother wanted him to become a priest, but he was expelled from the seminary when they discovered he was reading Marx. Although lacking advanced schooling, he educated himself widely, studying Marx and Lenin but also science, and literature. He lived a humble existence even after coming to power. Contrary to myth, he was a brilliant theorist. Reading his writings and speeches, which Brar quotes at length, one is impressed by his ability to convey complex economic or political issues in simple terms the common people could understand. Stalin was quite witty, it should be added, and loved to illustrate his speeches with Russian fables and folklore. He was a tireless revolutionary and a loyal follower of Lenin. He organized strikes, wrote articles, was sent to Siberia, escaped, and played a crucial role in building up the Bolshevik Party. During the Revolution and the civil war, he played an important role. Thus, contrary to mythology, it was no accident that he rose to a prominent position because he had proved himself again and again.

However, in order to actually build socialism in one country Stalin would have to battle two tendencies in the party aiming to derail this goal. First, there was the left opposition of Zinoviev and Trotsky. Trotsky's disagreements stemmed from his theory of permanent revolution which led him into all sorts of mistakes and ultimately into becoming downright counter-revolutionary. Trotsky may become the topic of a future article. He emerges from Harpal Brar's account as a fascinating villain carried away by egotism and ambition into every sort of crime. He is the embodiment of that treacherous breed of leftist who always manages to side with imperialism. Many have done this most recently in their positions on Libya, Syria, and Ukraine.
Let me state here my most controversial assertion that the so-called Moscow show trials were not show trials but that those tried really were guilty. Actually, as Brar and Cameron both point out, the American ambassador at the time, Joseph Davies, also believed the trials were genuine, as he wrote in his book "Mission to Moscow." The British also believed the trials were genuine. However, they allowed the world to believe the opposite since it was great anti-communist propaganda.
This idea that former revolutionaries would engage in a campaign of assassination and wrecking aimed at destroying their own country may seem fantastic to you at first. However, if you remember all the many tactics that have been used by the CIA to destabilize countries to carry on counter-revolution, then the idea that British and fascist intelligence agencies carried on these sorts of tactics isn't so incredible. Actually, while reading about the counter-revolutionary wrecking campaign, I was reminded of the scene in Orwell's 1984 where Winston and Julia agree to carry out all sorts of terrorist acts in order to bring down the state. Perhaps Orwell the Trotskyite was being indiscreet in writing this. It certainly revealed where his deep hatred of the USSR could take Orwell for instance. The games of espionage have been going on for millennia. As I've mentioned elsewhere, the CIA dirty tricks postwar against the USSR have already been partly revealed. They included sabotage, assassination, propaganda, everything the opposition was accused of in the 1930s.
Harpal Brar presents strong evidence that Trotsky, driven to desperation by his complete loss of power and prestige, formed an alliance with fascist intelligence. This alliance was fully exposed during the Spanish civil war. Trotsky was not the only guilty party. Many of the opposition would join with Trotsky in a campaign of assassination, wrecking, sabotage and propaganda. This should not seem so incredible after witnessing what an opposition allied to the CIA has been capable of in Syria, Libya, and Ukraine, for example. Today's Russian opposition marginalized by Putin's popularity is quite openly funded by western NGO's fronts for the NED and ultimately the CIA—or at least they were until the Kremlin recently made the practice illegal. You may ask how could once committed communists resort to such means? Yet experience teaches us that nothing is more common than for people to betray their ideals as decades pass. The Russian communist movement had always been marked by these betrayals both before and after the revolution. Many of Lenin's writings were dedicated to exposing such betrayals, including exposing Trotsky himself more than once.


However, I am skipping ahead somewhat as it was only later after Stalin had politically beaten both the left and right deviations that they decided to mount their counter-revolutionary terror campaign. Earlier it had merely been a policy argument. The left opposition wanted to embark on a campaign of industrialization and collectivization immediately. In doing so they wanted to risk confrontation with the middle peasants and immediately begin the expropriation of the rich peasants—the kulaks who grew wealthy by exploiting the poor peasants and whose opposition to the Revolution and hoarding were dangerous. However, Stalin reminded them that Lenin had warned that only by maintaining its alliance with the middle peasants would the leadership of the proletariat be secure. Stalin opposed their plan for an immediate attack on the kulaks because at that time they produced a massive proportion of grains compared to the collective farms. Only when industry had been built up enough to produce the tractors needed to supply the collective farms could the middle peasants be induced to join the new collectives willingly.

