"Until its complete extermination or loss of national status, this racial trash always becomes the most fanatical bearer there is of counter-revolution, and it remains that. That is because its entire existence is nothing more than a protest against a great historical revolution... The next world war will cause not only reactionary classes and dynasties, but also entire reactionary peoples, to disappear from the earth. And that too is progress." -Karl Marx, 1849, Neue Rheinische Zeitung.
"The classes and the races too weak to master the new conditions of life must give way.... They must perish in the revolutionary holocaust." -Karl Marx (Marx People's Paper, April 16, 1856, Journal of the History of Idea, 1981)
Anyone?
"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."
This may be of some help: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/index.htm.
thelion: First of all, its Solzhenitsin who himself often blames Jews and the West for Socialism. He hated Anatoly Kuznetsov, who wrote Babi Yar (and Kuznetsov disliked Solzhenitsin, so he denounced him to build trust in himself with the authorities to get out into the West, where he instantly defected and published his unabridged magnum opus--the point of his defecting).
First of all, its Solzhenitsin who himself often blames Jews and the West for Socialism. He hated Anatoly Kuznetsov, who wrote Babi Yar (and Kuznetsov disliked Solzhenitsin, so he denounced him to build trust in himself with the authorities to get out into the West, where he instantly defected and published his unabridged magnum opus--the point of his defecting).
The relevance being?
thelion:Thirdly, Lenin had many Jewish advisers. But they are the same quality Jews as George Soros, who resent the fact they are Jewish. Like Marx himself. They are proud to be communists. Lenin often attacked Trotsky for his Jewishness.
thelion:In Russia, Soviet or not Soviet, antisemitism in the open was always part of society. For instance, a doctor goes to a job, and she is told Djidi Nam Ne Noogjni. And this in the twenties.
thelion:Solzhenitsin in public blamed the West for Socialism; he blamed Jews in general, and Western civilization specifically. He was a Russophile, so of course, if you like him, you won't like Suvorov, who says twenty four million dead on the Russian side is the pragmatic equal of losing the ("Great Patriotic") war.
thelion: Hell, here's Mises in Planned Chaos on the topic: “Neither were the Soviets afraid of a Nazi aggression… they were certain that such a new world war, in which they themselves planned to stay neutral, would result in a German defeat. And this defeat, they argued, would make Germany—if not the whole of Europe—safe for Bolshevism. Guided by this opinion Stalin already in the time of the Weimer Republic aided the then secret Germen rearmament” (Mises 1947:52-53). This is the "controversial" Icebreaker thesis of Suvorov.
Hell, here's Mises in Planned Chaos on the topic:
“Neither were the Soviets afraid of a Nazi aggression… they were certain that such a new world war, in which they themselves planned to stay neutral, would result in a German defeat. And this defeat, they argued, would make Germany—if not the whole of Europe—safe for Bolshevism. Guided by this opinion Stalin already in the time of the Weimer Republic aided the then secret Germen rearmament” (Mises 1947:52-53).
This is the "controversial" Icebreaker thesis of Suvorov.
As for Jewish communists; you have obviously never argued with these idiots. They will even call for the defeat of Israel if you argue that the Arab-Israel conflict is a question of class conflict, or "anti-imperialism". You said it yourself: "anti-zionist". In Russia, "Zionism", "Cosmopolitanism", etc, are just catchwords for "Jew-Bourgeois".
They really do not see themselves as Jewish, and are proud of it. They have overcome their "class bias", they suppose. Read Levin's "Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of People Under Siege": http://www.amazon.com/Oslo-Syndrome-Delusions-People-Under/dp/1575254174
When society is part of a political party, then the social becomes the official.
As for Suvorov (and his real name is Rezun, btw), Soviet plan to attack Germany eventually is a part of his Icebreaker thesis, and a no less correct than the other part. It all has to do with geography.
If Germany didn't attack in 1941, the Soviet Union would have been able to attack Germany with impunity (it was expanding its Eastern Borders all the way up to the summer of 1941, to take strategic oil reserves, while Germany was fighting in the West from 1939-1941). As each side relied on tanks, this would have meant defeat. Each side planned to attack the other ("defect" from the alliance) prior to the end of the "game": this is a well known game theory result today.
