WestwallSpring In reply to The-Necromancer [2010-11-22 20:53:33 +0000 UTC]

I can just imagine the "N" beating up the "B" with nazi daggers.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

gl0wstick In reply to ZombieToaster [2010-06-24 23:11:20 +0000 UTC]

I just realized how annoying it is that this group has support for National Bolshevism and Titoism and to an extent Maoism while claiming to be anti-revisionist.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Necromancer In reply to AtomFusion [2010-05-28 07:22:28 +0000 UTC]

I've been wondering that for a good while...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

donald09231985 In reply to The-Necromancer [2010-06-09 18:06:35 +0000 UTC]

Probably just the presence of a sickle-and-hammer, a big misconception, and knowing Eduard Limonov, the fool whose ideology uses this flag, this is a subtle attempt to indoctrinate people into fascism, and many comrades fall for it

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ChairmanLongJohn In reply to GoD-Soviet [2010-08-25 13:04:32 +0000 UTC]

That needs celebration!
I heard he had a painful death
(too bad it wasn't earlier), I love when things end happily!
But still, i don't think he suffered as much as the people in the gulags...

But at least he isn't remembered as he would have wanted, a hero (god),
but as what he really where, a mass murdering dictator that would kill everybody to ensure his own power.

Next year I will drink a big cold beer in celebration of his death, and the piss on a picture of Stalin. (A little childish but then again the man deserved it...)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

GoD-Soviet In reply to ChairmanLongJohn [2010-08-25 13:49:58 +0000 UTC]

Too long
Did not read.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

fng456 In reply to GoD-Soviet [2010-05-15 05:52:27 +0000 UTC]

WTF are you talking about Joseph Stalin was a mass murdering criminal! He is a disgrace to the motherland!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

GoD-Soviet In reply to fng456 [2010-05-15 14:40:23 +0000 UTC]

Are we, as general leftists evaluating human life? No. So when Lenin, Che, Kim, Mao and others also killed people they should be treated the same way as Stalin. Learn in to order to get some more arguments before saying hard words like "disgrace" and "criminal" Comrade.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

gl0wstick In reply to ChairmanLongJohn [2010-02-20 02:45:44 +0000 UTC]

[link]

I do not believe that so much disdain for Trotsky is justified, however. I believe his ideas CAN be applied if the society itself is suited for those ideas. I am neither Trotskyist or Marxist-Leninist; I refrain from one specific ideology on the grounds that society's conditions could overt time change to better suit another ideology instead. Recently, I've began to lean more toward Marxism-Leninism-Maoism/Hoxhaism, but I still see flaws in their "anti-revisionist" reasoning and am still somewhat debating as to whether or not Mao and Hoxha were necessarily true socialists.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Necromancer In reply to Incendary95 [2009-12-09 03:40:07 +0000 UTC]

It smacks more of NazBol to me, but our good comrade has explained the choice of symbolism time and again. I doubt it will be changed...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Incendary95 In reply to The-Necromancer [2009-12-09 05:19:21 +0000 UTC]

to bad, people approaching our ideas might shy away should this "blood flag" be the first thing they see.

plus as a person with a very strong german heritage it makes me over think that aspect. but as long as i never see a swaztica on this page i'll be fine.(should i see a swastika [unless it being set ablaze or being smashed] i will in fact go ape shit)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

The-Necromancer In reply to Incendary95 [2009-12-09 06:50:59 +0000 UTC]

To me, the red flag is part of our Movement. However, that flag with the white circle is not. The "blood flag" represents just that: the red flag is symbolic of all who have died in our fight for equality. Red has always been the color of the Communist Movement, and the far Left in general. The only thing that irks me about comrade ~Marxism-Leninism 's choice of flag is it's National Socialist feel. I hate the Nazi scum even more then the Capitalists...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Incendary95 In reply to The-Necromancer [2009-12-09 18:54:31 +0000 UTC]

well, i geuss im just touchy. i think the red banner on its own says more that the blood flag/hammer & sickle combo. thats all.

(oh, if you ever see a nazi/ neo-nazi please step on his throut)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

The-Necromancer In reply to Incendary95 [2009-12-09 19:50:58 +0000 UTC]

If I ever do, I shall. I despise the Nazi and Fascist scum...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Incendary95 In reply to The-Necromancer [2009-12-10 02:06:39 +0000 UTC]

yeah, i hope i get the oppertunaty to stomp out a nazi sometime.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Necromancer In reply to Incendary95 [2009-11-27 04:46:58 +0000 UTC]

manuscript? I'll have to check that out.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Necromancer In reply to Sovietmaster [2009-11-24 08:37:08 +0000 UTC]

For the most part I have very little knowledge of the Khmer Rouge. As such, I'm not too certain that I can form a good opinion, however I have read your conversation with comrade ~renegadeofpeace . It was most interesting, and a bit informative on both sides.

