Athens Greece: Cops murder a 16 year old
- Thread starter Dimitris
- Start date
Like you. Frogwoman, I'm beginning to suspect papageorgiou12 is a spoof posting - it is just so "out there" on the stalinist event horizon.
I just love this :
KKE is a communist party, NOT a left party in general. It is the vanguard party of the working class, not because it says so, nor because it wishes to be, but because it charts the strategic goal of overthrowing capitalism and constructing a workers' state and a classless / stateless society in the long-run.
I mean... meglamania or what ! Some sort of ("dialectical materialist" ?) "world historical spirit force" just creates the KKE as the "vanguard " party which has a historical RIGHT to be the sole arbitor of what is in the working class's interests !!! There used to be another good old stalinist saying .. " An individual worker can be mistaken in what his interests are ... but the Class is always right about its collective interests " - a version of that bonkers " wisdom of crowds" bollocks which is quite popular nowadays. The beauty of this stuff is that it completely dismisses all criticism of Party actions as "false consciousness" - and of course condemns the critic to the Gulags for being lippy !
The black humour feature of this stalinist apparatchnic mindset (basically "fuck the working class - cos I'LL be OK as a Party loyalist in the stalinist future regime" ) is that at the height of Stalin's periodic purges it was actually party hacks like papageorgiou12 who were MOST AFRAID all the time of being denounced and purged. Molotov, one of Stalin's very long term right hand cronies apparently NEVER slept in his bed overnight, but on a sofa, fully clothed, in case the secret police came for him in the early hours. And he denounced his WIFE , in order to prove his loyalty to Stalin. Stalin terrorised the Party just as much as the rest of the country. Wake up papageorgiou12 , the stalininist politics of the KKE are going to leave Greece in the hands of a military dictatorship again. UNITY on the Left (the radical anti capitalist Left, obviously , not the bourgeois sellouts of PASOK), has to be the watchword of the day.
dennisr
the acceptable face
has ernestostolich moved to greece?
dennisr
the acceptable face
Absolutely.
100% agree with you Blagsta - EVERYONE should read it. (though a warning if you haven't - its utterly brilliant and gripping -- but you should hide the razor blades before you do - it aint a cheery read !)
teqniq
DisMembered
You may have a point there.
The poster is for real. 
papageorgiou12
New Member
1. You wish I were a spoof, ayatollah! I wonder, as opposed to myself and the isolated KKE "on the fringes of the political spectrum", which political force do you represent? Or maybe just your own self and your petit-bourgeois prejudices.
2. No "world historical spirit force" creates KKE. This is just your idealist BS! The Party gains the right to be the vanguard of the class ONLY in struggle and maintains that right in much the same way. This is how things went along in the Soviet Union and the working class was much more supportive of the Stalinist leadership than any of the bourgeois, Krushchevite or (your favorite) "left" clowns can imagine.
3. You are right on one aspect though - that most of the so-called "great terror" concerned Party cadre and members, not common workers. Your little amusing stories about Molotov can scare only little kids and come right out of the horror pages of such paragons of historical research as Robert Conquest, Roy Medvedev or papa-Solzhenitsyn.
4. "Unity of the left" cries out ayatollah and with him various reformist types, such as our own SYRIZA, who self-label themselves as "radical anti-capitalist left", while accepting the European Union as a necessary alliance that needs some alterations to make it progressive. But I guess in your mindset, you can be against the bourgeoisie, but accept one of its main strategic choices, the EU.
papageorgiou12
New Member
You cannot imagine, chilango, how many times we have heard since 1991 (not to speak about the decades before that) that we will end up in the dustbin of history. And the only ones that actually did, losing all influence within the greek proletariat, were the various opportunist left forces (eurocommunists, trotskyites, et al), plus the anarcho-provocateurs. Get back to me in a few months.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
Aye. History will be the judge, again.
papageorgiou12
New Member
Victor Serge, how innovative!!
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
Mad as he is can we all just ignore the nutter.
Lets get back to the things that matter.
