Was Lenin really that good?

[Harry Smith]

I was just wondering what the more left wing members of the board thing about Lenin, it always seems like he's hailed as the original mastermind of Marxism in action and that if Russia had followed his route then it would of all been fine.
However looking over the stuff he did in his 6 years in charge he made Stalin look ordinary.

So what do you think of Lenin?

[Stronk Serb]

He did start the revolutions. I disagree with his methods, but under that time, the newly-formed Soviet Union was having it's first breath choked by the White Movement, the USA, the UK, Japan, Germany, Serbia... If the royalists and capitalists didn't intervene, I think it would have went better. I think Lenin killed less people then Stalin. Stalin did kill more then 20,000,000 people. Hell, some sources say he added a few extra millions to the casualties of WWII instead of his purges.

[Vlerchan]

Lenin ruled in war-time so lots of the 'atrocities' he (ordered to be) committed can be hand-waved as necessary. Though I still wouldn't place him on the same level of notoriety as Stalin: Stalin routinely purged anyone who he felt might be a threat. You'll hear Stalinists hand-wave Stalin's atrocities as necessary during what they also considered 'war-time' but wasn't 'war-time' under how we'd generally recognise the term to be used. And the threats he eliminated weren't as much threats to the USSR as his rule, unlike with Lenin.

Lenin was also a great theoretician. Stalin was shit. Luxenbourg was the best of the time, though.

[Harry Smith]

Lenin ruled in war-time so lots of the 'atrocities' he (ordered to be) committed can be hand-waved as necessary. Though I still wouldn't place him on the same level of notoriety as Stalin: Stalin routinely purged anyone who he felt might be a threat. You'll hear Stalinists hand-wave Stalin's atrocities as necessary during what they also considered 'war-time' but wasn't 'war-time' under how we'd generally recognise the term to be used. And the threats he eliminated weren't as much threats to the USSR as his rule, unlike with Lenin.

Lenin was also a great theoretician. Stalin was shit. Luxenbourg was the best of the time, though.

I mean I understand that the early changes such as war communism were necessary in the times of war, but even after victory in the civil war he alone had more power than any Tsar in Russia could dream of

[Vlerchan]

I mean I understand that the early changes such as war communism were necessary in the times of war, but even after victory in the civil war he alone had more power than any Tsar in Russia could dream of

Democratic Centralism existed until 1921. Up until 'factionalism' was banned in 1921 he was shot-down in discussion by party members a number of times. He was then near-entirely incapacitated for the last two years of his rule - i.e., 1922 - 1924 - so we don't see much ruling once 'factionalism' was banned. If Lenin had actually done much ruling past 1921 your criticisms would ring true* - because he began to display serious anti-democratic leanings at this stage - but he didn't.

*Well, sort of: Tsarism was absolute whilst Lenin could still be overruled by a number of like-minded party-members.

[tovaris]

dude Lenin had three woman sleeping and serving him at the same time and they didnt mind echother... Yes he realy was that good ;)

Lenin wrote a lot of books, he was a good guy and given time he would have been one of the first to create a socialist state... But lead has alwais been poisones...

[Vlerchan]

dude Lenin had three woman sleeping and serving him at the same time and they didnt mind echother... Yes he realy was that good ;)
Two*

Nadezhda Krupskaya being his wife and Inessa Armand his mistress. However Lenin was personally still quite socially conservative (http://www.marxists.org/archive/zetkin/1920/lenin/zetkin1.htm)

If you want sexual-permissiveness then see Trotsky.

[tovaris]

Two*

Nadezhda Krupskaya being his wife and Inessa Armand his mistress. However Lenin was personally still quite socially conservative (http://www.marxists.org/archive/zetkin/1920/lenin/zetkin1.htm)

If you want sexual-permissiveness then see Trotsky.

yeah but he wasnt at the weel and was asassiated somevhere in mexiko right... So i stil say to have mistreses and a wife ahd jet stil run a county with a bulet in your back is prety awsome

[Vlerchan]

yeah but he wasnt at the weel and was asassiated somevhere in mexiko right... So i stil say to have mistreses and a wife ahd jet stil run a county with a bulet in your back is prety awsome
Trotsky was great, period.