The right deviation advocated by Bukharin wanted to keep the NEP indefinitely and instead concentrate on building light industry. Light industry makes consumer goods whereas heavy industry produces machines and the means of production themselves. Stalin argued that it was necessary to concentrate on heavy industry if the USSR was ever to advance from its backwards state. In the political struggle, Stalin first sided with the right against the left since he believed Trotsky's policies would lead to a disastrous war for the countryside. However, at the same time he slowly began to build up heavy industry and the growth of the collective farms until they were producing enough grain so that he could risk expropriating the kulaks.
However, even before this campaign began in 1929, in 1928 the Kulaks began to rise in open revolt by burning collective farms, killing teachers, slaughtering livestock and burning crops. Since they had often held the government hostage with their grain hoarding. Thus it should be remembered that during the Stalin era the class struggle would often emerge into open warfare.
However, just as mainstream history ignores all the brutalities the white counter-revolutionary armies committed during the civil war, it also ignores all the violence perpetrated by counter-revolutionaries during the Stalin years. It was a war on both sides. In addition, it should be pointed out that before collectivization was carried out, Russia suffered from catastrophic famines every few years. This was a result of its primitive and unproductive agriculture. However, once collectivization had been successfully carried out, the USSR suffered no more famines. In other words collectivization saved untold millions of lives in the long run. In addition, it should be remembered that it was intended primarily to be a voluntary process. Stalin was even forced to briefly call a halt to the process when he discovered that overzealous officials were attempting to force the middle peasants to join collectives. He issued his famous pamphlet "Dizzy with Success" to combat this error. Instead, Stalin wanted to entice the peasants with the availability of tractors. He believed that mechanized agriculture would help to prepare the peasants for the USSR's industrial future. As Brar explains, the use of tractors would end up providing invaluable experience for the peasants, as driving a tractor is very similar to driving a tank. Thus appropriately it was at Stalingrad where a massive tractor factory would be built. During the war the factory was fiercely fought over and Stalingrad was where the Nazi's would meet a decisive defeat. Appropriately enough, the next decisive battle would be the massive tank battle at Kursk. It was during this collectivization campaign that Trotsky decided to switch over to Bukharin's position which advocated that a halt be called, paving the way for the alliance of left and right opposition that would quickly become purely destructive and counter-revolutionary.
With agriculture successfully collectivized, the greatest industrialization campaign in history was undertaken. This is doubtless one of the main reasons that Stalin is the target of an unending propaganda campaign. The capitalists do not want the world to know about the economic miracle that took place in the Soviet Union between the late 1920's and the start of the war. This is because studying this period would destroy forever their favorite truism that socialism doesn't work. While the West was mired in the Great Depression, the USSR underwent the greatest economic growth in history. Unemployment was completely eliminated early on. This industrialization was to prove vital for the USSR's survival during World War II. In ten years Stalin managed to turn the Soviet Union into a superpower, and this alone saved the USSR from becoming a colony and the Soviet people from the genocide and slavery so openly planned and implemented by the Nazi's during the war. Stalin actually foresaw all this in a remarkably prescient speech he delivered in 1931. He made it in answer to the question of whether Russia should slow the pace of industrialization. It was a great speech, so I cut and pasted the relevant section for its vivid picture of imperialism.

It is sometimes asked whether it is not possible to slow down the tempo somewhat, to put a check on the movement. No, comrades, it is not possible! The tempo must not be reduced! On the contrary, we must increase it as much as is within our powers and possibilities. This is dictated to us by our obligations to the workers and peasants of the U.S.S.R. This is dictated to us by our obligations to the working class of the whole world.

To slacken the tempo would mean falling behind. And those who fall behind get beaten. But we do not want to be beaten. No, we refuse to be beaten! One feature of the history of old Russia was the continual beatings she suffered because of her backwardness. She was beaten by the Mongol khans. She was beaten by the Turkish beys. She was beaten by the Swedish feudal lords. She was beaten by the Polish and Lithuanian gentry. She was beaten by the British and French capitalists. She was beaten by the Japanese barons. All beat her — because of her backwardness, because of her military backwardness, cultural backwardness, political backwardness, industrial backwardness, agricultural backwardness. They beat her because it was profitable and could be done with impunity. You remember the words of the pre-revolutionary poet: "You are poor and abundant, mighty and impotent, Mother Russia." 4 Those gentlemen were quite familiar with the verses of the old poet. They beat her, saying: "You are abundant," so one can enrich oneself at your expense. They beat her, saying: "You are poor and impotent," so you can be beaten and plundered with impunity. Such is the law of the exploiters — to beat the backward and the weak. It is the jungle law of capitalism. You are backward, you are weak — therefore you are wrong; hence you can be beaten and enslaved. You are mighty — therefore you are right; hence we must be wary of you.

