#1
(already have a folder of szymanski but interested in other sources that either corroborate or contest his general line of argument)
ie june 1953 in the gdr
have the u.s./allies exaggerated the popularity/working class character of this kind of unrest in the socialist bloc or were there principled communists really opposed to the soviet + warsaw pact governments? if so, what does that mean for our position on socialist construction spearheaded by a marxist leninist party, right now?
there is a tendency of self-professed communists who cite (reports of) this kind of labor unrest as evidence that 'socialist construction by a marxist leninist party is the indefinite deferral of communism, which can be achieved NOW, a red fascist is a fascist, shoot tankies on sight' etc. etc. and of course it's simplistic, it's a libidinal appeal (more than anything else it just feels disingenuous). but how do we effectively argue against these people, can we? should we, is it worth it? are they just tailing state dept. propaganda or are they focusing on real shortcomings of this model of socialism at this period in history (1922-1991)?

Edited by psychicdriver ()

#2
Socialism With a German Face has a relatively fair account of 1953 which I think does good in highlighting that legitimate grievances were addressed while expressions of national chauvinism and reaction were repressed.

psychicdriver posted:

(already have a folder of szymanski but interested in other sources that either corroborate or contest his general line of argument)
ie june 1953 in the gdr
have the u.s./allies exaggerated the popularity/working class character of this kind of unrest in the socialist bloc or were there principled communists really opposed to the soviet + warsaw pact governments? if so, what does that mean for our position on socialist construction spearheaded by a marxist leninist party, right now?
there is a tendency of self-professed communists who cite (reports of) this kind of labor unrest as evidence that 'socialist construction by a marxist leninist party is the indefinite deferral of communism, which can be achieved NOW, a red fascist is a fascist, shoot tankies on sight' etc. etc. and of course it's simplistic, it's a libidinal appeal (more than anything else it just feels disingenuous). but how do we effectively argue against these people, can we? should we, is it worth it? are they just tailing state dept. propaganda or are they focusing on real shortcomings of this model of socialism at this period in history (1922-1991)?


#3

Parenti posted:

legitimate grievances were addressed while expressions of national chauvinism and reaction were repressed.


would you say this was a pattern with this kind of unrest and that the u.s.-nato axis disguised the propaganda of national chauvinism and reaction as grievances of this kind?
if this was a rule, were the exceptions?
one thing that was confusing ab the wiki article (lol) i glanced at was that the initial demands of the strikers were already met and yet they kept it going?

#4
maybe instead of putting (lol) just don't base your ideas on the wiki article you glanced at? how are you going to argue your own position if you can't get people to agree that wikipedia is trash?
#5
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Rjensen&dir=prev&offset=20190305040829&limit=500&target=Rjensen

^ glance at one page of this man's contributions to Wikipedia, of which he has made roughly 1000 in the last month or so, which ain't shit compared to the people doing it for a living. glance at the names of the articles he's edited. go ahead and glance at the next page too. just scroll down and drag your eyes across it like a fresh fish sliding off the paper onto the kitchen floor. realize this is almost certainly not even one of the guys who actually works for the CIA, he's just found someplace where life is mysteriously easy for him. then let me know if you want to start building your arguments on responding to what it says on wikipedia instead of getting everyone to acknowledge what they already all know and will endorse at the slightest prompting: Wikipedia is a broken toilet at the county fairgrounds.
#6
ive been owned
Talk:John Paul II
is this the kind of person who really, really cares a whole heck of a lot about vatican ii and like the liturgy being in vernacular
#7
i'm so fucking tired of people not owning their own shit (not talking directly about you PD). always nice to see people embrace failure. thank you, psychicdriver.
#8
#9
fail aire
#10
Just Post.
#11
https://afoniya.wordpress.com/2013/07/25/towards-the-history-of-maoist-dissidence-in-the-soviet-union-an-article-by-alexei-volynets-part-1/
https://afoniya.wordpress.com/2013/07/25/towards-the-history-of-maoist-dissidence-in-the-soviet-union-an-article-by-alexei-volynets-part-two/
https://woodsmokeblog.wordpress.com/2016/07/17/20-communists-under-revisionist-rule/
https://woodsmokeblog.wordpress.com/2016/08/09/the-communist-resistance-in-east-germany/
https://www.marxists.org/history/erol/poland/index.htm
https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1116&context=history_theses
https://anti-imperialism.org/2017/11/09/remembering-the-storozhevoy-mutiny-and-its-lessons/
a friend happened to link these to me recently, i haven't looked through them all so you know no investigation etc, but i'd imagine that there are things of interest in them
#12
bless u.