[tovaris]

Trotsky was great, period.

tortskist :p

[Miserabilia]

In my opinion Lenin destroyed the original concept of communism and turned it into a system that was out of place and ironicaly, unfair.

[phuckphace]

Bertrand Russell went to the USSR and met Lenin personally, and his take on Lenin is pretty interesting. longer excerpt here (http://skepticva.org/excerpt-Lenin.html), but this part in particular stood out:

I think if I had met him without knowing who he was, I should not have guessed that he was a great man; he struck me as too opinionated and narrowly orthodox. His strength comes, I imagine, from his honesty, courage, and unwavering faith—religious faith in the Marxian gospel, which takes the place of the Christian martyr's hopes of Paradise, except that it is less egotistical. He has as little love of liberty as the Christians who suffered under Diocletian, and retaliated when they acquired power. Perhaps love of liberty is incompatible with whole-hearted belief in a panacea for all human ills. If so, I cannot but rejoice in the sceptical temper of the Western world.

I went to Russia a Communist; but contact with those who have no doubts has intensified a thousandfold my own doubts, not as to Communism in itself, but as to the wisdom of holding a creed so firmly that for its sake men are willing to inflict widespread misery.

in other words, Lenin came off as a kooky religious fanatic unable to tolerate any dissent against his beliefs (much like religious fundamentalism). a good example of the horseshoe theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory).

[Vlerchan]

in other words, Lenin came off as a kooky religious fanatic unable to tolerate any dissent against his beliefs (much like religious fundamentalism).
I find this a somewhat unfair criticism: whilst Lenin was an orthodox Marxist and rigidly adhered to Marxist dogma he was at the same time a pragmatist who did give new ideas a chance: the most obvious example of this was his fall-back to the NEP after it became clear that war communism was failing. Though, the critique seems more directed at Lenin's consequentialist stance on ethics as opposed to his anti-democratic tendencies (which he did hold - though I'd argued this stems from the aforementioned ethical stance as opposed to genuine disdain).

[britishboy]

I was just wondering what the more left wing members of the board thing about Lenin, it always seems like he's hailed as the original mastermind of Marxism in action and that if Russia had followed his route then it would of all been fine.
However looking over the stuff he did in his 6 years in charge he made Stalin look ordinary.

So what do you think of Lenin?

Are you a communist now?

As for the thread all political extremists are wrong. Communists and anarchists are the worse.

[Harry Smith]

Are you a communist now?

As for the thread all political extremists are wrong. Communists and anarchists are the worse.

Yes I'm a die hard communist, it comes with the labour party membership. I don't understand how making a thread about Lenin makes me a communist? This is ROTW

I'd argue that fascism is much worse than communism

[Miserabilia]

Yes I'm a die hard communist, it comes with the labour party membership. I don't understand how making a thread about Lenin makes me a communist? This is ROTW

I'd argue that fascism is much worse than communism

I aggree, I don't see why communism would be the worst system.

[britishboy]

Yes I'm a die hard communist, it comes with the labour party membership. I don't understand how making a thread about Lenin makes me a communist? This is ROTW

I'd argue that fascism is much worse than communism

I would live in fascism before I accept communism.

Just thought it was a little odd.

[Harry Smith]

I would live in fascism before I accept communism.

Just thought it was a little odd.

Move to north Korea and you'll see how great Fascism is

[britishboy]

Move to north Korea and you'll see how great Fascism is

Communism and you're trolling you would have said Nazi Germany if you wasn't. You want an argument on whether NK is Communist.

[Harry Smith]

Communism and you're trolling you would have said Nazi Germany if you wasn't. You want an argument on whether NK is Communist.