That is why we must no longer lag behind.

In the past we had no fatherland, nor could we have had one. But now that we have overthrown capitalism and power is in our hands, in the hands of the people, we have a fatherland, and we will uphold its independence. Do you want our socialist fatherland to be beaten and to lose its independence? If you do not want this, you must put an end to its backwardness in the shortest possible time and develop a genuine Bolshevik tempo in building up its socialist economy. There is no other way. That is why Lenin said on the eve of the October Revolution: "Either perish, or overtake and outstrip the advanced capitalist countries."

We are fifty or a hundred years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or we shall go under.

That is what our obligations to the workers and peasants of the U.S.S.R. dictate to us.

Ten Years later the Nazi's were invading, confident that the Soviet Union would be destroyed, but they now no longer faced backwards Russia but the mighty USSR.

One thing that has been completely forgotten with the cartoon version of the Stalin Era, in which everyone was unhappy and everything was grey—was the tremendous enthusiasm unleashed among the people of the USSR by this drive towards industrialization. This alone can help to explain the economic miracles that took place in those days. With Stalin's inspiration they approached the drive towards industrialization with the same heroism and enthusiasm that they would later display during the war. It was a particularly exciting time for women who long before their western counterparts achieved equal rights and the independence that work outside the home brings.
The pattern of this industrialization shows incidentally that those who talk of a Soviet "empire" completely ignore the economics. Imperialism seeks to keep the periphery underdeveloped thus they can be kept in economic dependence and ever-expanding debt by selling their raw materials in exchange for manufactured goods. The USSR, on the other hand, sought to develop what had been, during the Russian empire, backwards semi-colonial regions. Incidentally, I should mention in passing that Stalin himself was in charge of the "national" question during Lenin's lifetime thus the coming together of the many nationalities and religions of the former Russian empire into the Soviet Union owed a great deal to Stalin's tireless work. This is yet another of his great accomplishments. During the effort to industrialize the country, massive new cities would arise in once backwards regions and mighty factories would be built everywhere. Not just factories were built. Schools and hospitals were also built around the country. Soviet healthcare was ahead of its time and unfortunately ahead of ours, especially in my backwards homeland the US. From a land that formerly had a high rate of illiteracy, the Soviets became an educated and cultured people. Contrary to myth, not only was the Soviet Union industrialized but standards of living also rose dramatically. After the incredible destruction of WW II, the USSR was able to repeat this incredible economic miracle, quickly rebuilding after all the destruction of war, and then undergoing another massive expansion. It was thanks to the wise economic policies of Stalin that the USSR would be able to build its own atomic bomb, and later beat the Americans into space.


