Comments on: The book without which you can’t fully understand communist terror http://www.empirechronicles.co.uk/2009/08/27/the-book-without-which-you-can%e2%80%99t-fully-understand-communist-terror Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Thu, 11 Mar 2010 21:42:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Ludwik Kowalski http://www.empirechronicles.co.uk/2009/08/27/the-book-without-which-you-can%e2%80%99t-fully-understand-communist-terror/comment-page-1#comment-2746 Ludwik Kowalski Tue, 01 Sep 2009 15:42:00 +0000 http://www.empirechronicles.co.uk/?p=6502#comment-2746 1) Thank you very much for reviewing my short book written for those who know very little about Soviet History. Posting it on September 1, exactly 70 years after WWII started, is significant. 2) One recent trend, among those who defend Marxism-Leninism today, is to write that Stalinism has nothing to do with communism, for which they are fighting. Here is an illustration: ““What you guys are discussing is not communism. You're discussing Stalinism and Socialism. In true communism, there would be no system of government, no ‘economy,’ only a society of people striving to improve the world around them.” I am quoting from a blog: http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message840339/pg1 How does this differ from what young idealists were saying in Russia, before 1917? Where are attempts to learn from what happened in the past? 3) And here is something from another blog: http://www.erepublik.com/en/forum/topic/109234/marxism-trotskyism-lenism-stalinism-titoism-maoism/3 “The fact of the matter is people think communism was tried in the real world, but it wasn't. Communism is inherently democratic and run by the workers themselves, with little bureaucracy as possible. There would be many parties to the communist one, albeit with new things to debate about. In a marxist system [ a real one ] the workers would have rights, and the bourgeoisie would be destroyed and made sure that it could not rise to prominence as a minority with self supposed rights over others. In a marxist system, everyone would work, almost in competition with one another because they could do what they want, when they want, and since human nature wants us to work together for survival and wants a sense of satisfaction, the work we choose would naturally be one we want, need, and would do willingly and efficiently.” In other words, there is nothing to be learned from what happened in the Soviet Union. Is this guy honest or is he deliberately trying to mislead naive idealists? 1) Thank you very much for reviewing my short book written for those who know very little about Soviet History. Posting it on September 1, exactly 70 years after WWII started, is significant.

2) One recent trend, among those who defend Marxism-Leninism today, is to write that Stalinism has nothing to do with communism, for which they are fighting. Here is an illustration: ““What you guys are discussing is not communism. You’re discussing Stalinism and Socialism. In true communism, there would be no system of government, no ‘economy,’ only a society of people striving to improve the world around them.” I am quoting from a blog:

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message840339/pg1

How does this differ from what young idealists were saying in Russia, before 1917? Where are attempts to learn from what happened in the past?

3) And here is something from another blog:

http://www.erepublik.com/en/forum/topic/109234/marxism-trotskyism-lenism-stalinism-titoism-maoism/3

“The fact of the matter is people think communism was tried in the real world, but it wasn’t. Communism is inherently democratic and run by the workers themselves, with little bureaucracy as possible. There would be many parties to the communist one, albeit with new things to debate about. In a marxist system [ a real one ] the workers would have rights, and the bourgeoisie would be destroyed and made sure that it could not rise to prominence as a minority with self supposed rights over others. In a marxist system, everyone would work, almost in competition with one another because they could do what they want, when they want, and since human nature wants us to work together for survival and wants a sense of satisfaction, the work we choose would naturally be one we want, need, and would do willingly and efficiently.”

In other words, there is nothing to be learned from what happened in the Soviet Union. Is this guy honest or is he deliberately trying to mislead naive idealists?

]]>