#761
https://gowans.wordpress.com/2013/11/09/the-revolution-will-not-be-televised-nor-will-it-be-brought-to-you-by-russell-brand-oliver-stone-or-noam-chomsky/
#762
that reminds me, when i went to see the star war the other day, one of the trailers they showed was for the new marvel black panther movie, and guess what they used for the soundtrack (a terrible remix to boot)
#763

Petrol posted:

that reminds me, when i went to see the star war the other day, one of the trailers they showed was for the new marvel black panther movie, and guess what they used for the soundtrack (a terrible remix to boot)


can't believe they had the nerve to rip off

#764

shriekingviolet posted:

Petrol posted:

that reminds me, when i went to see the star war the other day, one of the trailers they showed was for the new marvel black panther movie, and guess what they used for the soundtrack (a terrible remix to boot)

can't believe they had the nerve to rip off



omg 😻

#765
Anti-Communist myths debunked

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Gxwhh-vdeB--47HM-20cEVRC9eAMhrapbNf0Sk8VSOs/mobilebasic#heading=h.xnm570vbqul3
#766

xipe posted:

Does anyone have a copy of the study Mark Tauger apparently made between the Soviet famine of 1932 and the Irish famine of 1845?

E: it seems this doesn't exist.



If one were to compare these two famines, what would be the criteria?

Britain was industrializing at the time, as was the USSR

In Ireland and maybe the USSR too, the rural classes broke down into landlords and strong farmers/kulaks vs subsistence tenant farmers and landless peasants seeking seasonal work

Top British policy makers at the time described the famine as divine punishment of the Irish; as We Know from this thread once top Soviet policy makers discovered there was a famine they rushed to alleviate it.

Ireland was producing enough food to feed itself but the British shipped food out using the military.
I don't know if Ukraine, Kazakhstan etc were producing enough food in total to feed their own population?
There was military requisition of food to send to the cities

The famine in Ireland how's something like a million people to starve and another million to emigrate in the time period, out of about 8 million people.
In Ukraine maybe 2 million died?

In Ireland large landowners benefited from the famine and expanded their estates into large cattle ranches.
In the USSR the kulaks were smashed as a class and replaced by peasant and state farming cooperatives

In 'international community' response ireland received some donations from around the world search as the ottoman sultan and the choctaw native Americans.
The capitalist powers responded to the USSR by refusing to swap their industrial Products and know how with anything but grain, in order to exacerbate the famine

These are some rough points of comparison I can think of (and I haven't checked any facts so I'm sure they are wrong)

What else would be worth looking at?

PS i think origin of this so-far non existent work was Louis Proyect making it up in his film review of butter harvest... Thanks Louis!

#767
Does anyone have Yale or whatever academic access this is and feel like liberating some of these documents?

https://www.stalindigitalarchive.com
#768
[account deactivated]
#769
If anypony could march into The Stalin Archive at Yale and give J Archibald Getty III a piece of their mind, it would be you tupine
#770
[account deactivated]
#771
Is there a thread on Soviet anti-imperialism? I know little about the topic and have always suspected that Soviet 'anti-imperialism' was just bourgeois geopolitics
#772

Caesura109 posted:

I know little about the topic and have always suspected that Soviet 'anti-imperialism' was just bourgeois geopolitics


I don't think Mandela and Che considered liberating their people from white settler domination to be "bourgeois geopolitics"

#773
I was searching around to see if synder has ever responded to or acknowledged blood lies (has he?) and found some amusing reviews

For example this 'Skeptic Society' review, an IQ Mensa rational logic club who "hope that our efforts go a long way in promoting critical thinking and lifelong inquisitiveness in all individuals.", complains that Furr "demands so called "evidence""

This is ridiculous, as is the idea that there's "some sort of international anti-communist sentiment, which upholds Nazi propaganda"

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=27560

Just some light humour!

