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

President Lukashenko

POST REPLY

Do you support Lukashenko?

Yes
14
50%
No
11
39%
Other (please state)
3
11%
 
Total votes : 28
Soviet cogitations: 304
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Feb 2014, 00:36
Komsomol
Post 27 Feb 2014, 04:07
Hey, comrades.

I'm curious as to where people stand on Lukashenko of Belarus. It's a highly working-class country, and seems to have avoided the organized crime and privatizations that happened after the breakup of the USSR and Lukashenko himself hasn't scrapped Soviet holidays like the Great October Socialist Revolution, is open about how he hated the dissolution of the USSR, and repeatedly tells the West to go suck a lemon. Now, I don't know enough about the country but I'll go with a tentative "yes" for now. What are other peoples' opinions?
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 27 Feb 2014, 04:23
Belarus is a bourgeois dictatorship like any other, except with even less democratic freedoms and more authoritarian. On the plus side it's actually one of the few relatively civilized ex-Soviet countries, that actually didn't regress that bad after 1991. The ruling class in Belarus is actually capable of running a country unlike their pendants in f. ex. Ukraine who are only interested in stealing.

I don't think i support Lukashenko because his time is already over. He'd played a positive role back then i guess but as you can see he's already stepping-up the privatizations once again and so on on and so forth. I don't think his "state for the people" will last long now.
Soviet cogitations: 304
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Feb 2014, 00:36
Komsomol
Post 27 Feb 2014, 04:26
Loz wrote:
Belarus is a bourgeois dictatorship like any other, except with even less democratic freedoms and more authoritarian. On the plus side it's actually one of the few relatively civilized ex-Soviet countries, that actually didn't regress that bad after 1991. The ruling class in Belarus is actually capable of running a country unlike their pendants in f. ex. Ukraine who are only interested in stealing.

I don't think i support Lukashenko because his time is already over. He'd played a positive role back then i guess but as you can see he's already stepping-up the privatizations once again and so on on and so forth. I don't think his "state for the people" will last long now.


Again, I don't know enough to make a fully informed opinion, I just liked how he tells Western politicians to frag themselves, kept November 7 as a day off, and at least said that the breakup of the USSR was a crime. It's sad when you live in a time and place where that much is considered crazy and radical.
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 27 Feb 2014, 04:36
Quote:
Again, I don't know enough to make a fully informed opinion, I just liked how he tells Western politicians to frag themselves, kept November 7 as a day off, and at least said that the breakup of the USSR was a crime.

It would have been better from the capitalist point of view if the USSR hadn't collapsed but simply got "reformed" along capitalist lines of course. Same with Yugoslavia but all that just shows how the bourgeoisie which was born out of the old "communist" bureaucracy was already behind the times and not up to what i'd like to see as its historical task.

Quote:
It's sad when you live in a time and place where that much is considered crazy and radical.

Spot on. Though we also have Venezuela for that, too see just how far to the left a bourgeois government can go while still remaining bourgeois.
Soviet cogitations: 1533
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Oct 2007, 15:55
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Party Member
Post 27 Feb 2014, 04:58
Compared to other post Soviet states, Belarus remains one where ordinary people are not suffering cohesively. Yes Lukashenko is on the authoritarian side, but he's no Turkmenbashi, Karimov, or Niyazov. There have been no wide scale movements against him the likes of which have been seen in Ukraine, Russia, or any of the color revolutions. This shows that he's probably doing something right if he's remained in power for so long despite sharing borders with three EU states.
We have beaten you to the moon, but you have beaten us in sausage making.- Nikita Khrushchev
Soviet cogitations: 304
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Feb 2014, 00:36
Komsomol
Post 27 Feb 2014, 13:02
Loz wrote:
It would have been better from the capitalist point of view if the USSR hadn't collapsed but simply got "reformed" along capitalist lines of course. Same with Yugoslavia but all that just shows how the bourgeoisie which was born out of the old "communist" bureaucracy was already behind the times and not up to what i'd like to see as its historical task.


Spot on. Though we also have Venezuela for that, too see just how far to the left a bourgeois government can go while still remaining bourgeois.


For your first point, it was definitely true for the domestic bourgeoisie. Obviously the forces of imperialism and folks like Yeltsin and co wanted to trash the entire thing the result of which was natural tragedy. And it is true that that bureaucracy betrayed the system at the highest levels.

