Why are state-capitalists even considered left-wing?

Capitalism saved us likewise with giving you guys logistics and attacking the west front/south front.

anarchists always suck the US dick and still wonder why everyone calls them bourgeoise-submissive faggots, kek

wew lad

You spit on the graves of every working class soldier who decided to fight by implying that Stalin and the bureaucracy he headed was the reason for the Nazis defeat. They were defeated despite them, not because of.

Stalin actually refused logistic suppoort from Churchill and the West because he hated them for leaving Russians to die on the fronts. That's why the Soviet T-34 was used all over the place. The Allies also only got involved later in the war so that the USSR couldn't spread Socialism into mainland Europe.

same for japan

Are you a mong? I didn't say the soldiers weren't the ones that fought on teh front lines, I'm simply saying that Stalin and the bureaucracy were the ones leading it. of course, they weren't on the front lines but Stalin didn't even flee Moscow when the Fascists were knocking on the door. He stood by his comrades.

Did the jewcapitalist also create the wiki around the flop union?

Daily Reminder.

and not to forget they stood by rejecting any and all offers by the soviet union to stomp out fascism before it had full military capacity to overrun most of europe
they were even involved in strengthening facism to begin with

Fucking kek, did you even know that it was the soviet invasion of manchuria who finally made japan surrender? They were waiting on the soviets to break a deal between them and america which would prevent an occupation.

You know OP, if you incite the stalinists they will just flood the thread with Stalin dick suckling.

Don't post this sort of thing to start fights. It's annoying.

...

LMFAO. The USSR wasn't obliged to help the Allies who were dabbling with Fascism before the war began anyway. They were all Imperialist powers. Not to forgt that the Western nations were involved in trying to destroy the Soviet Union during the times before and a little bit into WW1.

...

And like I said, the working class won WWII on the eastern front despite the parasites.

And the US won over japan and made them post war allies while the soviet union was stuck in the shitter. So mutch for all that effort to have your allies (China and Hungary partly) betray you towards your decline to irrelevance in 1991.

Dont sin comrades dat is counter revolutionary :^)

kek, the lengths these anarkiddies go to deluding themself

FIFY

Your fantasy has died years ago, deal with it videogame LARP'er.
Your only hope is lacan (my gott the revisionist) cocain man.

they mad as fuck

who is this pig guy face you guys keep posting? is it leftypols version of jew face?

this

just calling it capitalism would be far better.
As if state capitalism is in any way different to 'regular' capitalism,

Stalin Ruined Everything.

No, it's a bourgie. Jews can be porkies or prols like us. We don't dicriminate based on race or whatever. Only based on class.

This, Anton Pannekoek warned us!

for faggots, certainly
the soviet people on the other hand are grateful

"Thank you Papa Stalin for never getting rid of beurocracy, strengthening the inner party instead of letting the state wither away, and promoting socialism in one coutry instead of world revolution."

All he did was industrializing Russia. In effect, while Turkey or Egypt needed the army to become the bourgies, Stalin turned the inner party into the bourgies of the USSR's State Capitalism.

it's grossly apparent you're talking out of your ass

turning party into the bourgeoise
kek

shove that wannabe marxist shitposting back where it came from

maybe read something for once
marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1951/economic-problems/

Only the dead can know peace from this historical revisionism.

...

lel

Japan attacked america, and the commonwealth was involved in the war before the USSR.

Read a book you dumb Stalin lover, before spouting off about history you don't understand. Seriously.

This anti-communist board is so fucking cringe-worthy man. I've gotten anarchists to proclaim more than once that capitalism has nothing to do with capital accumulation at all, they just use the term to refer to any firm without a sufficient degree of democratic management for their liking. Political and economic reductionism are both plagues noticeable in the anarchist and Marxist traditions respectively. However, as capitalist and communist societies are both defined by the workings of their economic base it should be taken for granted that the later group are the more consistent socialists.

What about sexuality? Poop dicks are subhumans

KYS.

KEK THIS WEBM

who did stalin personally kill with his own two hands that prevented fascism? are you sure it wasn't the red army?

full retard and beyond

...

