Lenin deserved it

Wouldn't you do the same in defence of a real proletariat revolution against some workers threatening to mess it up?

Did he have superpowers or something?

...

...

Read my post again and you will see what changed my opinion.

What is your definition of socialism? "All power to the sovjets" or "All power to the elite party"?

The soviets are not inherently revolutionary as they are merely democratic organization any class can dominate. The party however is a organ of class power formed out of the most class conscious subset of the proletariat who have the greater proletariats interests in mind.

Yeah the whites were really sad to see Kronstadt fail.

Reminder that she did nothing wrong :)

GTFO from here, you spooked idealist.
How can he even be a traitor to his own revolution, and some other guys who didn't like it be faithful to it?

I love daddy Lenin but what the fuck

I like Lenin Ramirez, and I think he does deserve his success.

Dude this was the guy who said he simply found power lying in the street and picked it up. Like him or not this was not "his" revolution, even though you could say the creation of the Soviet state was

October revolution was little other than the Bolshevik Party seizing power.
They managed to do it, of course, because their program and their tactics resonated with the people's opinion and class dynamic, and it resulted in collapse of old society and rise of a radically new one.

Such is a Marxist-Leninist Zen It only implies that he executed his plan flawlessly, that guaranteed success and implied near to none opposition.

It wasn't the intention of the Kronstadt rebels to restore capitalism. Anyway, Lenin did it partly after slaughtering them.

It may not have been their intention but its what would have happened.

...

it hurts lads

Lenin was a dictator.

no

Stop using words that mean nothing. Dictator is the commander of the military who seized political power by using that military and bypassing any protocols and institutions.
There is absolutely no sense to call Lenin a dictator. He didn't rely on Imperial military, and he did not bypass the institutions.

I was a fan because I have read tons of his writings. But it seems he is more into fictional stuff than I thought.

He was a totalitarian who used mass executions and terror to implement his regime. If that isn't dictatorship, then nothing is.

So, like, any state and, therefore, any society in human history.

Someone please explain the 200 character meme. I've been away for a few weeks.

lol

Kronstadt was Trotsky's doing ya dumbfuck.

...

You mean, Lenin AND Trotsky's doing, ya dumbfuck.

Communists are not to implement a cheap imitation of a bourgeois state, but empower the proletariat democratically. You just proved my point.

Communism is the negation of democracy

“Democracy is, as I take all forms of government to be, a contradiction in itself, an untruth, nothing but hypocrisy (theology, as we Germans call it), at the bottom. Political liberty is sham-liberty, the worst possible slavery; the appearance of liberty, and therefore the reality of servitude. Political equality is the same; therefore democracy, as well as every other form of government, must ultimately break to pieces: hypocrisy cannot subsist, the contradiction hidden in it must come out; we must have either a regular slavery — that is, an undisguised despotism, or real liberty, and real equality — that is, Communism.”

Engels. Progress of Social Reform On the Continent. 1843

"In true democracy, the political state disappears… [I]t is evident that all forms of the state have democracy for their truth, and for that reason are false to the extent that they are not democracy.”

Marx. Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. 1843

“The proletariat too needs democratic forms for the seizure of political power but they are for it, like all political forms, mere means. But if today democracy is wanted as an end it is necessary to rely on the peasantry and petty bourgeoisie [instead].”

Engels. Friedrich Engels to Eduard Bernstein In Zurich. 1884

also if you reject the use of violence to fight for socialism your basically a liberal.

Where? The October revolution was relatively bloodless. Lenin only started taking harsh measures when the allies began deploying forces and attacking Russia

According to whom? Definitely not to Marx or Engels, who
- allowed any means necessary, be that legal politics or violent power grab.
- didn't fall for the bourgeois spook of "democracy", which is merely an oligarchic spectacle.

liberal screeching intensifies

terrorist organizations against the Tsar existed long before the October revolution.

How about you actually read Marx instead of spouting bullshit:

-Karl Marx

Why do you fetishise democracy when it's actually contradictory in the real world?

the fucking state of this board man

what was their intention then, sabotage the war effort against reactionary forces? I understand the sympathy for Kronstadt, but sometime it gets ridiculous.

What's the point of cheating the character limit if you're just going to shitpost like that?

Fucking asscreed

They wanted to get rid of the bolshevik opression and establish sovjet democracy.

This is not a shitpost. The Kronstadt tragedy can be described in few words and is the proof, that Lenin is a traitor.

But the problem is that you know almost nothing about Lenin, the Revolution, Civil War, or Kronstadt.

HOLY SHIT
This is bait right??

Left-coms get the bullet too

Oh, you mean Sovjet Union history revisionism? Nah, I'm actually interested in facts, not propaganda.

No, they don't.

How can you possibly think that Kaplan was a leftcom, you useless idiot?

It was a shame, but honestly irrelevant.

...