I think Furr has referred to some long standing marxism email list that he posts on - any links to where that might be?
#774
#775
I don't think there are much parallels between Castro and Che's struggle and the Cold War USSR expansion into neighboring states. Supporting struggles is one thing, but the expansionism into, say, Afghanistan is what I meant by 'bourgeois anti-imperialism'.
#776
Have you thought that the "blood lies" Dr. Furr exposes is not merely an expose of a particular historical event or scholar but that the entire way scholarship functions is anti-communist? Have you thought this might impact the entire way you view the USSR, history-as-such, and the world? Or are you going to go "wow everything I thought about the 30s era USSR was wrong, but seriously though everything else I thought about the USSR which happens to align perfectly with CIA propaganda about the equivalence of socialism and capitalism is correct."

We had a good thread on Afghanistan and other things in the past, look for crow's posts on it in the search. But if Dr. Furr doesn't make you rethink how you approach new information entirely there will always be another thing where the gaps in your knowledge will be filled by what you think you know based on liberal ideology. It's better to know about Afghanistan than to be ignorant of course but you can't know everything, start thinking about larger theoretical questions so that every detail doesn't matter. For example, I don't need to know about the story of every single person is said to have been purged in the USSR because I understand the overall picture. Liberalism thrives on being like "what about this poet, how can you justify the way he was treated?!" and if you are an honest person and say "well I don't know his particular story but I'm sure there's an explanation" they have you by the balls and will overwhelm you with a bunch of atrocities on wikipedia, the sheer volume of which prevents you from responding with rigor. Your response should always be "you don't know anything, shut the hell up." For the same reason I know that the concept of "Soviet expansionism" doesn't make sense because "expansionism" isn't a real concept, imperialism is, and Soviet imperialism didn't exist by definition. The details of "well the USSR bombed this village probably here's some book on wikipedia" don't interest me.

Look at how much effort Dr. Furr put into destroying the sources of a piece of shit book by a stupid and lazy author who has suffered no consequences (and has actually been rewarded for his bullshit). Do you really expect similar works for everything to be satisfied? Communists will never be able to match the sheer amount of nonsense cranked out on North Korea every day, start with communism = true and liberalism = false and then reconstruct some worldview from there.
#777
Thanks to this forum and thread I've definitely come to respect Furr and really don't believe almost anything I read from liberal Sovietologists, but that leaves me with major gaps as to the motives and goals of the USSR as a state that I can't just fill with ideology or state propaganda.

Another question is how to substantavely respond to liberals who claim such and such about the USSR without being dismissive of their claims in such a way as you described. And even if Western Soveitology is riddled with lies, aren't their basic crimes and abuses of power that one can rationally and unbiasedly attribute to the single-party revolutionary government of the USSR? Furr does himself no favors at all and comes of as a crackpot when he says something along the lines of "there is no evidence Stalin committed crimes".

Edited by Fayafi ()

#778

Caesura109 posted:

Thanks to this forum and thread I've definitely come to respect Furr and really don't believe almost anything I read from liberal Sovietologists, but that leaves me with major gaps as to the motives and goals of the USSR as a state that I can't just fill with ideology or state propaganda.

By referring to USSR as "expansionist" you just showed that it's actually well within your grasp to fill in the gaps with propaganda. I implore you to read at least the first six words of this: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-6/mswv6_11.htm

Caesura109 posted:

Another question is how to substantavely respond to liberals who claim such and such about the USSR without being dismissive of their claims in such a way as you described.

You can't. There will always be new claims. You are fighting the P vs NP problem here. As BHPN pointed out, your liberal friends get their lies from an inexhaustible source. In your discussions about the past atrocities of the USSR, they don't care about the truth and you (purportedly) do. It serves liberal class interests to believe that the USSR was basically bad, and if something contradicts that, all they have to do is get squeamish and say something like, "And even if Western Soveitology is riddled with lies, aren't their basic crimes and abuses of power that one can rationally and unbiasedly attribute to the single-party revolutionary government of the USSR? Furr does himself no favors at all and comes of as a crackpot when he says something along the lines of "there is no evidence Stalin committed crimes"."

If you want to substantively respond to their claims in a way that is "specific" to what they are saying, you have to press them for sources, for original sources, and show them why what they believe is based on a lie. Good luck with that.

Caesura109 posted:

And even if Western Soveitology is riddled with lies, aren't their basic crimes and abuses of power that one can rationally and unbiasedly attribute to the single-party revolutionary government of the USSR? Furr does himself no favors at all and comes of as a crackpot when he says something along the lines of "there is no evidence Stalin committed crimes".