However, not everyone was happy with the progress being made, Stalin had, in the process of steering the USSR along the correct path, also marginalized once-prominent revolutionaries. Generally, the story is depicted in reverse. Supposedly, Stalin envied these brilliant revolutionaries. In reality, however, they had advocated the wrong policies and Stalin had advocated the correct ones. If Bukharin had had his way the USSR, would inevitably have been destroyed by the Nazis. Only the building of heavy industry allowed the USSR to build the weapons it needed to defend itself. If Trotsky had had his way, disaster would have occurred.
Trotsky never believed socialism was possible in one country and vacillated between advocating disastrous ultra-left policies and advocating complete surrender to capitalism, as Brar exposes in great detail in his "Trotskyism and Leninism". Actually, for those doubting Trotsky's treachery, they only need to read his writings of the time which swung between predictions of doom and advocating violent resistance to the government. Brar quotes him at great length on the matter. He especially advocated the idea the USSR would collapse in a matter of weeks if attacked by Nazi Germany. This explains his willingness to cut a deal with those he believed would be on the winning side, the fascists. At the same time he also cut deals with the "democratic" imperialist countries. All those in the opposition formed themselves into a ruthless counter-revolutionary conspiracy.
Stalin was too popular for them to attempt open political opposition thus they decided on a campaign of sabotage and terror that might destabilize the regime. Ultimately, they hoped to assassinate Stalin himself. They killed Stalin's heir apparent Sergei Kirov and others. They intentionally caused accidents that cost hundreds of lives and caused huge economic damage. Again, you'll have to read either Brar's "Trotskysim or Leninism" Or Cameron’s "Stalin" if you want to read the evidence for yourselves. Even American and British technical advisers witnessed such sabotage first hand and wrote up first-hand accounts which Brar and Cameron quote. The opposition formed an alliance with the bourgeois technical advisers to carry out such sabotage. They acted as spies for the axis. Most dangerously, they formed an alliance with reactionary elements in the military who plotted a coup that was narrowly avoided. Thankfully, these plots were discovered in time. The traitors were dealt with. In our ugly 21st century full of dangerous treasons, with people in places like Syria duped into trying to destroy their country, Stalin's toughness can finally be seen in its true light and given proper praise. Unlike in so many countries like France or Norway, when war came there was no fifth column to sabotage the Soviets. (see the documentary “Sorrow and the Pity” for more on France's fascist collaborators). Nor could counter-revolutionaries hope to destroy the Soviet Union from within. Their conspiracy was uncovered and their plots smashed. This led to the infamous Moscow Trials. Wherever people today are resisting empire, I urge them to follow Stalin's example and be vigilant against the inevitable plots from without and within. Of course reading Brar's "Perestroika," one can't help bemoaning Stalin's absence while Gorbachev's gang were allowed to destroy everything with their disastrous policies. If only someone had put them all on trial for treason before it was too late, the Soviet Union would never have been destroyed. Down with the traitors and counter-revolutionaries!

All of these accomplishments would be tested in the most dramatic fashion during the war. Without collectivization, the Soviet Union would have been prey to famine and unable to industrialize. Industrialization alone allowed the Soviet Union to defeat the fascist hordes Hitler was to send, which had already conquered the rest of Europe. By 1940, Soviet Industry was 8.5 times the level it had been in 1913 (bear in mind that the 1913 level had marked a peak since the WW I and the civil war were to decimate industry). Large scale industry had increased 12 fold. Machine building was 35 times greater. If Stalin hadn't dealt with the traitors, there is no telling the chaos they might have been able to cause or the secrets they would have revealed to the Nazis. If Stalin were in fact the hated tyrant of fascist and capitalist propaganda he was portrayed as, the Soviet People would never have made such tremendous sacrifices during the war.
Finally, he managed to outwit his opponents on the eve of war with the infamous Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. In truth, the Nazi's had been intentionally built up by the capitalist West in the hopes that they would turn east and attack the Soviet Union. It was not love of peace that was the real reason for their appeasement of Hitler. The Soviets again and again offered to form an anti-fascist alliance with Britain and France but were refused. They hoped the Soviets would be left to fight the Nazis alone, then they could attack when they had both worn each other out. It should be pointed out that during the Spanish civil war, the USSR alone aided republican Spain against the Fascists. The "democracies" used non-intervention as an excuse to prevent aid from reaching republican Spain which led to its downfall. Stalin's cynical ploy should be seen in this context. He well understood the plans the west had to destroy the Soviet Union.

Thus Stalin turned the tables on them by signing the non-aggression pact with Germany. Within weeks the western powers were forced to declare war on Germany over its invasion of Poland. Thus when the Soviet Union entered the war, the UK was forced to ally with it. Unfortunately, what Stalin couldn't have predicted was that France would collapse so quickly.
Much nonsense has been written about this pact, but if you look at the actual timing of events and study the Spanish civil war, you'll see that this is the correct interpretation of events. As Brar points out, the Western democracies even toyed with the idea of switching sides during the war but decided it was a bad idea in light of Soviet victories. Churchill even drew up plans to ally with Germany and attack the USSR immediately after the war but his planners warned him it would most likely be a disaster.
Incidentally Churchill stole his famous line about the Iron Curtain from Hitler's propagandist Joseph Goebbels, as Brar reveals. By signing the pact, Stalin bought a little time to build up Soviet industry and defenses. If the Germans had held off their invasion for another year, the Soviet Union would have been much better able to defend itself. It was just beginning to produce its next Generation of weaponry like the Famous T-34 when Hitler decided to launch his surprise attack on June 22, 1941. Hitler believed victory would be his in a matter of weeks. After seizing the rich natural resources of the mighty Soviet Union, Germany would dominate the planet. Hitler believed he was founding an empire that would last a thousand years. However, thanks to Stalin's preparations, things would turn out quite differently from what Hitler imagined. As Brar is fond of saying, "Stalin had some wicked surprises waiting for him."

