Who was in the right...

Who was in the right? I know in Hungary the "rebels" were backed by the US and condemned by pretty much every socialist government, but here there seems to be an even split. Was the USSR afraid of losing influence and so attacked a legitimate socialist state, or was it just another color revolution?

Other urls found in this thread:


Hoxha, as always, was in the right.

Dubcek was trying to carry out legitimate reforms to make his country into less of a backwards dictatorial shithole and the USSR didn't like that


The Chad Anti-Revisionists vs the Virgin Social Imperialists

Judging the class character of a conflict by which countries support which belligerents is, as always, completely stupid.

Geopolitics is both complex and mostly short term. The USA and UK siding with the USSR during WW2, for instance, does not do any of the following:

Not everyone who participated in the Hungarian Uprising was a Western liberal. There were anti-Semitic fascists who attacked Jews, and there were the council communists led by Imre Nagy who actually got shit done. The US actually didn't like Nagy and the councilists, and preferred some cardinal who wanted a Western regime in Hungary

OP is however not asking if Hungary should have been attacked. OP is asking quite a opposite - if Hungary had a right in attacking legitimate socialist state to violate decision of democratic centralist government.

This. New socialist man has been born. It was time to make room for him to bring western socialist republic(s) closer to anarchy.


more questions?
communists were murdered, fuck them, roll in the tanks

the same shit happened in poland, it was "nationalist communists" that were pushing for even stronger "market socialism"
fuck them and fuck them to death

… does he have two hats?

Yes in Prague by a bunch of Brezhnevboo Tanks with the help of NazBol Poland and Mark-Suc Hungary


it's a bunker

not everything Hoxha did to spite the soviets was good either.
no communists were harmed during the restauration of order by communists rolling in tanks. the only downside to it was that those weren't ordered in by a genuine ML leadership.


Order had not collapsed to begin with
The C-S gov (Which was the one recognized by basically everyone) still was in the control of the entire country
137 civilians killed,
500 seriously wounded
5 soldiers committed suicide
70,000 Czechoslovak citizens fled to the West immediately after the invasion. Total number of emigrants before Velvet revolution reached 300,000.

nobody said that, just fuck the czech cuckdems
had it coming and deserved it

just stay in your bunker and cry more for Stalin-senpai to notice you

Oh so you just know jack shit about history
Dubcek was a committed socialist/communist and was certainly not a Soc-Dem
He was a almost Lifelong member of the communist party and took part in Anti-Fascist Uprisings for fuck sake


No Hoxha was right because the SU showed the fact that the "Warsaw pact" just meant "soviet puppet states" and he had just witnessed them commit an act of Out-right imperialism against a supposed ally because it broke the soviet line
Im not sure what this even means
Are you implying that Dubcek and his men were somehow NATO?

Tankies really are batshit insane. I think I'm beginning to understand genuine anti-revisionist MLs and I'd much rather side with them than Brezhnev apologists.

it's retarded

brezhnev was a faggot
dubcek was worse

but of course the liberal-flag poster sides with cuckdem NATO agents because you can't possibly shit on them while also shitting on those who were slightly less worse

*Insert no argument man here*

It might be strange for trotskyist-brezhnevite scum like you, but yes, a man who fought in anti-fascist uprising, afterwards left to Moscow to study ML and recognized comrade Stalin as great revolutionary was not only committed socialist, but commited marxist-leninist

the retardation is strong in those 2



pizzahut guy was probably just a ML with "human face" too
and totally not a western agent because reasons and stuff

oh right but breshnev was just as bad because as we know the SU dissolved back then too, nobody noticed tho so it happened again with pizza hut guy
who wasn't as bad as breshnev and just a true ML (with "human face")

He didnt though he just allowed society to be more open
He simply condemned Brezhnevboo Warsaw pact tier "Communism" (That was basically already Mark-Soc)

Mao was right, ya'll are cucks

[citation fucking needed]
the core of his reforms was dissolving police state enlarging civil freedoms.

He was as much socdem as any ML was. Get back your leftcom flag.

how many levels of trotsky-fascist-wrecker-hyena-ism are you are comrade?

they werent?

here, you forgot your flag

The Czechoslovakia was also in the way towards cybernetics planning of economic production.

In fact what can be gathered from the books released for general public and for the experts, it was the golden age of knowledge.

Translation of Glushkov's Introduction to Cybernetics was released in 1968, and many other books laying the foundation of what might culminate as cybernetically planned economy were released in the 1960's. These books are however rare and you have to search the antiquarian book shops or online auctions, but the prices are okay.

All the books that I have read so far explicitly prefer cybernetics planned economy. At least those on cybernetics. There were also many books on the management from western authors and the formal structure of factory management with bosses was kept, instead of something like Cybersyn or factory soviets.

And also the worker protests of 1950's in Pilsen, where the workers accused the party officials of being bourgeoisie in red cloth, and rightfully so as their observation was correct. A nomenklatura was emerging just as it emerged in soviet union. So it was not all perfect. At least the system was tuned towards the benefit of all common people.

The only author, Oskar Lange, who was for markets only argues for analysis of markets and subsequent control of markets to avoid the periodic crises of it due to long feedback chains causing the system to have unstable oscillations.