Who is claiming that there was no corruption among any official at any time over a 75 year period? What basic crimes would you like to go back and re-litigate? Which of them condemns the Soviet experiment? And specifically what crime do you want to charge Stalin with?

Edited by swampman ()

#779
I call specific attention to this very important piece of wisdom in Mao's writing linked above

Must you go out of doors? Not necessarily.

#780
wtf im maoist now
#781
burn down the wikiepedia
#782

Caesura109 posted:

I don't think there are much parallels between Castro and Che's struggle and the Cold War USSR expansion into neighboring states. Supporting struggles is one thing, but the expansionism into, say, Afghanistan is what I meant by 'bourgeois anti-imperialism'.


yeah im sure the PDPA invited the (reluctant)soviets into their country because they were in favour of 'expansionism'. thanks a lot for your insight

#783

Caesura109 posted:

I don't think there are much parallels between Castro and Che's struggle and the Cold War USSR expansion into neighboring states. Supporting struggles is one thing, but the expansionism into, say, Afghanistan is what I meant by 'bourgeois anti-imperialism'.


I meant that the Soviet Union's significant material support of liberation movements in South Africa, Cuba, etc is also smeared as imperialism. Afghanistan in particular is a much more complex topic and I don't really know enough on the topic to provide a defense one way or another, but the late Soviet Union doesn't have to be an infinite expanse of blemishless perfection for its legacy to still be worth defending imho.

#784
My questions arose when I found that they did in fact seem to have an endless fount of 'experts' and academics to cite who were entirely anti-communist, but would pull out the old pinko to throw me off. I was starting to wonder if there were actual 'extensive sources' that that they were relying on, but in most instances I waste a lot of time chasing a claim to find that it's origin is anti-communist.Thanks for clarifying.

Also yes burned down wikipedia. The other day I visited the sources of their article on Hezbollah and found MEMRI, Camera, Jeffrey Goldberg etc.
#785
Double post

Edited by Fayafi ()

#786
This analysis of Soviet COIN in Afghanistan says that they did the right thing but they didn't get the resources from the vacillating Gorbachev gov.

https://www.google.ie/url?q=https://www.boekje-pienter.nl/images/coin-soviet-afghanwar.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwjGn_vT9KPYAhWsDcAKHaZJDqkQFggNMAA&usg=AOvVaw07Jb1-r74c5Cv6pQw2zayX

The US/UK can go to hell for what they did to Afghanistan.
Robert Parry as a journalist asked CIA operatives there in 1988 if they would stop their terrorist insurgency now that Soviet soldiers were leaving: they answered not till Najibullah was strung up on a lamp post.
In 1996 the CIA warlords broke into the UN compound and kidnapped tortured castrated and lynched Najibullah



Of course the people who did this faced no consequences: for example this prick was one of the main organisers of operation Cyclone then did the same for the Bush and Obama regimes... None of that is mentioned when he writes opeds in western media of course

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-trump-administration-should-not-give-up-on-removing-assad-in-syria/2017/07/23/a7073878-6d59-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html?utm_term=.272d6b12daab

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-26/who-michael-vickers-cias-afghan-jihad-architect-declares-war-trump

E:
The Soviet central committee knew it was a trap before engaging

https://www.google.ie/url?q=http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/113260.pdf%3Fv%3D8ff47ec7b273101b558ee74818ff43f5&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwj9_9OgjqTYAhWHA8AKHacqAdQQFggLMAA&usg=AOvVaw1hyrc7wpDMNxEns1nj7HOZ

What could they have done differently?
This article goes through some reasoning on how Russia has avoided similar traps in Ukraine and Libya to successfully hit back in Syria

http://www.stalkerzone.org/decrypting-war-ukraine/

If the US weren't successful with their contra project I'm sure the USSR would have had a similar arrangement as it did with the independent Mongolian socialist republic

Edited by xipe ()

#787
This on whether Russia/USSR is/was imperialist has been posted a lot in this forum--perhaps it was even posted in this thread already. Have you read it Caesura? It's an easy way of not having to get down into nitty gritty geopolitics of individual "interventions"--the USSR did not exploit countries through finance capital or more traditional extractive colonies so it could not be imperialist. The idea that having border disputes or sending arms to certain factions makes a country an imperialist nation is insane--as that post points out, it would mean Rwanda and India are imperial powers. Is Armenia "expansionist"? Is Pakistan an empire?

