Did Stalin ruin Lenin's revolution?

If so, how?
Or would Lenin have approved?

They had a civil debate about it (lenin drops in half way through), but i can't tell who won: youtube.com/watch?v=ZT2z0nrsQ8o#t=137.409916

Other urls found in this thread:

revolutionarydemocracy.org/rdv7n2/blandlt.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Do you mean Lenin's counter-revolution?

...

Stalin did a better job by banning petty bourgeois completely. I'm sure tho that Lenin would dissaprove of Stalin's russian chauvinism, homophobia (Lenin was the first world leader that gave equal rights to lgbt) and some foreign relationships.

Stalin systematically removed/killed every member of the original Bolshevik organization once he was in power.

What does that tell you.

That anarkiddies don't read?

Are you denying that he did that?

That Stalin was a big strong guy and the rest were just weak fray, ideologues.

In Communism, the Weak fear the Strong even more than in regular settings.

He was in a position of political power, you numbskull. How physically big or strong he was doesn't mean shit.

The rest of Lenin General staff was also in a position of power ;')

Simply Stalin was literally the Big Guy and a true Gunslinger. The rest were a bunch of ideologues who thought they were chosen by justice after murdering whole Romanov family.

At what point was the state supposed to disappear completely?

When gorbachev was in power

After the world revolution had established global socialism and after that had grown past the need of a state.

it finished USSR. ironic isn't it

Lenin ruined Lenin's revolution by destroying the workers' councils; the soviets.

Leninists like to rationalise this, but things shouldn't be made simpler than possible.

Marx ruined Lenin's revolution, tbh

Everything Stalin did was a logical extension of the work of Marx and Lenin. If either of them had lived to see it both would recognise he played his part in building socialism. Like Lenin, all of Stalin's "anti-democratic" actions were in fact responses to the influence of bourgeois and reactionary forces in the country. I actually just posted this quote but now it's relevant again ITT.


When you're recruiting from a backwards landlord-infested and superstitious countryside some bureaucratisation is unavoidable. The more democratic 1936 constitution and party purges were all moves directed at preventing the degeneration of the Soviet state into oligarchy, and thus capitalist society. The fact that the USSR eventually did degenerate shows that things were far from perfect but the CPSU at the time did the best they could given the circumstances to avoid that.


No. Lenin, like most communists at the time, held socially conservative views as well. The Bolsheviks didn't actually go out of their way to grant LGBT rights, they merely dissolved all the old Tsarist laws. I swear, people here talk like Lenin and Stalin were strangers. They were hardly best friends or anything but they knew each other. If Stalin was so nasty then Lenin is at fault for not speaking out against his rising role in the party.

Yeah, let's just hand the country over to a band of opportunistic liberals right? They liked the color red and called themselves socialists so surely they had the interests of working people at heart. Jesus I am so glad none of you weenies were in charge of anything back then. It wasn't Lenin's Revolution anyway. You're just using Lenin to disguise your criticism of the actions of the working class. The Bolshevik party was just an arm of the urban proletariat that was used to abolish itself and the peasantry.

OP here

No one answered the important question.

Who won the civil debate?

my gott

No, Lenin's revolution was doomed as soon as Luxemburg's revolution failed. All Stalin did was be a fairly bad human in general, not betray any revolution.

Socialism in a feudalist backwater could never be possible and Lenin knew this. He was relying on the global revolution taking place, not the russian one.

so the trots were right?

The trots were wrong. Didnt trotsky try to say socialism could come about from feudalism?

Why people blame Stalin so much? The revolution didn't succeed because the material conditions werent there yet. This just reinforces vanguardism because "things would be different if it wasnt by Stalin" just means that the great leader wasnt great enough.

revolutionarydemocracy.org/rdv7n2/blandlt.htm

Read this you nignogs. Lenin knew Stalin, it's Lenin who put Stalin in his position as secretary of the party in the first place.

Yeah, except for that part where by the end of the 30's the overwhelming majority of Soviet people were committed to socialism. And for whatever grievances they might have justifiably had they also never rejected the state they lived in outright either. It's a pretty funny kind of capitalist state that goes out of it's way to educate it's citisens on Marxist theory, but that's what the socialist movement of today unironically believes.

The reason I like reading about the USSR and it's achievements so much is because it's an inspiration in comparison to today's demoralised armchair socialists. Just a few short decades ago working people actually rose up, seised state power, built socialism, and won the largest conflict of the century. The fact that communists openly denounce them and their sacrifices today is only a statement to how far we've fallen.

No, Trotsky said that a workers state could take on the progressive role the bourgeoisie failed to do and from there move onto socialism/communism.

Oh yea, of course russia got to a standard of socialism extremely quickly, but that was under capitalism.

I guess you could say Stalin betrayed the revolution in that he didnt transfer the means of production to the workers by that point but that's kinda complicated as well.