It was no doubt the greatest invasion in history. Hitler attacked with over 5 million men and thousands of tanks and airplanes. Never before or since have such huge conventional forces battled each other. Initially, the Soviet Union was handicapped by surprise and by their outdated equipment which was no match for the Germans. Fortunately, the Soviets were already beginning to produce the new equipment which would prove so decisive in the battles of 1942 and beyond. The Soviets suffered some disastrous early defeats but they resisted valiantly. For example, there is the story of Brest Fortress which continued to resist for weeks although completely surrounded and behind enemy lines. No matter how many Soviets the Germans captured or killed there always seemed to be more and they all offered fierce resistance.

Finally, before the gates of Moscow, the Soviets managed to halt the German advance in an epic battle. Not only did they stop them, they pushed them back hundreds of miles, destroying the myth of German invincibility. I should mention the terrible siege of Leningrad during which the Germans attempted to starve the city into submission. At least a million would die, but the city refused to surrender.
The decisive moment of the war would come the next year in 1942 when Germany would launch another huge summer offensive aimed at seizing central Asia, particularly the oil fields in the caucuses. In order to cover their flank they needed to control Stalingrad. Stalingrad was one of many new cities that had arisen during the economic boom, and, as mentioned above, its tractor factory was a symbol of the modernization of the nation. It was at Stalingrad that the Soviets would inflict a decisive defeat on Germany.
The first phase of the battle was a brutal defense. Although the Germans managed to enter the town and were issued medals of victory, the Soviets refused to surrender and brutal street fighting would continue for months. It was urban combat at its most intense. The Germans were made to pay dearly for every foot of land they seized. However, unbeknownst to them while they were bogged down fighting for the city, Stalin was planning a massive surprise winter offensive. The entire German 6th Army, the pride of Germany, became encircled. The Soviets beat back the massive attempt to rescue them then forced them to surrender.
Germany never recovered from this defeat. At Kursk Hitler the gambler attempted another offensive but this time the soviets were ready and had set up massive defenses that stopped the German advance. Then they launched their own offensive at the worn-out Germans, crushing them. This was history’s largest tank battle. After Kursk, the Soviets liberated all of eastern Europe in an irresistible series of offensives like Operation Bagration. They liberated the fascist puppet states before marching all the way to Berlin. Hitler blew his brains out and the rest is history.
The victory of the USSR in the war was undoubtedly another of Stalin's great accomplishments. Brar quotes Marshal Zhukov himself on Stalin's role. Stalin supervised everything. The Stavka (Soviet High Command) worked under his close supervision and his organizational genius contributed greatly to their victory. During the battle of Moscow he had courageously refused to leave the city, knowing his example would inspire the troops. I suggest you watch for yourself (a quick youtube search) the immortal speech he gave before the battle of Moscow on the anniversary of the October Revolution when he urged the Soviet people not only to defend the USSR but to liberate all of Europe from fascist occupation.