Sadly, I must also say I don't entirely condone mass killings. After all, we don't want to be seen as comparable to the Nazi scum. Sentence to a GULAG-like penal system where the emphasis is not exactly killing but hard labor would be a more just and productive method. Of course, limitations and restraint of opportunists plays a large part in it all as well.

Then again...

I guess many did die in the GULAG system as well. Alas, the problems of subduing the bourgeoisie while keeping the ethical high ground...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sovietmaster In reply to The-Necromancer [2009-11-25 04:17:19 +0000 UTC]

The GUALG, as I hear, was simply not one entity. Like the Red Gaurds there were different GULAGs. Some where just prisions others labour camps and some re-educational facilities. The bueacracy took advantaged of this as they did with the Collectivization era. Imprisoning those who were agaisnt them, those who threatened them and those who would up-sure them. But then many didnt die due to Repressions. From a good source (Though highly anti-Soviet) the repressions had 12 million people involded. This is sub-divided into non-intentional and justifable. The justifable would be Nazbols,Nazis, Terrorists of the "left opposition" headed by the Zionviev-Samnev,Kamenev centre. The total for that is 1.4 million. The non-intentional(meaning all members of the the All-Union Communist party didnt intend or want those deaths) was 3 million. GULAG is: 1.5 million, during transport: 0.5 and the state executed 1 million. so of these the repressions killed 4.4 million people.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

The-Necromancer In reply to Sovietmaster [2009-11-25 08:44:47 +0000 UTC]

You are correct, the GULAG was not one system per se. As for your figures, I have no knowledge of the data, but I would imagine your reliable source was "The Black Book of Communism"? While being very anti-Soviet and anti-Communist, I do suppose it is accurate in some ways. I'm not entirely convinced on the figures for the Great Purge or the Ukrainian Famine, though...

And those are a whole different topic altogether.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sovietmaster In reply to The-Necromancer [2009-11-25 18:24:12 +0000 UTC]

No, the source was "Soviet Repression statistics: a few comments" by micheal ellman. The Ukraine famine can be described in Another view of Stalin or another work I read (I forgot its title but my comrade knows of it) and it basicly goes over the famines of the USSR. Bottom line: the famine deaths in total was 10 million. This even includes that nasty one in '36. This meaning the other famines must have killed around 3 million at the highest to 10,000 at the lowest. This even includes the Ukraine famine. Though another view of Stalin does take the action a bit too dogmatically but it does give good statistics to work on.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

The-Necromancer In reply to Sovietmaster [2009-11-26 06:35:25 +0000 UTC]

All the famines in total? That seems far more realistic then the figures I've heard on the Ukrainian Famine alone...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sovietmaster In reply to The-Necromancer [2009-11-26 06:41:53 +0000 UTC]

All famines in total through out the USSR. Though I have a good selection of books like "Staying on: Japanese soliders and civilains in China: 1945-1949" which describes that the Nationalists didnt remove the Japanese Imperial presense even the surrendered ones. Some soliders didnt surrender at all. That book was by Gillin Donald G. and Etter Charles.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

The-Necromancer In reply to Sovietmaster [2009-11-26 06:48:22 +0000 UTC]

You certainly seem to have a good library!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sovietmaster In reply to The-Necromancer [2009-11-26 06:50:06 +0000 UTC]

I collect pdf files in my spare time or ask for documents. I'm still waiting for Albanian documents from a Hoxhaist friend of mine, but thank you.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

renegadeofpeace In reply to Sovietmaster [2009-11-12 20:12:41 +0000 UTC]

Uhm... being a communist living in a former socialist country (however not a member of this club) I can say that Pol Pot was greatly disliked and looked down on even by most people in the Eastern Block.
My grandfather (who was also a communist btw.) always said he was a "Red Hitler".
There was also a sarcastic drawing of him in Pravda made by a Soviet cartoonist in 1985 titled: "Greatest homicidal maniacs of all time"
He stood on a podium and was staring at Hitler above him with envy. The text was: "Pol Pot. If he wasnt such a Pol-Pot worker he would have extinguished Cambodia" The joke is that the word "pol-pot" in the russian slang was used to define lazy people.

So in short: I don't know about the others but I certainly don't think that we should look up on or follow Pol Pot.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sovietmaster In reply to renegadeofpeace [2009-11-12 22:00:55 +0000 UTC]

I see, well comrade our views are very different yours and mine.

Besides I dont think Pol Pot, or the regime in general, acted as genocideal. As seen in the reports of Ieng Sary and others they didnt kill intellectuals for "wear glasses" and most of those skulls were not of Khmer Rouge victims. Most could have been any victims of the American bombing raids on Kampuchea (in which over 500,000 tons of bombs were dropped over all of kampuchea from farms, and villages to cities) or of the famines that followed in Lon Nols regime or even when the Vietnamese invaded.

