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

Lenin's State and Revolution... practical question

POST REPLY
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 8
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 04 May 2008, 08:02
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 07 May 2008, 15:57
In Lenin's The State and Revolution he argues that after the seizure of state power by the proletariat, they must smash the bourgeois state - the army, police, and bureaucracy - replacing it with the armed population of workers. To what extent was this actually carried out in the Soviet Union? From everything I've read it seems not at all.

Lenin also calls for elected officials being subject to immediate recall and being payed no more than a workman's wage. To what extent was this followed?
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 09 May 2008, 01:28
It was carried out almost entirely at first. The police, army, and bureaucratic apparatus was almost entirely dismantled and replaced by a new mechanism.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 109
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 May 2009, 14:55
Pioneer
Post 19 May 2009, 05:42
Does anybody know what type of gun control there was in the USSR?

I seem to recall that they outlawed the private ownership of firearms, basically unarming the populace, which would fly in the face of what Lenin had said.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 19 May 2009, 05:52
It wasn't difficult to get weapons under hunting licenses. But generally only hunting rifles. Personal protection firearms were basically outlawed from what I know.
banistansig1
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 272
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 29 Mar 2008, 02:58
Komsomol
Post 08 Jun 2009, 00:52
Based on the statement above, it seems Lenin is referring to an armed proletariat during the seizure of power. It doesn't seem that statement would necessarily contradict the banning of private ownership after the revolution.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 136
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Sep 2008, 17:13
Pioneer
Post 08 Jun 2009, 22:06
Well, the working-class was armed, through the workers militias and the Red Army. The socialist system was forced to have standing armies in large part of the existence of the socialist states spearheaded by the USSR (correct my if i wrong)- because of the imperialist aggression and threats of war and real clashes of war in different parts of the world.

I really know to little about this subject.

I saw Hugo Chavez proposed the formation of workers militas at the work-places etc, kept at the work-place, at the collective etc.

In Cuba they dont have that kind of "standing armies" like that of the USSR for example, as far as I know. But the working-class are armed and trained as a whole to resist any aggression, in guerrilla style warfare, backed up by some regular armies which are necessary to face the highly-developed military technology and machinery of the imperialist states.
"For us there is no valid definition of socialism other than the abolition of the exploitation of one human being by another."
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 08 Jun 2009, 22:18
Cuba has a standing army. Their guerilla warfare ideas are a result of desperation not superiority.
banistansig1
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 136
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Sep 2008, 17:13
Pioneer
Post 10 Jun 2009, 16:17
Their guerilla warfare ideas as you call them is a result of analyzes of past experiences, concrete reality; its the best way to defend Cuba.
"For us there is no valid definition of socialism other than the abolition of the exploitation of one human being by another."
Soviet cogitations: 3448
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 26 Jun 2006, 15:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Party Bureaucrat
Post 10 Jun 2009, 16:50
No, it's the only way.
The moment one accepts the notion of 'totalitarianism', one is firmly locked within the liberal-democratic horizon. - Slavoj Žižek
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4032
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Oct 2006, 23:10
Politburo
Post 10 Jun 2009, 21:10
So why does North Korea need a huge army, when cuba doesnt?
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 10 Jun 2009, 21:11
North Korea doesn't need a huge army. Their leadership is moronic in that regard. The only thing they need is their 20 000 artillery pieces pointing south ready to turn Seoul into a lake of fire.
banistansig1
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9277
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 19 Mar 2005, 20:08
Embalmed
Post 10 Jun 2009, 21:25
What exactly would that accomplish?
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
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 10 Jun 2009, 21:32
The North Korean army is used for construction projects, too. Maybe they simply need men.
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4032
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Oct 2006, 23:10
Politburo
Post 10 Jun 2009, 22:22
I dunno. Unless the army is more productive at work then civilians...
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 11 Jun 2009, 05:11
Quote:
What exactly would that accomplish?


Deterrence. The RoK won't attack if the consequences destroy their capital, and thus do major damage to their economy. Not that they're concerned with the lives lost, but the economic shockwave would be tremendous.
banistansig1
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9277
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 19 Mar 2005, 20:08
Embalmed
Post 11 Jun 2009, 21:36
But the north has greater ambitions than that. Of course it's not prudent to be so ambitious at this time, but what can you expect. Plus said artillery would have to be at battle readiness 100% of the time. Basically they're too ambitious and corrupt for that.
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
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 12 Jun 2009, 00:51
We don't know what their ambitions are, or how corrupt they are. What we do know is that they have enough artillery pieces to create the equivalent of a small nuclear explosion in Seoul. That is the #1 reason why the RoK will not invade them (with or without America).
banistansig1
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.