Against Vulgarising
the Slogan of Self-Criticism
marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1928/06/26.htm

"d) The state apparatus and the struggle against bureaucracy. So much is being said about bureaucracy that there is no need to dilate on it. That elements of bureaucracy exist in our state, co-operative and Party apparatus, there can be no doubt. That it is necessary to combat the elements of bureaucracy, and that this task will confront us all the time, as long as we have state power, as long as the state exists, is also a fact.

But one must know how far one can go. To carry the struggle against bureaucracy in the state apparatus to the point of destroying the state apparatus, of discrediting the state apparatus, of attempts to break it up— that means going against Leninism, means forgetting that our apparatus is a Soviet apparatus, which is a state apparatus of a higher type than any other state apparatus in the world.

Wherein lies the strength of our state apparatus? In that it links the state power with the millions of workers and peasants through the Soviets. In that the Soviets are schools of administration for tens and hundreds of thousands of workers and peasants. In that the state apparatus does not fence itself off from the vast masses of the people, but merges with them through an incalculable number of mass organisations, all sorts of commissions, committees, conferences, delegate meetings, etc., which encompass the Soviets and in this way buttress the organs of government.

Wherein lies the weakness of our state apparatus? In the existence within it of elements of bureaucracy, which spoil and distort its work. In order to eliminate bureaucracy from it—and this cannot be done in one or two years—we must systematically improve the state apparatus, bring it closer to the masses, reinvigorate it by bringing in new people loyal to the cause of the working class, remodel it in the spirit of communism, but not break it up or discredit it. Lenin was a thousand times right when he said: "Without an 'apparatus' we would have perished long ago. If we do not wage a systematic and stubborn struggle to improve the apparatus we shall perish before we have created the base for socialism." 13 […]"
marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1927/12/02.htm#4._Classes,_the_State_Apparatus_and_the_Countrys_Cultural_Development_

I shall not dilate on those defects in our state apparatus that are glaring enough as it is. I have in mind, primarily, "Mother Red Tape." I have at hand a heap of materials on the matter of red tape, exposing the criminal negligence of a number of judicial, administrative, insurance, co-operative and other organisations.

Here is a peasant who went to a certain insurance office twenty-one times to get some matter put right, and even then failed to get any result.

Here is another peasant, an old man of sixty-six, who walked 600 versts to get his case cleared up at an Uyezd Social Maintenance Office, and even then failed to get any result.

Here is an old peasant woman, fifty-six years old, who, in response to a summons by a people's court, walked 500 versts and travelled over 600 versts by horse and cart, and even then failed to get justice done.

A multitude of such facts could be quoted. It is not worth while enumerating them. But this is a disgrace to us, comrades! How can such outrageous things be tolerated?

Lastly, facts about "demoting." It appears, that in addition to workers who are promoted, there are also such as are "demoted," who are pushed into the background by their own comrades, not because they are incapable or inefficient, but because they are conscientious and honest in their work.

Here is a worker, a tool-maker, who was promoted to a managerial post at his plant because he was a capable and incorruptible man. He worked for a couple of years, worked honestly, introduced order, put a stop to inefficiency and waste. But, working in this way, he trod on the toes of a gang of so-called "Communists," he disturbed their peace and quiet. And what happened? This gang of "Communists" put a spoke in his wheel and thus compelled him to "demote himself," as much as to say: "You wanted to be smarter than us, you won't let us live and make a bit in quiet—so take a back seat, brother."

Here is another worker, also a tool-maker, an adjuster of bolt-cutting machines, who was promoted to a managerial post at his factory. He worked zealously and honestly. But, working in this way, he disturbed somebody's peace and quiet. And what happened? A pretext was found and they got rid of this "troublesome" comrade. How did this promoted comrade leave, what were his feelings? Like this: "In whatever post I was appointed to I tried to justify the confidence that was placed in me. But this promotion played a dirty trick on me and I shall never forget it. They threw mud at me. My wish to bring everything into the light of day remained a mere wish. Neither the works committee, nor the management, nor the Party unit would listen to me. I am finished with promotion, I would not take another managerial post even if offered my weight in gold" (Trud, 14 No. 128, June 9, 1927).

But this is a disgrace to us, comrades! How can such outrageous things be tolerated?

