No justification for Bolshevik slaughter at Kronstadt!

This is a lie. They had enormous theoretical differences, the foremost of which being that Trotsky actually had theoretical opinions.

We know that revolution is violent and ugly; it's that we think it should be done through popular means and democratic control as opposed to strict conformity and obedience. And yes, I am aware that Makhno was strict in giving out orders to the Black Army, but it's obviously far different from Lenin.

If the situation was that bad why were the Bolsheviks not willing to compromise? Non-aggression and a plan to address the demands after the war? I dont see the logic of

How is that a better use of time and resources? Were they afraid of a chain reaction if they recognized one rebellion as legitemate? That might make sense I guess but still very strange.

But Stalin worked better in the practical than just Theory. I just wish the two could have worked together.

Pure idealism.

this lmao

If i had to guess i would say a Trotsky USSR would be more SocDem with guns than Red Fascism whereas Stalin was Red Fascism with some SocDem

This.

I will never, ever get tired of making fun of commies, they literally had control of the world in the 60's and 50's and they fucked it up

all they had to do was nuke america and the rest of the west and they couldn't even do something as simple as pushing a red button

think about it, they literally couldn't even push a fucking button, what a bunch of useless fucks

Trotsky also had an icepick go through his head which his theoretical opinions were unable to stop :-/

>>>/liberalpol/

Edgy

...

here, someone already sent you to your homeboard

England hard

...

Sauce: israel getzler

Somewhat cosmetic differences. Who would be a better leader is debatable, but their principal policies would be the same.

Trotsky would have been a much better tankie fetish, I have to say. Military man. Great posture. Great rhetorical skills. Stronger appeal to Russian nationalism, too.

Worse than leftcoms tbh.

I bet you think anarcho-nihilism just means depressed anarchists, lmfao. I bet you haven't even read Nechayev

You will never make an omelet if you’re afraid of cracking a few eggs.

Eggshell is not an ingredient in an omelet.

nope

I have

even a bigger meme flag than nazbols

Are you Posadist or something? Do you believe that once we put ourselves on the brink of extinction, communist aliens will land and build us communism?

Because it's pretty much the only belief that could justify nuclear aggression, and even, troublesome. It appears that the Soviet Union did not believe in enigmatic and bloodthirsty interstellar communists.

What did he mean by this?

Not a meme.

I know ur memeing but kronstadt was the equivelant of killing the people trying to take the shells out of the omelette

how the fuck do you even arrive at such conclusion?

how exactly are aliens related???

Calling the USSR red fascism is peak liberalism

What if they pop the yoke while trying to remove the shells? A shelled egg is better than no egg at all.

The biggest problem with anarchists is that they are not trying to "make" anything. They are only messing around with the others who do.

Kronstadt uprising was a direct challenge to the Communist government. Which it saw fit to crush without much fuss, which was a rational solution. You shoot at the Chairman, you better not miss.

You believe axiomatically that aliens exist and then decide that they haven't come yet because there hasn't been an emergency

Yet none of you can prove higher stage communism was ever a realistic expectation, let alone even makes a single lick of sense at all, and you think you can slide past on technicalities. All you have is the appeal to the authority of your infallible messiah and the legacy marketing copy and recognizable branding assets from the cargo cults managing forced development schemes, which resulted in nothing but total defeat and near invincible reconstitution of the enemy of the species.

kys

stop saying dumb shit

you asked you dumb sperg, next time don't ask about dumb ideas if you don't want a dumb answer

yes, please, continue embarrassing yourself

Chill bro you're the newfag that didn't know what posadism is

...

Lol my b I didn't realize you were autistic

Do you know what an omelette is?

Peak liberalism is thinking that communism and fascism are basically the same thing anyway. Red fascism is a cringey term maybe but Stalins turn towards nationalism and cultural homogeneity was really shitty, not even mentioning purging all the old bolsheviks

See

Yes, a challenge by the workers that government was meant to represent. Literal veterans of the revolution of 17 demanding that the government stop suppressing workers and peasants. Is that not true? I would like to see an argument with evidence that the fate of the USSRs existence depended on the party line of the Bolsheviks never being challenged by the populace whose behalf they claimed to be acting on.

Im not even anti-Bolshevik, I just think Kronstadt was an awful decision and doomed the USSR to regressing to a repressive state capitalism. I dont have any explicit ideological allegiance other than to the broad project of communism so I dont have a sectarian dog in this fight, the demands of the Kronstadt rebellion just seem entirely reasonable and the Bolshevik response seems entirely unjustified.

epic, simply epic sir

except I do know what posadism is autist, what kind of fucking meme loving fuck are you that you automatically relate nuclear what with a meme-tier theory?

nice projection

the point is not to eliminate the US, the point is to eliminate the conditions that are a fertile soil for capitalism, without a stable global route of commerce there would be no way for the west to amass wealth and fund the collapse of the soviet union

keep samefagging out of butthurt

I didn't respond to a joke by filling my diaper, that's on you bro

Wew lad

...