Not really, I was going to say Saudi Arabia but that's more autocratic than fascist, so I thought I'd mention the country that closely follows the principles of facism. There isn't any argument about NK, and I didn't want to invoke Godwin 5 posts in

[Vlerchan]

You want an argument on whether NK is Communist.
Please look up the definition of communism before continuing. I won't ask you to research Leftist ideologies, because I have before and its quite clear you never bothered, but at least make sure to have a rudimentary understanding of terms before you decide to use them.

For the record, NK isn't socialist either. It shares its national-based command economy, and that's it.

[britishboy]

Please look up the definition of communism before continuing. I won't ask you to research Leftist ideologies, because I have before and its quite clear you never bothered, but at least make sure to have a rudimentary understanding of terms before you decide to use them.

For the record, NK isn't socialist either. It shares its national-based command economy, and that's it.

It is a wannabe communist country. Not pure communism I am aware of that.

Not really, I was going to say Saudi Arabia but that's more autocratic than fascist, so I thought I'd mention the country that closely follows the principles of facism. There isn't any argument about NK, and I didn't want to invoke Godwin 5 posts in

I would have used Nazi Germany. I could live a long and happy life and fascism. I hate it but I could live in it. In communism I would be beaten to a pulp, family wealth taken away and me being forced to do a job I am not qualified for or hard labour. I would die.

-please do not double post. -Emerald Dream

[Harry Smith]

I would have used Nazi Germany. I could live a long and happy life and fascism. I hate it but I could live in it. In communism I would be beaten to a pulp, family wealth taken away and me being forced to do a job I am not qualified for or hard labour. I would die.

I wouldn't-it's about 70 years out of date and for once I didn't want to use Godwin.

I'm going to quote something you've just said because I'm very confused

I could live a long and happy life

I hate it but I could live in it

Would you hate it or love it?

It's very easy to sit typing on your computer in the 21st century saying how nice fascism is

[Vlerchan]

It is a wannabe communist country.
I can't add to this with 'wannabe communism' not being a political or economic system that I am aware of.

As long as we both recognise that it is a) not communist, and b) not socialist, I think I might be fine remaining ignorant however.

[britishboy]

I wouldn't-it's about 70 years out of date and for once I didn't want to use Godwin.

I'm going to quote something you've just said because I'm very confused





Would you hate it or love it?

It's very easy to sit typing on your computer in the 21st century saying how nice fascism is

I hate it. But I would survive it and live relatively normally.

I know the evils but they don't effect me. I'm not a political activist, I am wealthy and am not a member of a group they target.

You are gay, you would have a problem. The same as I am wealthy, I would have a problem in communism.

I can't add to this with 'wannabe communism' not being a political or economic system that I am aware of.

As long as we both recognise that it is a) not communist, and b) not socialist, I think I might be fine remaining ignorant however.

The leadership call themselves communists.


-please use the "Edit" or the "Multi-Quote" button and do not double post. -Emerald Dream

[Harry Smith]

I hate it. But I would survive it and live relatively normally.

I know the evils but they don't effect me. I'm not a political activist, I am wealthy and am not a member of a group they target.

You are gay, you would have a problem. The same as I am wealthy, I would have a problem in communism.

So by your logic unless your Jewish the holocaust wasn't a problem?



The leadership call themselves communists.

They also call themselves democratic...

[britishboy]

They also call themselves democratic...

Did you not read the post :D

[Harry Smith]

Did you not read the post :D

I'll still stand by the point that 'wannabe communist' isn't a political ideology or economic model.

Whilst we're on this, do you understand what facism is? Because you do know that we could quite easily live in Islamic fascist society-would you want that?

[Vlerchan]

The leadership call themselves communists.
Juche isn't a comunist ideology (in the Marxist sense, at least). It's idealist, i.e., anti-materialist, which makes it by definition not communist.

Also, what Harry said.

[britishboy]

Because you do know that we could quite easily live in Islamic fascist society-would you want that?


Sound like the BNP...

Give me the definition if a wannabe.

[Harry Smith]

Sound like the BNP...

Give me the definition if a wannabe.