So no, it was not about introduction of market socialism. Otherwise they would not spend time researching into computers that much. But stories from relatives who were involved in computerization said that for some factories, computers were just a mark of prestige and not that actually useful.

can you post names and authors (or ISBNs) of books?

brezhnev did that

Oskar Lange, Antoni Banasiński, Theory of reproduction and accumulation, Pergamon Press 1969 (Czech translation 1966)

Oskar Lange, 'Wholes and Parts: A General Theory of System Behavior, Pergamon Press. 1965.

Viktor Glushkov, Introduction to Cybernetics, Academic Press 1966 (Czech translation 1968)

Полетаев Игорь Андреевич, Сигнал. О некоторых понятиях кибернетики, 1958 (чешский перевод 1961)

I don't think there is an english translation.

Norbert Wiener, Ross W. Ashby. All major works titles of which you can find at wikipedia.

Then there are several books as an article compilations, published by the Czechoslovak publisher Academia. Those sadly are of course outdated today and only available in czech or with english abstracts at best.

What is worth mentioning is that the Insitute of theory if Information and Automation puts out free pdf copies of the entire run of its journal, Kybernetika.

Available mostly in english at kybernetika.cz

Of course the journal is scientific and as such is incredibly focused on the details and specific problems. But also serves as a guideline of the level of scientific research in the Eastern Bloc countries, where they were capable of publishing in english.

But today the most important book is Paul Cockshott's Towards a new socialism. General enough to be understandable by beginners, yet specific enough to focus on actual main points of economic planning.

The introductory book in pic in my previous post shows feedback loops and cybernetic models of economy used for planning being done in accounting units (money, time) and not in kind. In fact the book is short and rather serves as an introductory one.

But even 50 years before the 60's, Otto Neurath figured out you need to do planning in kind. That is not to reduce entire economic information into one accounting unit, but keep the vectors.

Ďakujem súdruh. Zastav sa niekedy zahovnoplagátiť na >>>/heilvasky/ ak to ešte náhodou nepoznáš.

I can tell who you are just by your flag and the way you write. You are the most intellectually dishonest person on the board who pretends to be a leftist. There's nothing to argue about there because you are toddler reaching for the high cabinets, at least on the OP subject

You don't have to speak authoritatively on subjects you don't spend hours rearching

Have to say I'm a bit surprised to see this thread so one sided; other than the mustache guy it looks like everyone is Team Dubček. Are there so many Hoxhaists on leftypol, or is it just anarkiddies latching on to anything vaguely antiestablishment?

I'm not asking anything about Hungary, my mind is quite made up on that issue. I'm asking about the invasion of Czechoslovakia.

Gorbachev was a product of Brezhnev and his era.

Děkuji, soudruhu, díky za pozvání.

Kdybys rovnou řekl, že jsi slovák, mohl jsem rovnou poslat několik citačních záznamů v češtině.

Gluškov, Viktor Michajlovič. Úvod do kybernetiky. Překlad Karel Čulík a Toňa Hrušková. Vyd. 1. Praha: Academia, 1968. 285 s.
Ashby, William Ross. Kybernetika. Překlad Karel Berka. 1. vyd. Praha: Orbis, 1961. 366, [4] s. Malá moderní encyklopedie; Sv. 23.
Poletajev, Igor' Andrejevič. Kybernetika. 1. vyd. Praha: SNTL, 1961. 429, [2] s. Polytechnická knižnice. Ř. 1, Co máte vědět; Sv. 23. a 24. Řada polytechnické lit.
Wiener, Norbert. Kybernetika neboli řízení a sdělování v živých organismech a strojích: Určeno věd. a techn. pracovníkům v nejrůznějších oborech lidské činnosti a studentům, kteří znají základy matem. analysy. 1. vyd. Praha: SNTL, 1960. 148, [3] s. Řada teoretické lit. Teoretická knižnice inženýra.
Wiener, Norbert. Kybernetika a společnost. Vyd. 1. Praha: ČSAV, 1963. 216, [1] s.
Kýn, Oldřich a Pelikán, Pavel. Kybernetika v ekonomii. 1. vyd. Praha: NPL, 1965. 206, [5] s. Ekonomie a společnost; Sv. 5.
Lange, Oskar. Celek a vývoj ve světle kybernetiky. Překlad Oliver Tenzer. 1. vyd. Praha: Svoboda, 1966. 128, [3] s. Filosofie a současnost; Sv. 3.

Nevím jak jsou na tom slovenské antikvariáty, ale i z českých lze objednávat. Nebo využívat knihovny, které tyto i jiné knihy ještě mají v inventáři.

Obviously 5th columns dont exist anymore, its all the people

Still no evidence he was a capitalist
Infact he was a life long communist
Accept he didnt though
He had no intention of leaving Warsaw/Joining NATO/Becoming capitalist Etc
He just triggered Brezhnev because he did not follow the soviet line

You red liberals can do no better than autistic screeching dumb anti-Marxist propaganda. I swear to God, I will fucking catch you, lock you, torture until you won't admit on camera that you are Trotskyist scum and then execute you by breaking baseball bat on your head.

serious question, is there some way we can get Stalinposter banned? it seems appropriate to treat him with stalinist methods

It's senseless trying to convince brainwashed people of the facts. There's no way that guy will ever accept the USSR made even one move that wasn't literal perfection.

I would love to, but banning every shitposter is hoochie-tier moderation

that's true
based board volunteer

bump for cybernetic book list