Not sure where I first heard it but there's a a line of thought saying the concept of the cold war is mostly bullshit, it was just the continued elements of class struggle happening on global scales. Many of the instances of creeping Soviet hegemony in this era were outright fabrications by the US--see Guatemala. Even a liberal like Andrew Bacevich (at least hes trikes me as a lib, don't know his actual policies) recognizes the concept of a belligerent Soviet empire was generally a crock of shit. If these basic points don't cause someone pause there's essentially no use arguing with them because they aren't going to come to a more accurate understanding without radically changing their worldview first.
#788
thanks for the link, many liberals seem to throw the word 'imperialism' around to mean any sort of state aggression without recognizing what actually constitutes imperialist exploitation
#789

xipe posted:

E:
The Soviet central committee knew it was a trap before engaging

https://www.google.ie/url?q=http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/113260.pdf%3Fv%3D8ff47ec7b273101b558ee74818ff43f5&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwj9_9OgjqTYAhWHA8AKHacqAdQQFggLMAA&usg=AOvVaw1hyrc7wpDMNxEns1nj7HOZ



Good read, it gives a great picture of the policy motivations in Afghanistan at the time, ie not imperialist. Interesting to see how they were consistently against aggression, especially with consideration towards the common people, and how they repeatedly chastised Taraki and Amin for executing all their opponents and being such bad revolutionaries

Edited by burritonegro ()

#790
Communist definition of imperialism is so poor: we haven't updated since Lenin so various kinds of Marxists can legitimately claim that USSR and PRC are empires based on it, and there is not good language to distinguish between when Russia bombs AlQaeda and 500 years of Euro-amerikan global narco-slavery

Humbug!
#791
Linked a while ago but here's more on the USSR in Afghanistan.

Includes some excerpts of the transcript linked above, and also stuff like Brzezinski admitting to the USA's role in setting the whole bloody affair in motion and also just being an all-around splendid human being:

Q: And neither do you regret having supported Islamic fundamentalism, which has given arms and advice to future terrorists?

B : What is more important in world history? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?

Q : “Some agitated Moslems”?



On the matter of Russian imperialism, here's another good essay to supplement the CoCT post rolaids was indicating (more direct link to that here).

#792
Also does anyone have good links on the Khmer Rouge, like a general history but not from an Amerikan perspective.
#793

Caesura109 posted:

Also does anyone have good links on the Khmer Rouge, like a general history but not from an Amerikan perspective.


this is one of my pet interests, the best book i've found in explaining the 'why' of DK is Michael Vickery's Cambodia 1975-1982, which can be downloaded along with most of his other publications here: http://michaelvickery.org/

his take is that DK was not marxist, but represented a utopian peasant movement, showing similarities to some of the early Spanish peasant anarchists during the civil war as well as people like Nestor Makhno. he supports his conclusion through materialist analysis, and so far he's the only person i've come across who has applied that kind of analysis to cambodia(the field is fairly small and mostly made up of liberals and straight up anticommunist types). a book that is not as good as explaining the 'why' of things but gives a good general overview of what happened generally(including aspects of the state that Vickery doesn't cover like foreign policy) is Ben Kiernan's The Pol Pot Regime. my impression is that Kiernan is a sort of left liberal but he's more honest than most of the other liberal historians in the field(doesn't show a cold war inherited anti vietnamese bias, recognises that the CPK weren't normal marxists, etc). Kiernan also talks a bit about the concept of there being a genocide, but that's because he's a genocide scholar, so it's in his academic interest and he also might not be too objective about it. Vickery never apparently agreed that there was a genocide, mostly based on his estimates for the death toll being quite low compared to Kiernan's, but the population figures for Cambodia at the time are basically unknown and based purely on estimate so imo the debate as to whether it's a 'genocide' or not is pretty vague and not that interesting to me particularly. Neither of these books talk that much about the Khmer Rouge after they were ousted from power, although Vickery's website does have stuff that deals with that a bit. But I haven't read very much on that yet.