Dont u have patches to be sewing or something

You dropped your pacifier.

weaker than jeb

…and my point was that if the Soviet Union had launched a nuclear strike against the US, the US would have responded in kind causing immense devastation and the likely collapse of the Soviet Union.

and? there would be no need for a state because capitalism, as we understand it, would have been impossible, the state would have accomplished it's historical necessity

the classic meme

the absolute state of Holla Forums

Yeah, and so would life on earth you dumbshit

classic

here's your (you)

Ah yes, maturity is slurping back a byzantine catalog of unthoughts almost solely designed to twist your mind into a knot and project everything wrong with you 24/7, only because you somehow concluded this enables you to masquerade an aura of wisened sophistication.

@2132024
Here's yours

j/k ideologies that have failed over and over don't get any

No, capitalism would still be plenty tenable in Western Europe, all you would have seen is a resurgence in imperial domination by those European powers as they enacted a sort of Marshall Plan in reverse. Send aid to the war-ravaged Americans to stabilize their political scene and enable them to buy the products of your industry. Alternatively, if you want to include Western Europe in the nuclear fires all you've done is removed the major centers of industry from the world. You haven't done away with class society, it still exists in the underdeveloped world, and in a less advanced form. So not only have you not removed the conditions for the existence of states, you've set the conditions for the abolition of the state back.

during the 60's and 50's the underdeveloped world were nothing but cheap resources which would be literally irrelevant because there would be no imperialist nations making use of it

And these nations would not start making use of those resources themselves? Of course they would, the emergent national-bourgeoisie would become ascendant and class society would be perpetuated.

What meaningful definition of fascism are you using to address the USSR?

I like Punk though

no they wouldn't or else they would've in the first place, read Weber tbh

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protestant_Ethic_and_the_Spirit_of_Capitalism

and again, if such situation arises, it's the historical necessity of the new socialist state to destroy it

Imperialism, anti-liberalism, valorization of industry, grassroots support among industrial labor, anti-capitalist rhetoric combined with war/mixed economics and a corporative state without abolishing money or ceasing external trade or dealings with international finance, forced labor (punitive), mass mobilization and militarization, strong roots in German Idealism: (organicism, historicist teleology, Activism), anti-clerical tendencies (and pro: NSDAP anti-Christianity and Scientific Atheism, Catholic integralism vs Liberation Theology), belief in the creation of Ubermensch, ethnic cleansing (Stalin's population transfers), mix of progressive and conservative policies (Soviet ban on gay vs NSDAP's world first environmentalism and so on), bureaucratic classification systems for "social-parasites" and elastic internal enemies, state direction of aesthetic culture, serious bans on subversive media, and of course co-option of socialism with anti-socialist activities in reality (Kronstadt being one of many examples).

They did work together many times. They both voted for the October revolution, but Trotsky was too radical for Stalin and perhaps for reality itself. Pic related is them together

It isn't realistic by any means. It is the only desirable and logical "end state" of humanity.

I'm not quite sure what are you rambling about, probably some sort of crazy Nazi aesthetics, Christian mysticism or Ancap autism. But Marxism has power because it works. Every bit of the modern world is affected by it to some extent.

ok
Simply saying the word "logical" doesn't make it so. You've said nothing, and you're not even confident enough in your worthless non-description of it to go 10 words without putting 2 in scare quotes lmao.

The sailors deserved it

They were in the middle of a civil war and invasion by 21 different countries.

I don't see this same hand wringing when, for instance, Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus and shut down the democratic legislatures in Maryland and essentially declared martial law.

REMEMBER KRONSTADT
E
M
E
M
B
E
R

K
R
O
N
S
T
A
D
T

Seriously it happened almost a century ago, this is pure autism

this is just one of the stupidest things said in this thread

He's right though.

The stupidest thing in this thread is believing that we will ever get a repeat of 1917. The Anarchism and Marxism of 1917 isn't viable in 2017, getting stuck in century-old rivalries when the world has long since moved on is pointless

[petty bourgeoisie intensifies]

It isn't a petty schoolyard rivalry about ancient grudges, that could be sealed over by hectoring such bad behavior, because we're all in this together or some such mushy bullshit. The point is evaluating what Marxism actually was to find out if it was ever viable in the first place, and what, if anything, may be salvaged from its ignominious legacy, rather than the treating the endless procession of New Marxisms x.0 as a welcome development and injection of fresh life into an otherwise purulent carcass. It takes two seconds two consider how a truly social movement would ever attach itself to the name of just one supreme individual, and just two minutes of conversing with just about any self-proclaimed Marxist to find them completely full of shit, an empirical invariant that requires explanation. To suggest working with these people simply because they exist, or to imply that its sectarian to find that the internal logic of le """real movement""" is inherently bankrupt and proliferant of incompatible sects, suggests it is you who's stupid, and as fuck I might add.