Stalin did not only defeat fascism. He also oversaw a massive expansion of the socialist world both in eastern Europe and in Asia. I should also mention in passing that in rebuilding the USSR after the war, he accomplished yet another economic miracle. Not only was the USSR able to rebuild from all the catastrophic destruction, it actually managed to double the size of its industrial production yet again. In China, in the final months of the war, he dealt a crippling blow on the Japanese imperialists in Manchuria in a major victory almost entirely forgotten in the West. He refused to give in to nuclear blackmail from the US, infuriating them by standing firm and refusing to be intimidated. Meanwhile he secretly ordered the development of a Soviet atom bomb which was ready by 1949.
When the US launched their genocidal war against North Korea, he sent Soviet planes to help defend the tiny nation and they shot down thousands of American planes. Thanks in part to his aid, the heroic peoples of China and North Korea were able to inflict the first defeat American imperialism was to suffer. Thus he was loved the world over by people living under colonial oppression and those able to see through the lies of capitalist society.
One of these people was the great Paul Robeson who refused to bow to McCarthyite intimidation, which he correctly saw as fascist. (See My June 2014 article Nazis and the CIA for more on the role of fascists in shaping the cold war). Robeson courageously praised Stalin after his death.
There was also the great Che Guevara who as Harpal's son Ranjeet Brar explained, quoting Che in 1953 (the year the Cuban revolution began), Che swore "before a picture of our old much lamented Comrade Stalin that I will not rest until I see these capitalist octopuses annihilated"
Unfortunately, since then 60 years of relentless propaganda have made this once-loved figure into a hated figure, even on the left. It is time we did some rethinking about the past. Whether one loves Stalin, as Harpal Brar does, or not I hope that at least you will adopt a more balanced view. Whatever you might think of the tough methods Stalin employed, at least in future keep in mind his undeniable accomplishments. He transformed Russia and the USSR from a backwards nation into a superpower. From a feudal brand of capitalism he built Russia into an advanced socialist nation with free health care and education. His victory in WW II alone should have been enough to earn him the gratitude of all nations. In spite of Hollywood depictions of the war, the fact is that 90% of German casualties were inflicted on the Eastern front. Thus we should celebrate the Stalin Era. We should also expose the lies meant to defame him. Above all, we should study this exciting era of history for the lessons it can teach us in building socialism. I've only just begun my study of Soviet history. Personally, I plan to immerse myself in revolutionary history next year so as to drown out the noise of yet another idiotic presidential campaign in America, the heart of the empire.
A better world is possible, but we will only get there through revolutionary change. Even reform is impossible without the threat of revolution, as the world has discovered since Khrushchev and Gorbachev destroyed the USSR and the West has begun dismantling all of the reforms forced on it during the cold war. So let us study revolutionary theory and history and begin to organize ourselves for a better world. There are few chapters of human history as exciting as the Stalin Era. Long live the glorious memory of the history of the USSR and of its leader J.V. Stalin.



Sources

My chief sources for this article were 3 books by Harpal Brar. First "Perestroika: The Complete Collapse of Revisionism." This book not only chronicles the fall of the soviet Union under Gorbachev in its first half but the building of the Soviet Union under Stalin in its second half meant to counter the waves of anti-Stalin propaganda being issued at the time. Second, there is the huge "Trotskyism or Leninism." This chronicles not just Trotsky's battles against first Lenin and then Stalin, but it also has in-depth coverage of the Moscow Trials, among other topics. There are a great sections on the Spanish Civil War and Stalin's role in the Chinese revolution, for instance. Third, there is Harpal Brar's short book "60th Anniversary of the Victory over Fascism,"which is of course equally relevant now when Russia recently celebrated the 70th anniversary of the victory over fascism last May 9th. You can purchase these books from the CPGB-ML along with many others there. I'm already dreaming of what to order next.

http://www.cpgb-ml.org/index.php?secName=books

My other major source was "Stalin: Man of Contradiction" by Kenneth Neil Cameron, which is also great and confirms much of what Brar says about the Moscow Trials and the wrecking campaigns. It provides a biography of Stalin and traces his many accomplishments.

Check out my previous article on Soviet history from July 2015 "lessons of the Russian Revolution." Also relevant to this article last winter I read "Socialism Betrayed" by Roger Keeran and Thomas Kenny which first revealed the truth about Soviet economic history, Stalin's successes, and Kruhchev and Gorbachev's errors. Then "Russian Revolution from Lenin to Stalin" By E.H. Carr was valuable. Also Carr's "Bolshevik Revolution from 1917-1923" was valuable in understanding the economic challenges facing the USSR at the time of Lenin's death.

The Internet has a wealth of resources, if you know where to look.

Join the CPGB-ML or merely make use of some of their great resources for further research here:

http://www.cpgb-ml.org/index.php?secName=home


This article by Mario Sousa debunks Robert Conquest and reveals what now declassified Soviet archives really reveal about the Stalin era:

http://www.stalinsociety.org.uk/lies.html



Harpal Brar founded the Stalin society of UK to combat anti-Soviet propaganda with facts. Check out their archive of articles here:

http://www.stalinsociety.org.uk/presentations.html


Their site is here:

http://www.stalinsociety.org.uk


I got the Picture for my article from the newly founded Stalin Society of North America:

http://www.stalinsociety.org


As I mentioned, check out the CPGB-ML YouTube channel called Proletarian TV for tons of great lectures on Soviet history, Marxist theory, and on opposition to the many imperialist wars going on like Ukraine and Syria.
After listening to Brar you too will feel like defending Stalin. Yet Harpal Brar is only one of the great lecturers they have. Ella Rule, Joti Brar, Ranjeet Brar and Keith Bennet, Katt Cremer and others are also recommended viewing. I discovered the Che Quote in the video of Ranjeet's speech "Join the Struggle: CPGB-ML".