Rezun argued for that date in 1941, because evidence points to it. Whether the exact date is correct or incorrect can hardly be know, but: eventually in 1941. One or the other would attack (they both drew up plans as rational actors). It could be not be any other way to explain the massive loss on the Soviet side in 1941, except that offense and defense are very different strategies, and Stalin screwed up his timing. Otherwise, he had numerical and mechanical superiority.
Neutrality was out of the question following rapidity of German success against the West.
As for specific evidence, Mark Solonin, who is not military but a historian, has done monumental research recently after opening of archives in Eastern Europe after fall of the Soviet Union. For evidence see his work, and the boatload of references therein. Just because you don't read in Russian doesn't mean what is written in Russian is not "evidence." This is quite a big topic in Eastern Europe.
I see you have written nothing to argue your initial claim that the the circle around Lenin and the Soviet Union even before Stalin were anti-semitic. Good, I will take that as you coming to your senses.
thelion: As for Jewish communists; you have obviously never argued with these idiots. They will even call for the defeat of Israel if you argue that the Arab-Israel conflict is a question of class conflict, or "anti-imperialism".
As for Jewish communists; you have obviously never argued with these idiots. They will even call for the defeat of Israel if you argue that the Arab-Israel conflict is a question of class conflict, or "anti-imperialism".
Excellent. Then they are quite in tune with Murray Rothbard: War Guilt In The Middle East
thelion:You said it yourself: "anti-zionist". In Russia, "Zionism", "Cosmopolitanism", etc, are just catchwords for "Jew-Bourgeois".
Wether that is true is irrelevant. The question is how was anti-zionism understood by the Bolsheviks, the self-proffessed opponents of anti-semitism.
thelion: As for Suvorov...
As for Suvorov...
July 1941 = Clown. Period.
thelion: As for specific evidence, Mark Solonin, who is not military but a historian, has done monumental research recently after opening of archives in Eastern Europe after fall of the Soviet Union. For evidence see his work, and the boatload of references therein. Just because you don't read in Russian doesn't mean what is written in Russian is not "evidence." This is quite a big topic in Eastern Europe.
You can appeal to authority on the account of being a Russian speaker if you want, but your appeal fails, because the July 1941 "thesis" is not actually taken seriously by anyone, the least of which serious Russian historians. Either quote something or desist from making appeals to your linguistic ability.
BTW, I find it interesting how sensitive you are when it comes to Jews, seeing anti-semitism even among the circle around Lenin and recommending a book so apologetic of Israel as The Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of a People Under Siege that it apparently chastises Israelis for seeking peace in Oslo. While on the other hand you are so insensitive when it comes to Russians as to advance wild, clownish theories about the genocidal Nazi invasion being a five-minutes-before-midnight type pre-emptive attack and recommending a piece of propaganda from the hands of Latvian nationalists (The Soviet Story) that carefully weaves historical fact (slightly readjusted) about the Soviet Union in with a malicious Russophobic spinn.
I like your refutations. "Clown. Period." How convincing! (Although you admit to having read nothing about it. But I'll take your word for it, seeing as you are from the proper circles of Moscow. And you don't have to read books: authors should read your books, seeing as you have so much evidence yourself.) I linked to Solonin's works, and told you to look at through references. But obviously I have expected to much. Books require reading. That is my fault.
I like your petitio principi argument, by calling Jews who are pro-Israel (i.e. pro-not-getting-wiped-into-the-ocean) "Jewish Nationalists", but Jews like Soros, Trotsky, and "anti-zionists" as "seeking peace." In what way have Nasser, Arafat et al sought peace? Because Nasser and Arafat have won the Noble Peace Prizes.
I like your calling the producers of The Soviet Story "Latvian Nationalists". After all, you say, they didn't like being ruled by Russia: What is wrong with them? Don't they know that Latvia "belongs" to Russia in the same way as Frederich List once claimed Belgium "belongs" to Germany. List's claim is that such "facts" are as much a law of economics as supply and demand. Historic-economic law. You seem to agree. (And what heartwarming agreement that is, to be in the company of Bismark, Schmoller, and Goering.) Marx also believe in the Law of history. As Trotsky understood it, all the republics around Russia "belong" to the USSR.