And thank you Dimitris for your posts and updates.
Lets get back to the things that matter.
And thank you Dimitris for your posts and updates.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
Yes. Thanks Dimitris. Stay safe.
Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
You never read him then, ern?
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Like it, or not the KKE has significant support amongst Greek workers and students. Your glib comments don't alter that fact.
The troika’s austerity package will result in sacking 15,000 public sector workers by the end of the year, slashing the minimum wage by 22%, a further ‘liberalisation’ of the labour laws and an overall total of €3.3 billion in cuts.
These next figures give an indication of economic melt-down:
Ten-year bond yields for Greece have reached an "utterly unsustainable" 29.8%.
Unemployment increased by 126,000 in November (to 20.9%), compared to October. Youth unemployment now stands at a staggering 48%.
A further 150,000 public sector jobs are set to go.
The industrial production index in December 2011 was down 11.3% since 12 months ago.
Manufacturing has decreased by 15.5% in the same period
GDP has contracted by 7% in the fourth quarter of 2011 compared to a year earlier. Many believe that Greek GDP will shrink by 25 to 30 percent, matching the 29 percent the United States reached in the 1930's.
According to the Greek unions 1.5 million Greeks have no income at all.
Despite all this, Bertrand Benoit, a spokesman for the German finance ministry said the offer was “not sufficient” and Greece had to come up with a “revised plan”. Under the current plans, he claimed:
Contagian for the rest of the Eurozone?
http://www.cpgb.org.uk/article.php?article_id=1004720
An interesting point Chilango. Of course the Stalinists TRY to claim the 1917 October Revolution as one of "theirs" - but considering that in the ensuing years Stalin shot or " disappeared " the vast majority of the 1917 Bolshevik Central Committee , and the 1917 rank and file Bolsheviks had largely been killed fighting the Whites in the civil war or " purged" by 1938, in reality Stalinism is the counter revolutionery usurper of the brief period of worker and peasant power, following the revolution's isolation and implosion.
I would suggest that it is only Tito's Yugoslav victory, the Maoist takeover in 1949 China , The Stalinist takeover in Vietnam (with a major nationalist aspect to its popularity, (and of the Kymer Rouge in Cambodia in the context of a destroyed society) which can really be chalked up to a "win" for Stalinism on it's own account (though I have to admit this accounts for A LOT of territory and people. ALL these victories were accompanied by the mass murder of their revolutionary Left rivals by the Stalinists of course). ALL the other takeovers , Eastern Europe, North Korea, etc, were on the back of the power of Stalin's Red Army. Cuba is a special case, NOT a stalinist, or indeed revolutionery socialist, victory, but essentially a victory with many political strains within the guerilla band of Castro , which was driven into the arms of the USSR by the USA's aggression and embargo.
Generally though the Stalinists have been vultures feeding on the body of the working class , not revolutionery leaders of the class. Since the victory of Mao really the history of stalinism has been a history of failure, collaboration with bourgeois elements, and retreat - and of course the collapse of the Soviet Bloc into complete capitalist restoration - with NO resistance from the working class - shows what a bankrupt corrupt system with no mass support it was.
Another black comedic aspect of the KKE's extraordinary pro Stalin position is that after Greece was handed to the capitalist West "sphere of influence" at Yalta in that notorious "back of an envelope" deal between Stalin and Churchill, dividing up the world , Stalin quite deliberately gave disastrous tactical instructions to the KKE during the postwar Civil War - ordering them to engage the far superior Western Power backed Right Wing forces in large unit formations, rather than guerilla tactics - hence ensuring their catastrophic defeat by 1949. All as part of the Yalta world share -out. The Capitalist West, similarly sold out Eastern Europe to stalinist bondage. For Stalin, as with any mafia boss, it was of course "Just Business".
Yeah, the Cambodians' version is pretty straightforward if familiar with the framework they used (and there has been an awful lot of crap written about them). I would say, though, that within the general term 'Stalinism' it was a blend of both Soviet and Chinese derived formulas and models, taught to them by their later enemies, the Vietnamese. A Stalin-Mao framework for revolution. Try-hard Marxist-Leninists. Personally, and in general, I prefer not to use the KR, it is an inaccurate name for the CPK as it (or the Communist underground) gelled during the 1960s. And they never referred to themselves as KR, at least not in the French anyway. I would also say, that as far as the intra-party terror goes, Stalinists killed Stalinists, really. There has been no other influential revolutionary (communist) tradition in the country, and even that one was imported relatively recently, and most people never really gave a toss about it, apart from when it was forced upon them.
The DPRK and so-called People's Democracies in Europe were indeed governments installed with the aid of the Red Army, however, IIRC Stalinist theoreticians partly justified such a thing by reviving an old Comintern categorisation first used to describe the new governments installed with instrumental help from the Red Army in Outer Mongolia and Tannu Tuva during the Russian Civil War. Although Mongolia in particular (Tannu Tuva was later incorporated into the USSR) passing by way of close Soviet guidance from 'feudalism' to socialism, while the European satellites were supposed to be passing from capitalism to socialism. During the 1940s Mao also came up with something approximating the People's Democracy concept for the PRC, and to fit the Soviet view, which also shifted dramatically within five years of its first use. Mao changed the definition accordingly, something the Vietnamese would do too, but blending Stalin's 1927 concept of a 'national liberation revolution' with both the Soviet and Chinese versions of People's or New Democracy, to create an ideologically unique Stalinist explanation for the workings of the DRV. Sort of in-the-making, while the country was still partitioned.
papageorgiou12
New Member
So, ayatollah, can you show us ONE successfull socialist revolution led by your anti-Stalinist leftists? How come those Stalinists always managed to take the lead and fool everyone to follow their counter-revolutionary course? Or should I say "takeovers" as per your revealing bourgeois language (the natural fate of Trots - right in the warm embrace of the bourgeoisie and the western intelligence services).
Really talking about comedy at its best - maybe you should learn your history better:
1. The Conference of Yalta recognized the correlation of forces that had been established in each individual country as of February 1945. In Greece there had already occured (in December 1944) an armed confrontation of the National Liberation Front Army (ELAS) with the British forces and their local collaborators. The defeat of the popular forces in December came about as a result of the fact that, although a revolutionary situation had developed in Greece during 1944, particularly after the withdrawal of the German forces in the autumn, KKE did not have the readiness to lead the class struggle to its logical end, the conquest of power.
2. All of the historians that point to Yalta as the decisive point fail to mention Roosevelt's and Churchill's meeting in Quebec in the summer of 1943, where it was decided that British forces would invade Greece after the withdrawal of the Germans. This is amply documented in Churchill's memoirs and in 1943 telegrams to his Foreign Minister Eden.
3. The major piece of "evidence" that is often given as proof of the "partition of Europe" is the infamous "small piece of paper" on which Churchill supposedly scribled perecentages of influence of the superpowers in the Balkans during his meeting with Stalin in Moscow in October 1944. Of course, the only reference for the existence of such a note can be found in the memoirs of Churchill himself. No such reference or evidence has been found in the published archives of Great Britain or the USSR. Moreover, the subjects discussed in Moscow were clearly defined: the opening of the new fronts in Western Europe, the recognition of the governments in Poland, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia (that had already been liberated). Greece was NOT on the agenda of the meeting - the issues relating to Greece had already been discussed in the Teheran Conference (where there is also no discussion about partition).
4. The "argument" is often made that the Red Army could have entered Greece in 1944 and put its weight behind the ELAS forces. This is really a non-argument. The Red Army had no reason to enter Greece, since, during the allied war efforts, Greece had been assigned to the responsibilities of the English command when it came to the pursuance of military operations agianst the Germans and in 1944 the war was still ongoing. If the USSR had entered Greece, it could have jeopardized the war effort and the speedier ending of the war, something that would have been detrimental to the popular movement worldwide.
The myths concerning the "treachery" of the USSR and Stalin towards the Greek popular movement and KKE are not limited to the war period, but extend into the 1946-1949 period and the heroic struggle of the Democratic Army of Greece (DSE) against the Anglo-Americans and their local stooges. There is, however, extensive evidence to support the fact that the Soviet Union (and Stalin personally), not only had agreed to the decisions of the KKE leadership regarding the onset of the new phase of the armed struggle, but provided significant material support to that struggle. Of course, that support had to be clandestine, due to the very volatile post-war climate. In any case, the USSR could not substitute the Greek popular forces, could not win the war for them.
papageorgiou12
New Member
And one other thing! Correct me if I am wrong, but the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, 35 years after the infamous 20th Congress of the CPSU when your buddy Khrushchev carried out a scathing attack against Stalin and after which policies contrary to the ones proposed by Stalin were adopted across the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries. So if there was "no resistance by the working class", if there existed "a bankrupt corrupt system with no mass support", why is Stalin (who had died almost 40 years before) the one to blame? In the same vein, maybe we should blame Lenin or (lo and behold!) Trotsky!
dennisr
the acceptable face
You are delusional pap12.
Stalinism - not Stalin. Its not the same thing. One is an individual (with the status of of a demigod to some complete idiots - what is it the tasche?!) the other is not an individual.
That you defend that individual (in your previous desperate post) who deserted your own heroic people is telling - but not in the way you think. Do you think the claimed truth or otherwise of the minutie of the Yalta conference make one bit of difference to the simple fact is shows that individual putting the interests of his clique above the interests of the international working class.
Are you actually going to argue that the greek people's interests where a necessary strategic sacrifice for the defeat of fascism by Stalin and his clique? Did anyone mention this to the greek working class?? or are you blaiming the greek working class for not being 'tough enough' in their fight against fascism???
Jesus feckin wept... "if these are communists I am not a communist" to paraphrase another beardy bloke
papageorgiou12
New Member
dennisr,
please do us a favor and don't be a communist!
Khrushchev and his cohorts not only critisized Stalin personally, but dismantled piece by piece all the previous policies followed by the Stalinist leadership. This is what eventually led to the counter-revolutionary developments in the USSR. To characterize as stalinist (in the 1980's) something that had been eroded and led in a different direction since the 1950's is ludicrous and idiotic. This kind of criticism of the Soviet Union is characteristic of bourgeois "thinkers" with whom you have apparently no problem to associate with.
What happened where in history is not "minutiae", it is THE historical thruth. Stalin and the leadership of the Soviet Union had the responsibility for the entire international working class movement in their hands. They did not "desert" KKE and the Greek working class (and there is ample evidence to demonstrate the FACTS), but, at the same time, they could not (and they should have not) sacrificed the worldwide interests of the proletariat to the interests of any particular revolution. Talking about the interests of Stalin and "his clique" shows that you understand NOTHING about what happened at the end of WWII.
Fire up those characterizations by the way! Are you becoming impatient or what?
please do us a favor and don't be a communist!
Khrushchev and his cohorts not only critisized Stalin personally, but dismantled piece by piece all the previous policies followed by the Stalinist leadership. This is what eventually led to the counter-revolutionary developments in the USSR. To characterize as stalinist (in the 1980's) something that had been eroded and led in a different direction since the 1950's is ludicrous and idiotic. This kind of criticism of the Soviet Union is characteristic of bourgeois "thinkers" with whom you have apparently no problem to associate with.
What happened where in history is not "minutiae", it is THE historical thruth. Stalin and the leadership of the Soviet Union had the responsibility for the entire international working class movement in their hands. They did not "desert" KKE and the Greek working class (and there is ample evidence to demonstrate the FACTS), but, at the same time, they could not (and they should have not) sacrificed the worldwide interests of the proletariat to the interests of any particular revolution. Talking about the interests of Stalin and "his clique" shows that you understand NOTHING about what happened at the end of WWII.
Fire up those characterizations by the way! Are you becoming impatient or what?
Similar threads