As for Venezuela: I agree. When I was a hardcore Trotskyite most people worshipped this place. Now it's easier to take a sober step back and, while I admire Chavez, I also just wonder what the hell his government is doing. One day it's ultra-left behaviour, the next it's anti-imperialist rhetoric, the next he's talking with the head of the Mitsubishi zaibatsu to keep Japanese investment in-country, and through all of it the traitorous bourgeois elements at home are allowed to run rough-shod over the economy and ramp up hoarding and criminality.

Which means that I have some sympathy for the "authoritarian" methods of Lukashenko, who is obviously quite popular as Soviet1924 pointed out, because he doesn't accept bullshit. Even if it isn't very democratic.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2293
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 27 Feb 2014, 14:51
He is from a right-wing party, so I won't support him unless he is threatened by some very reactionary forces.
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: 221
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 04 Feb 2013, 06:55
Ideology: Democratic Socialism
Pioneer
Post 04 Mar 2014, 07:32
Are we supporting bourgeoisie politicians now or something? Pathetic, to see 6 people vote yes. Supporting people on the biases of anti-imperialism is a deadly belief that needs to die amongst the Marxist crowd no matter what sect.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4381
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 04 Mar 2014, 11:49
I support him whole-heartedly. He is not a member of any party, but has support from the Left both at home and in neighbouring countries. He has saved his country and its people from national catastrophe, and turned it into a regional industrial powerhouse, all the while rejecting the economic advice and pressure from the West.

He hasn't been stepping up privatizations, except in situations where the pressure is too great to resist, which has been rare, coming mostly from Russian energy companies. Otherwise he plays the game of being open to the idea of privatization, but only 'upon payment of full market value' for state companies, which obviously isn't worth the effort to anyone, East or West, especially considering the special rules the country has about the treatment of workers, tax regulations, etc. Just recently he spoke out very adamantly to the effect that if foreign investors' only goal is to wreck a company, abuse its employees or use various financial machinations to corner a market or lower valuation, 'we don't need such foreign investors; today we have enough resources ourselves' (my paraphrasing).

About Lukashenko's authoritarianism: yes, he is authoritarian, and he keeps ministers and state company directors sitting on one cheek at all times, even threatening (and delivering) jail time for instances of corruption and willful neglect. He built a super-presidential republic with the support of the people through referendums at a time when the parliament was divided and filled with representatives of the wave of liberalism and anti-Sovietism from the late 1980s. I can see where Loz is coming from with the 'his time has passed' angle, and can agree in the sense that he needs to find a way to ensure that the progress that has been made under him won't disappear when he's gone.

I don't know where the idea that he's a right wing politician comes from.
He's more than an anti-imperialist; right now his republic is probably the last place where many of the most positive elements of socialism have been preserved and improved upon, and where the republic's socialist past is respected and admired. Is Lukashenko a populist pragmatist? Undoubtedly, but under the circumstances, which Soviet has alluded to, it's very difficult for him to be anything else. I have read about and listened to his rhetoric extensively, and believe that in his heart he's the last 'Soviet' politician, in the most positive, idealist sense of that term, in the former USSR.
"The thing about capitalism is that it sounds awful on paper and is horrendous in practice. Communism sounds wonderful on paper and when it was put into practice it was done pretty well for what they had to work with." -MiG
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2293
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 04 Mar 2014, 12:09
What is the program of Belaya Rus if it's not a right-wing party? Anyway, he might have done good things (even Putin did some good things), that doesn't mean that we should support him in general. We can support him when he does good things, but that doesn't mean that we can't also criticize him and oppose him on some questions and tell people why we believe that a communist would be a better option than Lukashenko.
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: 4381
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 04 Mar 2014, 13:07
OP, Belaya Rus is not an official party, but a movement similar to the People's Front for Russia, generally considered to have been created to support the president. I'm not sure what it is exactly that you don't like about the movement, excepting its name perhaps. To be clear: this movement has no nationalist or racist component. From the Russian language wiki:


Quote:
"The purpose of the Republican public association "Belaya Rus" is: to promote the unification of progressive forces in society that are interested in building a strong and prosperous Belarus, a socially just society based on patriotic and spiritual and moral values ​​of the Belarusian people."