You have obviously convinced me. Such arguments are bound to convince anybody, if they overcome their "touchiness" or "class bias." Just about anybody! (Except people who know first hand that Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Nasser, Mao, etc, are all of the same profession: bandits.)
Official Soviet historians, who made their careers in the Brehznev era, showing his greatness, you trust. Because they are not "clowns."
Of course, you might as well say Mainstream Economists don't like Austrian Economists. Yes, Keynes, Samuelson, Krugman, Soros with his "reflexive economics", Gailbraith, are correct.... ("In what way" is apparently a faux pas question.) Because they are not "clowns."
You have convinced me; I will now go throw away Rezun et al, and go pour myself a bronze statue of Stalin (because the one that was in Moscow got thrown out a while back.) Because Stalin was honest. He trusted Hitler, whom he never met (although he never trusted anyone else, but that is a minor quibble). Hitler betrayed Stalin.
Its impossible they were both shit. After all, as Stalin said to Feuchtwanger, you must choose a side: either you are a Communist or you are a Nationalist. Hitler agreed. I find it absolutely heartwarming that the youth of today, such as yourself, still agree with such honest and upstanding people as Stalin and Hitler.
(I hope you notice my sarcasm. Books are not usually expensive; go buy them. And if not, then how can you argue? As far as English language publications, I hope you don't think United States generals and other officers are "clowns" to publish Rezun. http://www.usni.org/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=1746 .)
You are starting to babble.
thelion: I like your calling the producers of The Soviet Story "Latvian Nationalists".
I like your calling the producers of The Soviet Story "Latvian Nationalists".
And how would you characterise the Tēvzemei un Brīvībai/LNNK?
thelion:I hope you don't think United States generals and other officers are "clowns"
No I think they are Russophobes.
Marko:Soros is very much Jewish from where I am standing as were the Jewish Bolsheviks.
The term "Jewish Bolsheviks" is quite spurious. In Nazi Germany, the Jews were "capitalist exploiters," "Bolsheviks," and the "founders of the Enlightenment," simultaneously. Essentially, whatever the German's despised was "Jewish." But yes, the Communist's hateful rhetoric was far broader in scale--they hated the "parasites." Religious Bolshevism is quite literally impossible.
Esuric: Marko:Soros is very much Jewish from where I am standing as were the Jewish Bolsheviks. The term "Jewish Bolsheviks" is quite spurious. In Nazi Germany, the Jews were "capitalist exploiters," "Bolsheviks," and the "founders of the Enlightenment," simultaneously. Essentially, whatever the German's despised was "Jewish." But yes, the Communist's hateful rhetoric was far broader in scale--they hated the "parasites."
The term "Jewish Bolsheviks" is quite spurious. In Nazi Germany, the Jews were "capitalist exploiters," "Bolsheviks," and the "founders of the Enlightenment," simultaneously. Essentially, whatever the German's despised was "Jewish." But yes, the Communist's hateful rhetoric was far broader in scale--they hated the "parasites."
And in the next sentance I spoke of "Russian Bolsheviks". But great for taking it out of context and for having a problem with one, but not the other.
Marko:And in the next sentance I spoke of "Russian Bolsheviks". But great for taking it out of context and for having a problem with one, but not the other.
Because only one is meaningless. Seems quite obvious...
It seems to me the only meaningles thing is your post.
Marko: It seems to me the only meaningles thing is your post.
Wonderful.
I am not sure on German to English translation and variation between translators. You might be looking for this, but it was a speech given two days earlier than your ref:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1856/04/14.htm
The end of the speech:
"To revenge the misdeeds of the ruling class, there existed in the middle ages, in Germany, a secret tribunal, called the “Vehmgericht.” [2] If a red cross was seen marked on a house, people knew that its owner was doomed by the “Vehm.” All the houses of Europe are now marked with the mysterious red cross.
History is the judge — its executioner, the proletarian."