Also check out the Stalin Society Youtube channel for more great lectures. I especially recommend "Paul Robeson, Stalin, and the USSR" by Ranjeet Brar for its discussion of Paul Robeson (the son of a slave) and Stalin (son of a serf) and Robeson's heroic defense of the USSR which cost him his career. Also the Marxist Leninist Theory You Tube Channel has tons of writings and speeches by Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Mao converted to audio format. He has another YouTube channel on history and revolutionary theory called Finnish Bolshevik. Check out his great exposés of Trotsky for instance. For another defender of the Stalin Era search Youtube for Grover Furr. You can read Stalin for yourself here:

http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/Stalin/index.htm
Posted by Hugo Turner at 4:57 PM

https://anti-imperialist-u.blogspot.com ... l?spref=tw
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

chlamor
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:46 am

Re: Stalin is trending

Post by chlamor » Thu Apr 04, 2019 2:56 pm

Thanks for that BP.

'Secret' Speech at 20th Congress of the CPSUB - Khrushchev 1/11

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ht1v2W4 ... ER5Bhn6rP2

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Stalin is trending

Post by blindpig » Mon Apr 08, 2019 12:43 pm

The myth of the terrible Stalin as an indulgence for modern oppressors
Posted by Nikolai Yurenev April 4 - 2 506 views

Image

Getting to Stalin, the current authorities are trying to get indulgence with a “absolution” for all the modern evil and their own crimes. It is necessary to talk about intolerable working conditions in capitalist production, about wild theft, blatant lawlessness, degradation of culture and education - the answer will be: “What are we? We are only thieves in blue pants! But Stalin - all evil is evil! "

Therefore, in order for Stalin not to return, you must endure all our tricks without complaint. Otherwise - millions of victims! Tens of millions! Billions! It is useless to ask them how a dead man can return from the next world, and even to the leading post! Or why old crimes are justified by new ones. It is useless to appeal to historicism, to attempts to view Stalin in the context of his time, and not in a vacuum.

After all, when the imperious crooks turns on the barrel organ about Stalin - one must understand that it is not talking about Stalin. It tries to justify any destruction and degradation by the fact that “creation is Stalinism” and “development is Stalinism”.

Thus, these balabols create - despite their wishes - the positive myth about Stalin, because they write down in Stalinism all the good things that exist in man and were in history. Recently, they podvistyvayut to Stalin, Peter I, Ivan the Terrible, Dmitry Donskoy, Alexander Nevsky - which, incidentally, Stalin did. They prove to us that these are all “shoots of one root” - and in general do not lie.

Statehood as such, taken generally, civilization as such - have much in common in their particular carriers. Although any carrier of statehood and civilization can be divided into function and personal, individual qualities.

That is, he strengthened the army, science (function), and also loved tangerines (a personal matter). Mandarins do not like all progressive figures. But the army and science are all fastened.

As a person, Stalin had many personal qualities - his manner of speaking, accent, choice of clothes and preferences in the arts. But just as a person, Stalin is absolutely not interested in his detractors. The slogan "Stalin - evil" they made to create a "human-symbol" of statehood, Victory, and national unity hated by them.



Recently, a progressive theater director invented a scene in which young Stalin hangs a ten-year-old hostage teenager. And then he blurted out in an interview that he composed it himself, because he sees Stalin “like that.” It’s no longer Stalin, but some Khoja Nasreddin, about whom several nations invented various jokes about what would come to their heads. Khrushchev and Solzhenitsyn began to do this first.

Further went everywhere as a sign of good tone. The film director Daniel Dondurei blurted out the other day: “Stalin is a murderer and executioner. Do you agree? ”The question in his mouth is rhetorical. Boris Grebenshchikov, the writer of curly texts for drug addicts and Buddhists, also spoke about the installation of a monument to Stalin in Siberia the other day:

“When people rule in the city who erect a monument to the executioner of many millions of people, this, of course, speaks of the city and of every person who lives in it.” This is a crime against humanity - to erect such a monument ... We must react to it with action. This can not be tolerated.

No matter how you argue here: you are no strummers on your guitar, and don’t bother with what you don’t understand! Guderian near Moscow would you stop your songs? Or a tractor to the village of the strings of his guitar would cast?

