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

Enver Hoxha

POST REPLY

Was Enver Hoxha positive or negative for Albania?

Very Positive
11
19%
Positive
13
23%
Neutral
6
11%
Negative
12
21%
Very Negative
12
21%
Other
3
5%
 
Total votes : 57
Soviet cogitations: 673
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 21 Sep 2015, 15:49
EdvardK wrote:
Maybe because it's like kim-jong-il-ism?
Well first off "Hoxhaism" doesn't exist as a separate ideology. It was coined by Maoists as a derogatory term. The Albanians claimed to be nothing more than Marxist-Leninists.

Second, Juche/Kimilsungism/Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism (or whatever one wants to call it) is far closer to Titoism and other "national roads to socialism." That is why Kim Il Sung, Ceaușescu and Tito closely collaborated with each other during the 1970s.

Hoxha's approach to socialism, by contrast, was a principled one. As he said at the Eighth Congress of the Party of Labour of Albania in 1981: "There is nothing unknown about what socialism is, what it represents and what it brings about, how it is achieved and how socialist society is built. A theory and practice of scientific socialism exists. Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin teach us this theory. We find the practice of it in that rich experience of the construction of socialism in the Soviet Union in the time of Lenin and Stalin, and we find it today in Albania, where the new society is being built according to the teachings of Marxism-Leninism. Of course, as Lenin said, socialism will look different and will have its own special features in different countries as a result of the differing socio-economic conditions, the way in which the revolution is carried out, the traditions, the international circumstances, etc. But the basic principles and the universal laws of socialism remain unshakeable and are essential for all countries."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 981
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Komsomol
Post 21 Sep 2015, 19:59
Ismail wrote:
Second, Juche/Kimilsungism/Kimilsungism-Kimjongilism (or whatever one wants to call it) is far closer to Titoism and other "national roads to socialism."
Hoxha's approach to socialism, by contrast, was a principled one.

hahaha... Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il's juche likened to socialist self-management - muahahahah... That's exactly what I was talking about in another thread.... I cannot discuss this rationally with you.
Hođa a man of principles? Yes, his principle task was to keep Albanians impoverished until his bitter end. Spare me with your hoxhaist quotes from the 8457th congress of the great albanian communist party when hoxha had something to say in the lobby just before he had to go to take a dump... It's not all he said worth reiterating and revering, you know.
Soviet cogitations: 673
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 22 Sep 2015, 02:31
EdvardK wrote:
hahaha... Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il's juche likened to socialist self-management - muahahahah... That's exactly what I was talking about in another thread.... I cannot discuss this rationally with you.
Kim Il Sung's so-called "Chajusong" did, in fact, stem from the same bourgeois humanism peddled by the Praxis School and other revisionist groups at the time. There was also his constant attacks on "dogmatism" and "flunkeyism," including his silly allegations that the Comintern had undermined the Korean independence struggle (just as Mao had argued in the case of China.)

Tito's "self-management" system did not influence the DPRK, though it did influence the revisionist regimes in Poland and Hungary. It was also eagerly studied in regimes that were openly hostile to Marxism such as Gaddafi's Libya.

Anyway, I was referring specifically to the so-called "Non-Aligned Movement," which the DPRK was actively involved in and which Romania, although it couldn't become a formal member, also posed as a friend of. As Hoxha noted at the 7th Congress of the PLA in 1976: "The slogan of 'non-aligned countries' gives the false impression that a group of states which have the possibility of 'opposing' the superpower blocs is being created. It gives the impression that these countries, all of them, are anti-imperialist, opposed to war, opposed to the dictate of others, that they are 'democratic', and even 'socialist'. This helps to strengthen the pseudo-democratic and anti-popular positions of the leading groups of some states which are participating among the 'non-aligned', and creates the impression among the peoples of these countries that when their chiefs establish or dissolve relations of any kind and nature, with the imperialists and the social-imperialists, openly or in secret, they do this not only in the capacity of 'popular governments', but also in the capacity of a group of states 'with which even the superpowers must reckon'."

The DPRK, Romania and Yugoslavia also supported the Khmer Rouge when the latter was ousted from Phnom Penh by the Vietnamese in 1979. They backed the demand of US imperialism and Chinese social-imperialism to restore the government of of "Democratic Kampuchea."

And for the record both quotes I gave were from his main reports at the respective congresses of the PLA. They weren't made "in the lobby."
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 22 Sep 2015, 03:03
Hoxha is dead and buried, and isn't regarded as a national hero. The only chance Albania really has is to join some sort of Balkan federation for trade and mutual economic assistance, in which they will most assuredly be the junior partner.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
Soviet cogitations: 673
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 22 Sep 2015, 07:15
Comrade Gulper wrote:
Hoxha is dead and buried, and isn't regarded as a national hero.
I don't see how either of those are relevant.

Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin are all "dead and buried." That has no impact on the validity of their analyses or their outstanding merits. Likewise whether Hoxha or anyone else who defended their work is "dead and buried" is similarly irrelevant.

As to your second claim, the present Albanian government regards tons of Italian and Nazi collaborators during WWII as "national heroes." It is no different from efforts made in Serbia to rehabilitate the Četniks, in Croatia to rehabilitate the Ustaše, in Ukraine to rehabilitate Bandera, etc.