If we're going into the realms of fantasy it's just as possible that Britain could become a fascist islamic republic, would you want that? Or are you going to avoid the question and claim I'm a BNP member

[britishboy]

If we're going into the realms of fantasy it's just as possible that Britain could become a fascist islamic republic, would you want that? Or are you going to avoid the question and claim I'm a BNP member

No I would not want that?

[Harry Smith]

No I would not want that?

But I thought you said you'd be 'happy' in a facist state?

Or what you actually meant was you'd be happy in a fascist state that suited you

[britishboy]

But I thought you said you'd be 'happy' in a facist state?

Or what you actually meant was you'd be happy in a fascist state that suited you

Change "suited" to "accept" and "happy" to "I could live in"

[Harry Smith]

Change "suited" to "accept" and "happy" to "I could live in"

But you stated early that you would and I quote

I could live a long and happy life

Sure you could technically live in a facist Islamic state, you cold also live in a communist state

[britishboy]

But you stated early that you would and I quote



Sure you could technically live in a facist Islamic state, you cold also live in a communist state

I was referring to a Nazi like fascism. I would die in communism.

[Harry Smith]

I was referring to a Nazi like fascism. I would die in communism.

You can't be certain of that, just like you can't be certain you'd live in Nazism

[britishboy]

You can't be certain of that, just like you can't be certain you'd live in Nazism

Both true.

[Harry Smith]

Both true.

If you such an avid fan of the third reich then read this

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

[britishboy]

If you such an avid fan of the third reich then read this

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

I am not a fan of them? I'm saying I could live under it?

[phuckphace]

lots of cognitive dissonance ITT in regards to the question of the USSR vs the Reich. I notice that social justice warriors like Harry tend to support (or at least downplay the wrongdoings of) Lenin & co. because EQUALITY (http://i.imgur.com/r7Q80LP.gif) but Hitler on the other hand was objectively EVIL because hurr durr six million Jews durr. let's handwave away the fact that the USSR for a good phase was practically a giant slaughterhouse for people that Lenin and Stalin didn't like (only FASCISTS do that!!!). let's handwave away the immense corruption and cronyism that led to mass starvation throughout the USSR. nope, let's just sit back and jerk off to a lefty utopian fantasy world where everyone is 100% equal and there are no ugh Xtian bigots to rain on our parade.

by no means am I a Hitler apologist - the guy was a mentally unstable ideologue rather than a skillful leader and the same can also be said for many of his cronies like Goebbels and Rohm. it's just funny to me watching the mental gymnastics that are required for silly lefties to loathe one and white knight for the other despite the two having relatively few differences (the horseshoe theory again).

[Harry Smith]

lots of cognitive dissonance ITT in regards to the question of the USSR vs the Reich. I notice that social justice warriors like Harry tend to support (or at least downplay the wrongdoings of) Lenin & co. because EQUALITY (image (http://i.imgur.com/r7Q80LP.gif)) but Hitler on the other hand was objectively EVIL because hurr durr six million Jews durr. let's handwave away the fact that the USSR for a good phase was practically a giant slaughterhouse for people that Lenin and Stalin didn't like (only FASCISTS do that!!!). let's handwave away the immense corruption and cronyism that led to mass starvation throughout the USSR. nope, let's just sit back and jerk off to a lefty utopian fantasy world where everyone is 100% equal and there are no ugh Xtian bigots to rain on our parade.

by no means am I a Hitler apologist - the guy was a mentally unstable ideologue rather than a skillful leader and the same can also be said for many of his cronies like Goebbels and Rohm. it's just funny to me watching the mental gymnastics that are required for silly lefties to loathe one and white knight for the other despite the two having relatively few differences (the horseshoe theory again).

In all fairness in the first page alone I said how Lenin's own beginnings in Russia were flawed due to the fact that he bypassed any form of democracy and gave himself powers that even Tsar's didn't' have. I'm by no means a defender of the USSR, however from a ideological point of view Marxism has much more to offer than national socialism