Can any Anarchist tell me what is wrong with the idea of a Red Police?

Can any Anarchist tell me what is wrong with the idea of a Red Police?

The Cheka was the closest thing to Robespierre's organised terror. How else would you counter kulak and bourgeois hoarders along with other counter-revolutionary activities?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=L4cl2fqtCtg
northstarcompass.org/nsc9912/lies.htm
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

With a revolutionary army.
Not a permanent "revolutionary" party property enforcement squad.

youtube.com/watch?v=L4cl2fqtCtg

actually there is nothing wrong with revolutionary special forces operating in your country to spy on and eliminate fascists, religious extremists or other groups which could hurt socialism.

If you're about to establish a new society you cannot go on easy mode. Anarchists will never succeed if they do not accept that the world is bloody and dark and that socialism is not about happiness and magical friendship but its about making your life finally a r e a l life. And anyone who is going to bring you back into wage slavery deserves to be shot.


Felix Dzershinsky did absolutely nothing wrong.

...

im too stupid to use leftypol please shoot me

It'd be a pleasure.

Tankies, you gotta stop making the rest of us look retarded.

A 'red police' is part of state apparatus - to paraphrase engels, a state arises in society when there is a contradiction that cannot be overcome without the use of a special force of armed men elevated above society. If there requires the existence of the 'red police' then something is wrong, and this body is being used to try and defend the revolution as it develops. I'm not an anarchist, so I see that sometimes the use of such things is necessary, but it must always be remembered that they are not the intended goal nor even the final goal in the transitional phase - before the idea of reaching actual Socialism can even be discussed the 'red police' has to be long gone.

you know that uuuhm this transitional phase will not last some months but years if not decades?

Because they're power-tripping murderers?

Easy to say until someone is accusing you of being a kulak, being counter-revolutionary, when you're not

Engels was tankie as fuck. He was very clear that he thought it was necessary to capture state power and use it to supress counter revolution.


– Frederick Engels, “Letter to Philipp Van Patten in New York”

can we talk about the fact that too many people think revolution is one day in which everyone is fighting and after that socialism will be established. Do anyone actually realise how difficult it is to change society as a whole?

please stop applying anarkiddie logic on yourself

embrace the slur tankie instead of rejecting it

Yes, and?


Yes, and?

It seems like you've completely missed my point if you think either of these are arguments.

You'd have to be more clear. Police implies defending a status quo, while the terror is something that would be going on during a revolution as a tool to further the revolution. There's a difference between having such a force when you're revolting against the bourgeoise and having it during the DoP, free territory, whatever you call the society resulting directly from the revolution. If such a force is needed after the revolution it is an indicator that something went wrong, and while this doesn't indicate that everything failed and we're in for 1984 it does mean there needs to be some form of course correction.

The cheka was a revolutionary organ of proletariat power. I'd like to remind our anarchist comrades that Makhno had one too under his second commune. There's nothing wrong with that.


Ech. You are either intentionally oversimplifying the soviet economy to make it look indistinguishable from capitalist economies or you are truly ignorant.

I agree with these anons.


'no'>6

Anarchists were the ones who started the Internationale FFS. It was originally mutualist. Moreover, most sections broke off and sided with Bakunin when Marx had the anarchists expelled - the Marxists were left only with the central command structure, after which it died.

After soviet union and maoist china the left really needs to rethink its position on authoritarianism. We dont want another 100 million proles dead do we?

Can you at the very least not do such poor bait? If you are not trolling, can you read? northstarcompass.org/nsc9912/lies.htm

The Cheka ruined socialism in Eastern Europe for years to come, even the Bolsheviks tried to stop their murderous tyranny by stripping their power legally, Felix told Lenin himself that he could not control them anymore and that there was no saints left, only evil men. Lenin eventually distance himself from them.

Kulak was literally jew to them and they branded anybody who they didn't like as a "capitalist kulak", they killed peasants, workers, socialists and even many members of the Bolsheviks and created fabricated evidence to justify these killings.

It was so bad that today, Russians in eastern Europe countries are oppressed and treated like shit because of this, but who can really blame them though. The Cheka/NKVD were worse than Nazi Germany was in some of those countries.

Clearly this is a balanced and informed analysis and not red liberal propaganda.

Wave a soviet flag in a baltic state and see if the locals won't beat you to death my red/pol/ack friend.

Wave a Swastika in a Baltic state and see if at least some of the locals won't salute you, newfriend.

And the Baltics weren't even really in the USSR during the Cheka/NKVD era anyway.

The NKVD became the MVD/MGB after 1946, should merely a simple change in name constitute the end of the NKVD/Cheka?
However this change of name question is rather meaningless as the Baltic states were occupied by USSR on 1940 and were considered annexed in all but name since 1944 when the second USSR occupation began (the fake elections and such happened a little after in 1946). the NKVD did operate during both of these occupations inside the Baltic states, committing various atrocities.

Read State and Revolution