...

Is anybody able to explain this? Why was it necessary to put down Kronstadt if they had the same goals as the Bolsheviks ultimately?

I'm not saying that, fam. I'm saying going on about "you killed Rosa" or "remember Kronstadt/Catalonia" is fucking pointless. Everyone from that time is dead. The ideologies as they existed at that time are dead. You're butthurt about a movement you were never part of, which existed under conditions that no longer apply in our time. You're far better off actually studying what happened back then and looking critically at both sides - as you're supposed to do when studying history - than taking sides in some imaginary war between two dead movements.

This is just like nazis posting the 25 point programme of the NSDAP and claiming they were socialists

ebin

bolsheviKKKs have hit a new low

Bolshevism is just state-capitalism, they are porkies dressing in red.

Read The Kronstadt Commune by Ida Mett, theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ida-mett-the-kronstadt-commune

dude you got btfo 2400 years ago

Why would you want to get rid of capitalism before it has transformed society?

Just because you're too much of a brainlet to read a paragraph doesn't mean the user was wrong.

If the question was "what are some features of fascism" he would be right. The question was "what definition of fascism are you employing", and he failed to answer that.

FTW!

Clearly, user was applying these shared features of fascism to Russia under Bolshevik domination.

pffft
sorry mate, but you're a fucking brainlet
in a civil war there's no place for "democracy"
early experiments with democracy in army, electable officers etc, ended with whities cock deep down in the red army's ass
so when our brave revolutionaries *got it* that their ass will be handed to them, they returned to the good ol' practices of military discipline

so your tears for the poor kronstadt sailors who only wanted democracy are just silly
if you do not follow orders - you get shot
that is the reality of any war

This is exactly why you and MLs like you are my enemy and not my comrade. As Murray Bookchin puts it, "the Kronstadt uprising marked the definitive end of the Russian Revolution." The sailors and workers in Petrograd developed a set of economic and political demands, consistent with the new Constitution, and Kronstadt followed through with those demands. Mett's argument is that the suppression of the Kronstadt forces marked the indisputable beginning of the Bolshivik betrayal of the constitution and the rise of authoritarianism. It was people like you who with your bullshit that ended of any dream of a true revolutionary workers republic and your kind would do it all again.

MARXIST LENINISTS GET THE BULLET TOO

Of course a tankie thinks democratic principles are experimental. Bolshevism’s highest stage is imperialism this is because Bolshevism is nothing more than one party state–capitalism. Imperialist swine HATE democracy and a free proletariate.

...

>11. To grant the peasant full right to do what he sees fit with his land and also to possess cattle, which he must maintain and manage with his own strength
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_communism
retards

Also completely ignores that the rebelion started just as Makhno started fighting against the Red Army, nuh uh, no Anarchist sympathies at all.

t. Socrates
t. Umberto Echo

t. Marx

Marx did not support abolishing capitalism because it was an "evil" or "alien" system, he thought capitalism was a stage of history he wanted to move beyond.

And just because it shares features does not mean it is fascism. I am not saying the USSR was not fascism, it might have bean according to some definitions. My point is that x shares features with y, therefore x = y is not at all sound.

don't try throw around words like "sound" if you're this dense

Marx is not exactly consistent, but he made multiple moralistic and humanistic arguments against capitalism. Just because you're a sociopath and can only quasi-understand what you perceive to be """logical""" doesn't mean you can revise what was written to suit you while claiming the eponymous mantle.
Uh….
The most hyper bourgeois economists weren't even saying this. Anti-capitalist my ass.

Kek, so basically everything is fascism since the end of the 19th century. Way to render meaningless a perfectly specific term.

Not to mention that Makhno's red army and dealing with the opposition were as anti-democratic as anything the bolsheviks did. But no, when the anarchists do revolutions it's due to material circumstances, and when the ebil commies do it, it's facsscsism.

when you are in a war against the forces of reaction the most revolutionary act of all is to win that war

…

That's not how it works, faggot

Wew

Remember kids, if you scratch an ML, a stalinist bleeds

At least the fucking Leninists are honest about what they actually did and wore it proudly.

stop using that flag

The same centralization happened with Makhnovites. War strategy can't be drawn up democratically. Tactic needs swift decisions and disciplined execution. In war the situation can change by the hour. It's amusing to see anarchobabbies deny their own history and present us with a white-washed super-clean pipe dream. Makhno would spit on you. He at least had the balls to shamelessly do what had to be done.

As soon as you start flying yours proudly

Pdf related

Kill yourself. Swiftly and absolutely

...

So I take you didn't read it? Are you read to sport the 'stache proudly or what?

...