Goals:

-promoting citizen participation in the implementation of social and economic development of the country;
-Fostering a strong and efficient social state, able to provide a decent standard of life of the citizens, and to guarantee the protection of their interests;
-to participate in the formation of Belarusian civil society;
-to work on the consolidation of social forces in order to implement the above stated goals;
-to educate citizens and encourage them to see their interest in participating actively in the life of the country, to educate them in patriotism as an important spiritual and social value;
-to attract the attention of authorities, the public and the media to address pressing problems of the country and society;
-to promote international cooperation and the establishment of cooperation with associations of other states.
"The thing about capitalism is that it sounds awful on paper and is horrendous in practice. Communism sounds wonderful on paper and when it was put into practice it was done pretty well for what they had to work with." -MiG
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2293
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 04 Mar 2014, 13:18
Quote:
OP, Belaya Rus is not an official party, but a movement similar to the People's Front for Russia, generally considered to have been created to support the president. I'm not sure what it is exactly that you don't like about the movement, excepting its name perhaps. To be clear: this movement has no nationalist or racist component. From the Russian language wiki:

I don't see how their program could be called lef-wing. What kind of ideas do they defend?

Quote:
I call myself a socialist, there is no difference between the two, but I want to distance myself from that term after all the damage the state-capitalist dictators did to it.

You are right to call yourself a socialist. That's the difference between you and me, you are a socialist, I'm a communist. I don't aknowledge you as a communist.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/tasks/ch12.htm

"We must call ourselves the Communist Party—just as Marx and Engels called themselves [...] Let us not imitate those sorry Marxists of whom Marx said: “I have sown dragon’s teeth and harvested fleas.”
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
Soviet cogitations: 304
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Feb 2014, 00:36
Komsomol
Post 04 Mar 2014, 13:37
soviet78 wrote:
I support him whole-heartedly. He is not a member of any party, but has support from the Left both at home and in neighbouring countries. He has saved his country and its people from national catastrophe, and turned it into a regional industrial powerhouse, all the while rejecting the economic advice and pressure from the West.

He hasn't been stepping up privatizations, except in situations where the pressure is too great to resist, which has been rare, coming mostly from Russian energy companies. Otherwise he plays the game of being open to the idea of privatization, but only 'upon payment of full market value' for state companies, which obviously isn't worth the effort to anyone, East or West, especially considering the special rules the country has about the treatment of workers, tax regulations, etc. Just recently he spoke out very adamantly to the effect that if foreign investors' only goal is to wreck a company, abuse its employees or use various financial machinations to corner a market or lower valuation, 'we don't need such foreign investors; today we have enough resources ourselves' (my paraphrasing).

About Lukashenko's authoritarianism: yes, he is authoritarian, and he keeps ministers and state company directors sitting on one cheek at all times, even threatening (and delivering) jail time for instances of corruption and willful neglect. He built a super-presidential republic with the support of the people through referendums at a time when the parliament was divided and filled with representatives of the wave of liberalism and anti-Sovietism from the late 1980s. I can see where Loz is coming from with the 'his time has passed' angle, and can agree in the sense that he needs to find a way to ensure that the progress that has been made under him won't disappear when he's gone.

I don't know where the idea that he's a right wing politician comes from. :?: He's more than an anti-imperialist; right now his republic is probably the last place where many of the most positive elements of socialism have been preserved and improved upon, and where the republic's socialist past is respected and admired. Is Lukashenko a populist pragmatist? Undoubtedly, but under the circumstances, which Soviet has alluded to, it's very difficult for him to be anything else. I have read about and listened to his rhetoric extensively, and believe that in his heart he's the last 'Soviet' politician, in the most positive, idealist sense of that term, in the former USSR.


Well comrade it's good he's relatively young, as without it him it would be sad to see the torch of leadership pass into less capable hands
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9187
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 19 Mar 2005, 20:08
Embalmed
Post 06 Mar 2014, 06:49
Other: On one hand, I'm pretty conflicted about his non-ideological approach to preserving the remnants of the Soviet socialist economy while also adapting Belarus to the neoliberal countries around it when it comes to transport infrastructure and minor privatizations, as well as foreign partnerships. On the other, I don't really care. He's been in power for 20 years now and can easily do 20 more, but that doesn't mean that whoever comes after him won't turn the country into an impoverished oligarchical shithole like the Ukraine.
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
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.