Comrade Edric, signing out

[ordos45]

damn it. Why isn't stalin in that picture? >:(

erm...because he was a dictator that killed millions of his own people? And because he wasn't exactly a role model Communist, and every Communist government that has existed usually is "Stalinist"?

[Emperor Harkonnen]

hm, I think that every communist leaders have been and are dictators

[Egeides]

Harkonnen, all communist leaders yet were soviet-type with ONE party. Do you believe a communism with multiple parties would work? If not, why?

[Edric O]

In that case, you don't really know much about Communism...

Karl Marx said that "Democracy is the road to socialism", and Vladimir Lenin later re-affirmed this by stating that "democracy is indispensable to socialism".

Stalin and his followers perverted the ideas of communism to suit their own ends and to give themselves absolute power. There is nothing Communist about Stalin or stalinism.

For a more detailed and complete explanation, you should read The Revolution Betrayed by Leon Trotsky.

[Edric O]

Egeides, in order for Communism to work, the government must be controlled by the people through some sort of democratic process. Of course, there are MANY different ways in which this could be done, but the basic idea is that the people must have all the power.

[Gobalopper]

And the people will never choose communism. :D

[Edric O]

Very funny. But no one except the old ruling elite will want to return to capitalism, just like no one except the old ruling elite wanted to return to feudalism in the 19th century.

[SurlyPIG]

Well I admittedly don't know a whole lot about Marx, but if Lenin was so democratic, how come, in his six year rule, he never attempted to implement any sort of democratic process at all, let alone hold a national leadership election...

[TMA_1]

I think you are stretching it by saying he never upheld any democratic status of law or statute. You havent explained in detail, and I think it is a rather general assumption.

[SurlyPIG]

How is it a stretch? There was never an election in his time...

[TMA_1]

that is not the only thing that connotates democratic virtues. it may be a big one, but there are other issues as well. Also see the philosophy of communism. It is for the people and supposedly controlled by the people. Leaders of Russia had just as much a threat than others to work hard, and serve well.

[SurlyPIG]

Supposedly is right, the Communist Russian government was never controlled by the people - Lenin's time included.

[Edric O]

You are right, Ace. It is true that Lenin was more on the authoritarian side and his government never achieved its goal of implementing a proper democracy. However, there are several reasons for that:

First of all, for the most part of Lenin's rule, there was a war going on. The Revolution took place in the middle of WW1. Lenin and Trotsky saw that the war was a disaster and pulled Russia out of it as soon as they could. They were desperate for peace, but even after signing a treaty with the Germans they still didn't have it. The western allies (the Entente) refused to accept the existence of a communist state (in those times, communists were heavily persecuted by all capitalist governments as enemies of the state). Therefore, the Entente threw whatever forces it could spare at Russia, with the aim of overthrowing the new government. The Russian civil war followed, in which the western-funded and supported Whites tried to overthrow the Reds. But the newly-formed Red Army, commanded by Leon Trotsky, threw them back. Despite the victory, however, the constant war took a heavy toll. Russia could not be a democracy in wartime because most of it was in complete chaos, each city or province being de facto independent. They could barely communicate, much less get together any form of centralized government.

When the war finally ended, in 1920, Russia lay in ruins. Now, Lenin's first priority was to rebuild the country. Democracy was out of the question for the time being: There was no infrastructure for it, and much of the population couldn't even read! Not to mention that the 6 years of constant war had destroyed food sources and left millions of people with no means to feed their family. There was no time or money to waste on building an expensive democratic system. Food first, democracy later.

Unfortunetaly, Lenin had to withdraw from power due to health problems just 2 years after the end of the war. In those 2 short years, his main concern was the shattered Russian economy and recovering from the war. He had a plan for a democratic political system based on worker's councils (soviets), but it would take time for a country like Russia, which had never known democracy before, to make the soviets truly democratic bodies. However, their time ran out much too soon. Before he died, Lenin hoped that his successor would continue his work and use the great power at his disposal in a wise manner. However, things didn't work out that way...

[SurlyPIG]

"Food first, democracy later."

Sensible. Let's remember that in the Iraq thread. ;)

[nemafakei]

Ah, the knife which cuts both ways.

Edit: Oops; that was unclear; the knife can also cut another way in the Iraq threads... making sure the world ha food before democracy...

[Edric O]

Touch