The Party's task is, in fighting against bureaucracy and for the improvement of the state apparatus, to extirpate with a red-hot iron such outrageous things in our practical work as those I have just spoken about.

e) Concerning Lenin's slogan about the cultural revolution. The surest remedy for bureaucracy is raising the cultural level of the workers and peasants. One can curse and denounce bureaucracy in the state apparatus, one can stigmatise and pillory bureaucracy in our practical work, but unless the masses of the workers reach a certain level of culture, which will create the possibility, the desire, the ability to control the state apparatus from below, by the masses of the workers themselves, bureaucracy will continue to exist in spite of everything. Therefore, the cultural development of theworking class and of the masses of the working peasantry, not only the development of literacy, although literacy is the basis of all culture, but primarily the cultivation of the ability to take part in the administration of the country, is the chief lever for improving the state and every other apparatus. This is the sense and significance of Lenin's slogan about the cultural revolution.

Here is what Lenin said about this in March 1922, before the opening of the Eleventh Congress of our Party, in his letter to the Central Committee addressed to Comrade Molotov:

"The chief thing we lack is culture, ability to administer. . . . Economically and politically NEP fully ensures us the possibility of laying the foundation of socialist economy. It is 'only' a matter of the cultural forces of the proletariat and of its vanguard." 15

These words of Lenin's must not be forgotten, comrades. (Voices : "Quite right!")

Hence the Party's task: to exert greater efforts to raise the cultural level of the working class and of the working strata of the peasantry.

Dude, what the fuck. How is supplying a significant portion of the USSR's light vehicles for the entire war, near two million tons of food, and a large number of tanks and aircraft pure propagana?

4) The problem of combating bureaucracy. The danger of bureaucracy lies, first of all, in that it keeps concealed the colossal reserves latent in the depths of our system and prevents them from being utilised, in that it strives to nullify the creative initiative of the masses, ties it hand and foot with red tape and reduces every new undertaking by the Party to petty and useless trivialities. The danger of bureaucracy lies, secondly, in that it does not tolerate the checking of fulfilment and strives to convert the basic directives of the leading organisations into mere sheets of paper divorced from life. It is not only, and not so much, the old bureaucrats stranded in our institutions who constitute this danger; it is also, and particularly, the new bureaucrats, the Soviet bureaucrats; and the "Communist" bureaucrats are by no means the least among them. I have in mind those "Communists" who try to substitute bureaucratic orders and "decrees," in the potency of which they believe as in a fetish, for the creative initiative and independent activity of the vast masses of the working class and peasantry.

The task is to smash bureaucracy in our institutions and organisations, to get rid of bureaucratic "habits" and "customs" and to clear the way for utilising the reserves of our social system, for developing the creative initiative and independent activity of the masses.

That is not an easy task. It cannot be carried out "in a trice." But it must be carried out at all costs if we really want to transform our country on the basis of socialism.

In the struggle against bureaucracy, the Party is working along four lines: that of developing self-criticism, that of organising the checking of fulfilment, that of purging the apparatus and, lastly, that of promoting from below to posts in the apparatus devoted workers from those of working-class origin.

The task is to exert every effort to carry out all these measures.
Political Report of the Central Committee to the Sixteenth Congress of the C.P.S.U.(B.)
June 27, 1930
9. The Next Task
marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1930/aug/27.htm

Lastly, there is one further question, which there is no need to deal with at length but which ought to be mentioned. That is the question of the growth of the Party's prestige among the non-Party workers and the masses of the working people in general of our country, among the workers and the oppressed classes in general all over the world. There can scarcely be any doubt now that our Party is becoming the banner of liberation for the masses of the working people all over the world, and that the title of Bolshevik is becoming a title of honour for the best members of the working class.

Such, in general, comrades, is the picture of our achievements in the sphere of Party affairs.

This does not mean, comrades, that there are no shortcomings in our Party. No, there are shortcomings, and grave ones at that. Permit me to say a few words about them.

Let us take, for example, the guidance of economic and other organisations by our Party organisations. Is all well with us in this respect? No, not all. Often we settle questions, not only in the districts, but also at the centre, by the family, domestic-circle method, so to speak. Ivan Ivanovich, a member of the top leadership of such and such an organisation, has, say, made a gross mistake and has messed things up. But Ivan Fyodorovich is reluctant to criticise him, to expose his mistakes and to correct them. He is reluctant to do so because he does not want to "make enemies." He has made a mistake, he has messed things up—what of it? Who of us does not make mistakes? Today I shall let him, Ivan Fyodorovich, off; tomorrow he will let me, Ivan Ivanovich, off; for what guarantee is there that I, too, shall not make a mistake? Everything in order and satisfactory. Peace and good will. They say that a mistake neglected is detrimental to our great cause? Never mind! We'll muddle through somehow.