I do not ask this audience to praise Stalin, but with their evil statements they speak no longer about Stalin, but about themselves. That is, they demonstrate a regressive and broken mindset.

They swear at the last words to the person who predetermined the entire history of the twentieth century, to the first historical person in this century — as if they themselves had done something in their life, built something. Swear at the story - the product of which they themselves are. And they are not ashamed of their own dullness, lack of talent, worthlessness, insolvency of all their predictions, the unrealizability of their plans.

He is he. And who are you? What have you done besides the fact that the state was blown out and the people were allowed into the world?

Obviously, nothingness, throwing dirt into something majestic and monumental (albeit gloomy, gothic) - feels like something more significant. Obviously, this is such a subconscious need, being a nobody, the matter of one who has managed to become a world-historical value.

Stalin his victory in World War II taught the entire planet of justice. But for them it is not an argument. They will answer you:

- Anyway, the executioner and scum. And without him would have learned! And without him would have coped with Hitler! This is the people without Stalin won ...

- Well, go without him, with the same people - at least with Bandera to start to cope! I'm not talking about Hitler - at least overcome his accomplice! Something is not so hot the results of something ...



For these anti-Stalinists, the “millions, billions, trillions” of the victims of Stalinism is not really a reason for tears, but a guide to action. These mythical billions should grant them the right to steal, kill, starve workers, shoot opposition from tanks, trade in poisons disguised as food ...

And constantly scare nonsense, undead shadow from behind the coffin.

Stalin has become at the crappy people what Marx called the modern church to him: "opium for the people." Any pain of a modern person, according to our bourgeois, must be stunned by horse doses of fake horrors about the millions and billions of victims of the Gulag.

No matter what place a person is sick, he just bang: but still not a gulag, yet you are not as bad as they, the sufferers, in Kolyma ...

And I will tell you what will happen next. People constantly overfeeding this opium will sit down on this opium. And in the end, it is in Stalin that he will see a universal anesthetic from all his sufferings. And mainly - from the current "stranglers of all fiery ideas"!

Just seeing every day who exactly scolds Stalin - from this alone he will get to the insulted outward respect. For there could not be a bad person who had so much annoyed so many torturers and robbers ...



According to Dmitry Nikolaev

22

Source: https://publizist.ru/blogs/107999/30331/-

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Stalin is trending

Post by blindpig » Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:25 am

Stalin’s Approval Rating Among Russians Hits Record High – Poll
4 hours ago

Image

Moskva News Agency
A record 70 percent of Russians approve of Soviet leader Josef Stalin’s role in Russian history, according to a poll published by the independent Levada Center pollster on Tuesday.

Stalin’s image has been gradually rehabilitated in the 2000s from that of a bloody autocrat to an “outstanding leader.” President Vladimir Putin has revived the Soviet anthem, Soviet-style military parades and a Soviet-era medal for labor during his presidency.

Seventy percent of Russian respondents told the Levada Center in 2019 that Stalin played a positive role for Russia. Stalin’s previous record approval rating stood at 54 percent in 2016.

A record low of 19 percent viewed Stalin’s role negatively, down from 32 percent in 2016.

“Stalin begins to be perceived as a symbol of justice and an alternative to the current government, deemed unfair, cruel and not caring about people,” Academy of Sciences sociologist Leonty Byzov was quoted as saying by the RBC news website.

“It’s purely a mythological image of Stalin, very far from the real historical figure,” Byzov added.

The share of Russian respondents who said Stalin’s crimes were unjustified has decreased from 60 percent in 2008 to 45 percent this year, Levada said.

Of the 51 percent who viewed Stalin favorably as a person, 41 percent said they respect him, followed by 6 percent who sympathized with and 4 percent who admired him. Only a combined 13 percent said they dislike, fear or hate Stalin, while 26 percent had neither positive or negative views of the Soviet leader.

Stalin’s positive approval rating stayed consistent across all age groups, with the exception of the 18-24 age group who were largely indifferent.

Russian society’s perception of Stalin has gone through three transformations in the past two decades, Levada sociologist Karina Pipiya said. Equally positive and negative views dominated the 2000s, followed by more neutral opinions in 2008-2014. Negative and neutral views began to subside in 2015.

Levada conducted the survey among 1,600 respondents in March.

Reuters contributed reporting to this article.

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/04/ ... oll-a65245

****************

This is not a communist friendly publication by any means
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply