Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

the reason why the dictatorship of the preletariat failed

POST REPLY
Soviet cogitations: 272
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Feb 2010, 13:54
Komsomol
Post 13 Apr 2010, 15:51
the fact is most or all communist movements and revolutions where headed by intelligentsia. these intelligentsia came from rich and privileged family's, hell even Marx was rich. The fact is they where not true proletariat. so even though they apparently wanted to help the proletariat the fact is the only person who knows what the proletariat need is the proletariat. It's like the only person who knows himself best is the person itself kind of thing.
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9183
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 19 Mar 2005, 20:08
Embalmed
Post 13 Apr 2010, 15:54
what about mao
Image

"Bleh, i don't even know what i'm arguing for. What a stupid rant. Disregard what i wrote." - Loz
"Every time is gyros time" - Stalinista
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 13 Apr 2010, 16:06
Quote:
the fact is most or all communist movements and revolutions where headed by intelligentsia. these intelligentsia came from rich and privileged family's, hell even Marx was rich. The fact is they where not true proletariat. so even though they apparently wanted to help the proletariat the fact is the only person who knows what the proletariat need is the proletariat. It's like the only person who knows himself best is the person itself kind of thing.


Fundamentally wrong facts.
Soviet Union especially did a huge endeavor in educating it's workers.In 1930's proletariat was massively involved in high education programmes,and peasant sons were becoming engineers,or at least skilled workers.
Marx was poor,especially in his later life.It's Engels whose father provided him with some extra money.
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 13 Apr 2010, 16:10
what about stalin
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 13 Apr 2010, 16:14
Quote:
what about mao


Quote:
what about stalin


Oh,you're gonna be sooo yetsined for such replies if mods see this...
Care to expand the sentence at least?
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 13 Apr 2010, 16:19
Stalin was born Ioseb Besarionis dze Jughashvili in Gori in the Tiflis Governorate of the Russian Empire, to Besarion Jughashvili, a Georgian cobbler who owned his own workshop,[1] and Ketevan Geladze, a Georgian who was born a serf. Initially, the Jughashvili family lived normally, but Stalin's father became an alcoholic, which gradually led to his business failing and him becoming violently abusive to his wife and child.[2] As their financial situation grew worse, Stalin's family moved homes at least nine times in Stalin's first ten years of life.[1] The town where Stalin grew up was a violent and lawless place. It had only a small police force and a culture of violence that included gang warfare, organized street brawls and wrestling tournaments. Stalin was frequently involved in brawls with other children. In 1894, at the age of 16, he enrolled at the Orthodox Seminary of Tiflis, to which he had been awarded a scholarship. Shortly before the final exams, the Seminary abruptly raised school fees. Unable to pay, Stalin quit the seminary in 1899 and missed his exams, for which he was officially expelled. Shortly after leaving school, Stalin discovered the writings of Vladimir Lenin and decided to become a revolutionary.

Intelligentsia my ass.
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
Soviet cogitations: 272
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Feb 2010, 13:54
Komsomol
Post 13 Apr 2010, 16:35
ok Stalin and Mao, proletariat ok but any others ?
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 13 Apr 2010, 16:42
What a person is born as doesn't matter. It's their actions that matter.

Also, the Dictatorship of the Proletariat didn't fail, so the whole thread is stupid.
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
Soviet cogitations: 272
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Feb 2010, 13:54
Komsomol
Post 13 Apr 2010, 16:48
ok then mabool. where did it succeed ?
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 13 Apr 2010, 17:02
USSR? The Soviet Union had successfully completed the period of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat by the 50's and was fully socialist right until the 80's.

"Dictatorship of the Proletariat" and "Socialism" are two different things. The DotP is when we've just gotten into power and are busy with liquidating the enemy classes. When the enemy classes are gone (And Stalin was definitely successful with getting rid of them), and classlessness is basically achieved, we have socialism. At this point, the state is only needed to defend the classless society from imperialism. When the whole world is socialist, the state can disappear and we're lfet with communism.
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
Soviet cogitations: 272
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Feb 2010, 13:54
Komsomol
Post 13 Apr 2010, 17:08
that failed thought. and Stalin, although he industrialized the USSR did not care much for human life
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 5137
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Nov 2007, 06:31
Embalmed
Post 13 Apr 2010, 17:09
The state is also needed in socialism to administer rationing, as abundance does not yet exist
Image
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 13 Apr 2010, 17:11
No, it didn't.


The socialist system of the USSR never failed. It was destroyed on purpose by Gorbachev's economic reforms. The USSR wasn't socialist when it collapsed. What "failed" was Gorbachev's pseudo-social-democratic transition phase.

Also your original point is still invalid because ALL General Secretaries of the CPSU, after Lenin, were from a working class background. Workers. Duh.

And Conscript is right.
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 13 Apr 2010, 17:14
Quote:
The socialist system of the USSR never failed. It was destroyed on purpose by Gorbachev's economic reforms. The USSR wasn't socialist when it collapsed.


Agreed.

But it's Too bad that comrade Andrei Mazenov isn't here.I recall him claiming that socialism was effectively destroyed after Nikita the shoe-banger came to power.Though he didn't really elaborate it.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 5137
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Nov 2007, 06:31
Embalmed
Post 13 Apr 2010, 17:22
Lmfao shoe banger

I agree that post 1956 the soviet union was officially revisionist, but I don't think that changes the fact it has a socialist mode of production. Though I do remember kirov talking about a switch to profit oriented production, instead of orienting towards meeting demand. Maybe he can elaborate.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 272
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Feb 2010, 13:54
Komsomol
Post 13 Apr 2010, 17:22
ok if this is true maybe i am just misinformed. but i have many failure's of the communist party of the USSR btw i only have access to capitalist made books. Was Fidel Castro a proletariat ?
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 5137
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Nov 2007, 06:31
Embalmed
Post 13 Apr 2010, 17:24
Who cares? It doesn't matter if he was or he wasn't. With time given, a person of any class can find appeal in socialism.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 272
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Feb 2010, 13:54
Komsomol
Post 13 Apr 2010, 17:26
Sorry man i just wanted to know.....
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 5137
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Nov 2007, 06:31
Embalmed
Post 13 Apr 2010, 17:28
Then to answer your question I don't think he was exactly proletarian. Also he wasn't really a communist from the start. Raul castro was though.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 272
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Feb 2010, 13:54
Komsomol
Post 13 Apr 2010, 17:46
Raol was a communist ok
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.
cron