#794
Thanks a lot, I'll find the Kiernan book first.
#795

Caesura109 posted:

And even if Western Soveitology is riddled with lies, aren't their basic crimes and abuses of power that one can rationally and unbiasedly attribute to the single-party revolutionary government of the USSR? Furr does himself no favors at all and comes of as a crackpot when he says something along the lines of "there is no evidence Stalin committed crimes".



so is your point "some nkvd agent stitched up his neighbour in 1936 to advance his career, therefore communism bad" or is it "killing landlords in the street was bad"

because the first one i don't really care because its a fact of life and the second one gets my enthusiastic endorsement, remove exploiters from the earth

#796
Just on the topic of the Soviet "invasions" of Poland 1939 and Afghanistan 1979, I was reading a bit about the (mainly trotskyist, but also maoist, social democrat etc) western socialist #resistance to Soviet imperialism over these 40 years (supporting apartheid South Africa, Nicaraguan contras, South Vietnam/Peace With Honour and Curtis Lemay's incineration of 2 million Koreans along the way)

Here's Max Shachtman arguing in 1940 with Leon Trotsky (as they split up the American SWP) that the Soviet union is an imperial satellite of Nazi Germany, with the berlin-moscow axis fighting against the US camp and socialists should stay out of it.

(Shachtman was the mentor to Vietnam War supporter & DSA founder Michael harrington. This article also has 2x more references to Stalin than Hitler, and demands a free and independent Ukraine)

https://www.marxists.org/archive/shachtma/1940/04/ussrwar.htm

The Nazi sponsored US "anti war" movement in the 40s was saying the same thing

http://www.charleslindbergh.com/americanfirst/

I think this contradicts Furr's assertion that "at the time, no one described the Soviet occupation of Polish territory in 1939 as an illegal invasion" - the Western governments maybe not, but trots ardently did.

As an aside: the Soviet reoccupation of the territories fascist Poland had previously captured allowed an est 1 million Polish Jews to escape the Nazis.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/escape-of-jews-from-poland-to-the-soviet-union

Unlike the Western Allies the USSR accepted refugees fleeing nazi Germany, moving 1.75 million Jews from the West over to the other side of the country - the bulk of the survivors of the Holocaust

https://www.jta.org/1943/07/02/archive/russia-helped-1750000-jews-to-escape-nazis-says-james-n-rosenberg

In the 80s, western trots and maoists worked with various skinhead & Nazi-exile groups to organise boycotts and blockades of Soviet embassies and Soviet goods

https://www.google.ie/url?q=https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/icl-spartacists/periodicals/australasian/1980_February_Austral_Suppl.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwiaoeK496zYAhXJAsAKHW2jAcIQFggLMAA&usg=AOvVaw2cErwIzjpwN-BuNc1Qi0t2

Internal CIA reports at the time congratulated the "western communists" for their help

https://www.google.ie/url?q=https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP81B00401R000600190013-5.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwjCjo2Jka3YAhXkJMAKHWOgD74QFggLMAA&usg=AOvVaw2Io49fT2LKGVo687TvyrpK

Edited by xipe ()

#797
Lol that Shachtman piece contains this fucking sentence

xipe posted:

It was therefore false to generalize from this experience which was never experienced.



Regarding the USSRs annexation of East Poland saving millions of Jews, does anyone have any insight into why antisemitism became rampant again in the 60s? Like did the reforms of Polish October pave the way for the reactionary antisemitic government? What were the failings of Polish socialism that allowed for this? There's been good discussion ITT and others on here of why antisemitism has reared up in former Communist bloc countries but it seems like in the case of Poland it was an ongoing issue even during the Cold War. I admit I don't know a ton about the PPR.

#798
[account deactivated]
#799
who wants to torture themselves?

https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/7n2s34/iama_survivor_of_stalins_communist_dictatorship/?st=jbttjfmk&sh=a345c695

this guy seems a total hack, anyone know his background well?

Edited by Fayafi ()

#800
you should read Tottle, that all sounds like bog standard Ukie-fash paperclip action: bootstraps + Nazi equivocation

tho, fuckin lol, he thinks Beria assassinated Stalin, never seen that one before