Such, comrades, is the way some of our responsible workers usually argue.

But what does that mean? If we Bolsheviks, who criticise the whole world, who, in the words of Marx, are storming heaven, if we, for the sake of this or that comrade's peace of mind, abandon self-criticism, is it not obvious that that can lead only to the doom of our great cause? (Voices: "Quite right!" Applause.)

Marx said that what, among other things, distinguishes the proletarian revolution from every other revolution is that it criticises itself and, in criticising itself, strengthens itself. 16 That is an extremely important point of Marx's. If we, the representatives of the proletarian revolution, shut our eyes to our defects, settle questions by the family-circle method, hush up each other's mistakes and drive the ulcers inwards into the organism of the Party, who will correct these mistakes, these defects?

Is it not obvious that we shall cease to be proletarian revolutionaries, and that we shall certainly perish if we fail to eradicate from our midst this philistinism, this family-circle method of settling highly important questions of our work of construction?

Is it not obvious that by refraining from honest and straightforward self-criticism, by refraining from honest and open correction of our mistakes, we close our road to progress, to the improvement of our work, to new successes in our work?

After all, our development does not proceed in the form of a smooth, all-round ascent. No, comrades, we have classes, we have contradictions within the country, we have a past, we have a present and a future, we have contradictions between them, and our onward progress cannot take the form of a smooth rocking on the waves of life. Our advance takes place in the process of struggle, in the process of the development of contradictions, in the process of overcoming these contradictions, in the process of bringing these contradictions to light and eliminating them.

As long as classes exist we shall never be in a position to say: Well, thank God, everything is all right now. We shall never be in such a position, comrades.

Something in life is always dying. But that which is dying refuses to die quietly; it fights for its existence, defends its moribund cause.

Something new in life is always being born. But that which is being born does not come into the world quietly; it comes in squealing and screaming, defending its right to existence. (Voices: "Quite right!" Applause.)
The Fifteenth Congress of the C.P.S.U.(B.)1
December 2-19, 1927
III
The Party and the Opposition
1. The State of the Party
marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1927/12/02.htm#Political_Report_of_the_Central_Committee_

i bet your mom calls you "big boy" too to pet your ego

those supplies weren't a present or contribution to the war, m8

...

fucked up the order

...

...

Revisionist lies and slander.

Great argument.

I'd love to see the facts behind this statement:
Especially considering that the allies were in the war BEFORE the USSR, so literally could not have joined later than them.

on paper, nothing else
ask polish people
if they know shit, they're still salty about brits not having done anything but declare war and then lollygag on their island fucking their close relatives

Lol, thats pathetic. Scraping the bottom of the barrel here for a comeback. I'm sure the Polish people were very grateful to stalin-senpai for all the help he gave them before the war began, unlike the lazy allies who only pretended to join the war before the USSR, and actually joined the war after them, despite what revisionist historians say.

Also, while I'm here, Poland was part of the allies, and were literally the first to react to the German invasion, not the USSR.

You dumb stalinists love to play pretend, don't you?

Tankies and State capitalists are just narcissists who think in their delusions of grandeur that somehow some way when a revolution comes they will be in the position of Stalin or Mao. I take them about as seriously as an "anarcho-capitalist" who tells me they're a young entrepreneur because they charge people to read their blog.

At some point you have to realize who serious allies to progress are and who isn't the sooner you ignore these people and their cries for attention and aggrandizement the sooner we can work on more important shit.

It must be nice to pass off any and all facts you don't like as "revisionist lies and slander"

Daily Reminder that red fascists arnt socialists.

State capitalists should be treated like fascists. We need to take violent action in the streets against them.

in all seriousness, you're a fucking historically illiterate faggot loudmouth stupid bitch that needs to fucking kill itself right the fuck now

What are you kidding me its way better than private capitalism that's constantly flirting with fascism like we have

...

It doesn't matter. :^)

because the parties that turn countries into authoritarian shit holes call themselves socialist, and their propaganda/ideology they espouse is socialist, they often cite Marx and other socialists/communists. They destroy, or heavily control existing market systems. They often steal property from the rich.