Bolshevism/Russian nationalism.
- This topic has 27 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
There is no reason why, ideologically, Bolsheviks (Leninists: Stalinists, Trotskyists, Maoists etc.) should support Putin any more than support NATO. Unless, of course, they are admitting at last what they always were: nationalists.
This equally applies to those lefties who support NATO as those who support Putin and Hsi.
The question goes back as to why so many leftist intellectuals continued to support Bolshevism long after the ugly truth was known. I suspect that there was then, and is now, a psychological process of ‘transference’ where, because of the hatred of the society/country into which they’re born, an identification with the declared ‘enemy’ takes place. The hypocrisy and lies of the propaganda of one’s own capitalist culture tends to reinforce this process. It becomes a habit that eventually is able to justify any barbarism of the entity to which the embittered individual identifies.
Post-WW1 arising from the abortive German Revolution in Hamburg there arose National Bolshevism led by Fritz Wolffheim and Heinrich Laufenberg proposing an alliance with the right-wing to wage resistance against the Entente Powers occupying Germany at the time.
Although this was rejected, the KPD and the Nazis did collaborate against the Versailles Treaty and the Weimar Republic
The Leninist obsession with “imperialism” ought to make them support Hitler’s plaint too, against the imperialism of Britain’s denying markets to Germany and “stifling” it.
In fact, just as Stalin was completing Russia’s capitalist revolution Hitler was doing the same in Germany – completing a national process begun by the Prussian kings and by Bismarck.
https://www.worldsocialism.org/wsm/rosa-luxemburg-and-the-national-question/
Rosa Luxemburg took the correct stand regarding nationalism. she swept the floor with Lenin nationalism. We have an article titled: Lenin Theoretician of Nationalism
In Latin America the Leninists of all tendencies have supported many reactionaries governments, presidents, dictators and leaders including augusto Pinochet, it is shameful their stands and it has created many confusion among the workers.
“RT en Espanol” is a platform to support the capitalists of Russia including Putin.
The Trotskyists supported Sadan Hussein because he was an anti imperialist, and the government of the dictator Fulgencio Batista in Cuba before the Guerrillas uprising which was also supported by one sector of the Cuban ruling class.
PS: The man that killed Leon Trotsky was an ex Trotsky who became a Stalinists ( they are all Leninists ) and the government of Mexico in that time allowed him to enter Mexico, and he was soviet agent, a killer who called himself a communist
Of pertinence, given that the bugbear of the Stalinists is “Nazism” round every corner …
At school I had a German teacher who, as a young girl, had been a member of the Nazi Party. She lived in the east of Germany and she told me that when the Russians moved in, she and the others (she was a secretary) in her office merely changed their swastika armbands for red hammer & sickle ones and carried on with business as usual – as members of the Communist Party!
I’ve told this story before.
At my work, there was an ex-regimental sergeant major and during one of our many conversations he reminded me that if the Russians invaded and occupied Britain, the only difference it would make for him and I, would be that instead of a crown on our caps, it would be a red star.
He was echoing your teacher. Unless you want to be a martyr very little actually changes in day-to-day life. Ask the occupied countries.
The Russian army still flies the Soviet flag alongside the Tsarist one.
The joke of the “communism” that never was has really come home to roost.Nationalist birds of a feather flock together?
“…Politicians from a far-right party in Germany who are on a visit to Russia, and plan to travel to Russian-occupied eastern Ukraine, have been accused of supporting Vladimir Putin’s war and of undertaking a “propaganda trip”.,,”
Fidel Castro and his groups became a Marxist Leninist in a few days because the Soviet Union turned him into a ‘communist”, but before that he was flirting with the USA and speaking about a Green Revolution and that he was not a Communist, the Soviets just turned the country into a new Caribbean Sovietism, or state capitalism and all means of productions were nationalized by a new ruling class. All those speeches about Cuban socialism it is just a lie, and the embargo is not only the main cause of the crisis, it is state capitalism. The Cuban Communist Party collaborated with the government of Fulgencio Batista and it was a dead Stalinist organization and the Soviet Union reactivated it again
Some sectors of the old capitalist class and the church supported the rebels and they opposed them when they started to nationalize the means of production, and they started the propaganda against the Soviets Red, since workers do not have political and class education it was easier to confuse both sides, but in some places the political organizations changed shirts from Castroism to Maoism and most members were students, and some are still living in 1959 because socialism/communism was never known, and still it is unknown
The dictator of the Dominican Republic known as Rafael L Trujillo before being assassinated by a plot made by the CIA he was in conversation with the Soviets in order to switch from the Yankees to the Soviets, and he spent most of his life fighting against ‘communism “, for the Soviets would have been easier because all means of production were under the control of the state, and they belonged to him, ( except the Puerto Rican Sugar Company ) it would have been easier than Cuba.