The only estimate death toll for the DK(Democratic Kampuchea), which is not only offical but used by Vickery in his "on KR genocide", 800,000.


the bombings alone killed 600,000 and put nearly 3 million people homeless plus all industries crushed. To build that up and change society would indeed "change 2000 years of history of Kampuchea" of the old feudal ways.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

renegadeofpeace In reply to Sovietmaster [2009-11-12 22:36:52 +0000 UTC]

It's difficult to form a picture out of the death statistics. Kampuchea was a huge mess after it gained it's independence.

Military dictatorships followed each other in a short period of time the only difference between them is that some of them were America friendly and some of them weren't but all of them (and as you mentioned the American and later between 1978-1980 the Vietnamese agression) caused incredible damage to the country.

Thanks to the long French occupation Kampuchea had absolutely no clue how a modern country and government should function they only knew one method of control: force.
It is difficult to judge them from our perspective, what is too brutal for us is was natural to them. And this "political" method of the iron fist was practiced by ALL and EVERY one of the leaders regardless of ideology.

Therefore I don't say that Kampuchean communism and Pol Pot were exceptionally cruel compared to any of it's contemporary political systems or leaders in the country.
He might be an ideologically great figure, but still I hold on to my opinion that how he executed these ideologies should not be followed or thought right.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Sovietmaster In reply to renegadeofpeace [2009-11-13 00:43:14 +0000 UTC]

Indeed, trying to rebuild its economy and industry (actually the KR got a bit far on that. Research before Revolution periods in terms of Farms and Industries)

But for alot of brutalityit can not be blamed on just Pol Pot. There were, of course, opportunists in the party and the Yuon Angkar ( a Vietnamese created Angkar or Organization) near the border between Kampuchea and Vietnam that acted as a safe-gaurd for the Vietcong units still near those areas. These agents knew more Khmer then most peasatns/farmser so they were regarded as intellectuals and this gave them the opportunity to kill off Khmer Rouge Intellectuals to secure the Coup D'etat. But then Pol Pot launched his own purge of the party. (in which Vorn Vet fled to Vietnam) And tried to get rid of the Yuon Angkar (it had at least some success)

But then again,comrade, as Engles said "Revolution is an act in which the Proletariat force their will apon the Bourgoise" and Mao "Revolution is not a dinner party, nor writting an essay or doing sowing, it is not leasutrely ,kind or gental in nature. It is an act in which one class overthrows another"

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Sovietmaster In reply to Sovietmaster [2009-11-13 22:45:20 +0000 UTC]

Actually the death of landlords, aka kulaks, was in the same instance as the 1930s collectiziation. The Poor peasants would treat them harshly,yes but wouldnt organize the way the party would like it. Now dont get me wrong the peasantry are revolutionary but not as revolutionary and also lets remember its also the same with the PRCs "Four class bloc" they etablished. Petti-Bourgoise that supported the elftist cause were allowed to survive but in a way that it would serve the proletariat. Same can be said with the CPK. Though when these petti-Bourgosie came back to the cities there werent many people left and they couldnt get to their manshions. They were allowed to live on collectives, villages, even if the cities if they wished. But due to famines ( the poor harvest of 1976 and 1978) and with the Youn angkar killing intellectuals to secure their power/start the coup d'etat they would also kill Petti-Bourgoise who favored the CPK over a Vietnamese puppet state (later do be known as the "Peoples Republic of Kampuchea)

Now back to the point( or the main one): the peasants were keen on revenege but werent so keen on working together in a collective. So, obviously, they took the same road as the peasant associations in China in 1927, and the Collective Farms during the collectivization. The main problem is that they, i.e. the CPK, already knew of the failure of the Four classes bloc in China and such a failure like that in Kampuchea would be an early death to the struggling nation. This meant it had to take 'drastic measures' (which it did) and with barely any allies (save China) it was on a place where the USSR was once. Unless it could build up like the USSR it would be doomed to famine or slow progression which the Vietnamese would like. It would help their invasion.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

renegadeofpeace In reply to Sovietmaster [2009-11-13 11:59:58 +0000 UTC]

As I said previously: I agree as well that we cannot blame everything on Pol Pot.

And about the last two quatations: absolutely right but let me point out that both only mention "overhtrowing" and "forcing their will upon the Bourgoise" not KILLING them. Some of them might die during the process of the revolution maniacally defending their capitalist or anytype of system but our goal is not to eradicate them but to slowly convince them that our side is the right one.
Pol Pot clearly ordered massacres many times, what he did cannot be called the "collateral damage" of overthrowing s system, and only the fact that he killed less cannot be an excuse for what he have done.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

The-Necromancer In reply to WingDiamond [2009-09-27 08:27:36 +0000 UTC]

Now look at that! You made me crack a smile.
^___^

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Marxism-Leninism In reply to WingDiamond [2009-09-26 22:26:06 +0000 UTC]

hehe, that word joke never gets old

👍: 0 ⏩: 1