It isn't surprising that a communist would not be considered a national hero by the bourgeoisie.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2293
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 24 Oct 2015, 23:56
Stalin is not dead, he lives in my heart.
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 33
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Nov 2015, 22:40
Ideology: Maoist
Pioneer
Post 17 Nov 2015, 22:50
I have a positive view on Enver Hoxha's leadership despite being a Maoist. He had did a great job criticising Euro-communism and Titoism.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 33
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Nov 2015, 22:40
Ideology: Maoist
Pioneer
Post 27 Nov 2015, 12:04
Even as a Maoist I do own some Works by Hoxha and do quite admire him. He was a great leader. (I put 'positive')
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 981
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Komsomol
Post 26 Dec 2015, 01:35
Ismail wrote:
The DPRK, Romania and Yugoslavia also supported the Khmer Rouge when the latter was ousted from Phnom Penh by the Vietnamese in 1979. They backed the demand of US imperialism and Chinese social-imperialism to restore the government of of "Democratic Kampuchea."

Whenever someone touches on the subject of the great and glorious, the one and only, THE president for eternity of Albania, Emo Hođa, you start pulling rabbits out of hats and switching to other topics. How many times have you already mentioned - without any reason whatsoever as there was a discussion on your favourite subject of Albania - the "crimes" of SFRY and other countries?
Soviet cogitations: 673
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 27 Dec 2015, 12:00
Because you were the one making fun of the comparison I made between Tito and Kim Il Sung, even though both men had many similarities, both as persons and in terms of the foreign policies of their states.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 981
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Komsomol
Post 27 Dec 2015, 19:26
How do you explain that the most votes in your little poll received the reply "very negative" then? Are we all misled? Are they all "filthy pro-Yugoslav American-asslickers"?
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 27 Dec 2015, 19:36
No one in America has ever known who Hoxha was. I grew up in the 1980's - at the height of the cold war- knowing the name of Albania as a pure item of geography. To this day, no one ever discusses Albania on the news, for any reason whatsoever. It's the very definition of a local nonentity.

Hoxha's deeds amounted to zero, and he has not a single living legacy or example to pass on. He never existed.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
Soviet cogitations: 673
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 27 Dec 2015, 22:37
EdvardK wrote:
How do you explain that the most votes in your little poll received the reply "very negative" then? Are we all misled? Are they all "filthy pro-Yugoslav American-asslickers"?
This forum is called Soviet Empire, most people on it think the USSR throughout its entire period was socialist.

Since Hoxha held that the USSR after Stalin's death became a social-imperialist superpower and a dual threat to the interests of the peoples of the world together with US imperialism, most people on here will obviously dislike him.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 981
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Komsomol
Post 27 Dec 2015, 22:59
Ismail wrote:
Since Hoxha held that the USSR after Stalin's death became a social-imperialist superpower and a dual threat to the interests of the peoples of the world together with US imperialism, most people on here will obviously dislike him.

I see. It's all Hoxha's fault because he implanted this notion into everyone's heads (despite the fact that not even modern young Albanians hardly know who he was - they think he played a forward for 17.Nentori). I understand now that he actually has an explanation for just about everything - please, what is Hoxha's take on gamma-ray bursts in the Universe?
Soviet cogitations: 673
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 28 Dec 2015, 22:32
Your replies almost never make sense. I don't see how Hoxha's analyses of the class nature of the USSR can be compared with thinking that "he actually has an explanation for just about everything." I'm pretty sure it's a basic task for communists to understand what the class nature of the USSR was.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 981
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Komsomol
Post 29 Dec 2015, 00:01
Ismail wrote:
Your replies almost never make sense.

I can only reply to what I get as input. See your quote below...

Ismail wrote:
I don't see how Hoxha's analyses of the class nature of the USSR can be compared with thinking that "he actually has an explanation for just about everything." I'm pretty sure it's a basic task for communists to understand what the class nature of the USSR was.

Well, here's a direct quote by you:

Ismail wrote:
Since Hoxha held that the USSR after Stalin's death became a social-imperialist superpower and a dual threat to the interests of the peoples of the world together with US imperialism, most people on here will obviously dislike him.


This is what you wrote in defense of my direct question on the reasons for Hoxha's poor performance in this forum. As I understand this sentence, you claim that those who voted negatively on Hoxha were influenced by his position that
Ismail wrote:
after Stalin's death [the USSR] became a social-imperialist superpower and a dual threat to the interests of the peoples ...
.
But then you negate that in your last post (see the second quote above) and you try to make me look incongruent. Especially, if it's a basic task of communists (and no one else for that matter) to understand the true nature of USSR, one would expect "them" to be well informed then. And yet, they voted negatively on Hoxha
Soviet cogitations: 673
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2011, 14:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 29 Dec 2015, 08:24
EdvardK wrote:
Especially, if it's a basic task of communists (and no one else for that matter) to understand the true nature of USSR, one would expect "them" to be well informed then. And yet, they voted negatively on Hoxha
That's implies that this forum has a majority of communists on it, rather than a majority of "communists."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 981
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Aug 2011, 22:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Komsomol
Post 29 Dec 2015, 21:19
Ismail wrote:
That's implies that this forum has a majority of communists on it, rather than a majority of "communists."

Yes, you're right about that self-declared communists are abundant here - I have yet to meet a communist on this forum.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 14444
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2006, 22:05
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 29 Dec 2015, 21:40
lol
Image
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3618
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Oct 2004, 15:15
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Politburo
Post 29 Dec 2015, 22:22
Those statements are of course pointless unless EdvardK and Ismail tell us what they would consider a communist. Probably for the one, it's "myself and Tito", for the other it's "myself and Hoxha". Or if they consider that unfair, I will simply say that they both hold on to very narrow and specific dogmas that nobody else is interested in. Even "Maoist Third-Worldists" have some form of organisation, although it is probably more a figment of their imagination than anything. In that sense, the guy who posted this thread is actually involved in something more concrete than the people obsessing over Albania.
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.