It would have been a different situation because the exiles living outside of the country would have supported the Soviet Union and some were pro soviets, and he already had contradictions with the catholic church and he created a cult of personality like Joseph Stalin or similar to a god, and he had his own Gestapo or KGB and he has his own vanguard party, or the dictatorship of one party to lead. The perfect platform for a new soviet republic. The same dog wearing different collar.
When you understand the concept of state capitalism and the real nature of Leninism the picture of the world situation is clear, a struggle between two superpower to dominate the world and its resources, it was not a struggle between communism of capitalism, it was a struggle between two capitalists camps, and the so called socialist camps, and real socialism it was just another lie
If you go to the websites of any Latin American so called communists or socialists political parties you will see that they are nationalists, they support governments and leaders, and the so called national liberation, the problems are banks and bankers and neoliberalism instead of capitalist production or the point of production. Maoists, Trotskyists, Stalinists, Hoxhaists, Castroists, Guevaraists, they are all Leninists and supporters of state capitalism without any Marxist or socialists foundations.
Like the Stalinists they continue with the same shit about Fascism/Nazism and Post fascism, as Stalinist( Leninist ) they see fascists all over, like Putin and his criminal accomplices, it is also a pretext to obtain popular votes, and most of those groups do not know the real definition of fascismo, anyone that oppose Putin, or any so called socialist country is a fascist, but they support the dictatorship of one party, fascism comes in two forms: Fascism and anti fascism
PS: For most leftist groups imperialism or capitalist expansionism is only one single country instead of the whole capitalist system. They have not read Rosa Luxemburg or Nikalai Bukharin on imperialism and accumulation of capital and expansion, therefore China, Rusia are not imperialist
WORLD VIEW: LENIN, THEORIST OF NATIONALISMLenin’s very notion that “imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism” supposes that one nation exploits another, so requiring a “national liberation” movement for the subject nation, which leads the working class of two different countries into a game of slaughtering each other. But the working class has no nation, only a world to win.
We know that, historically, unless a particular class monopolises the means of production and distribution and forces the rest of the people to sell their labour power, no capitalist production is possible. Private property is monopoly. Coupled with the division of labour it is the basis of commodity production as of exchange, money, the market, etc.
But to Lenin monopoly was not this class monopoly but the mere concentration and centralisation of capital. According to Marx, the very existence of capitalist society involves both monopoly (in this sense) and competition, which nullifies Lenin’s supposition that such monopoly is only a feature of “imperialism”:
“In the economic life of the present time you find not only competition and monopoly but also their synthesis, which is not a formula but a movement. Monopoly produces competition, competition produces monopoly” (Letter to Annekov, 28 December 1846).
The basic nature of capital always remains the same both in developed and undeveloped form–production for profit (i.e. the unpaid portion of labour). The defining feature of capitalist production is that it is based on wage-labour. Wages presuppose capital and vice versa. Here also, Lenin failed to understand why different rates of wages prevail in different countries. According to him, wages are higher in imperialist countries because the capitalists there bribe their workers out of the superprofits which they earn from exploiting the subjugated countries.
PS: Pure bourgeois nationalism. Transforming Marxism which is a revolutionary theory into a nationalist theory
The theory of the Three World created by Mao Tse Tung was so reactionary that thousands of Maoists rejected it and it produced a great division among the international maoist movement, it was something similar to Trotsky concept of the degenerated workers state which produced an enormous division among the working class movement. Ironically, Trotsky wife knew that the Soviet Union was a state capitalist economy and she left the fourth international
A Letter to Natalia Trotsky on the Theory of State Capitalism
I read, “She also identifies the period that the definitive transition to state-capitalism occurred: 1935-1937.”
Surely this time-line is suspect.
That is the opinion of the Marxist Humanist because they think that the period before the so called Stalin coup the Soviet Union was a socialist nation. Stalinism is not Stalinism, it is also Leninism, as well some Maoist group think that state capitalist started after the coup against the gang of five, and the Hoxhaists think that state capitalism started after kruschev. Natalia Sedovia was a friend of Dunayeskaya who also believed that state capitalism started in 1930 and that state capitalism saved the collapse of capitalism
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.