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

Belarus

POST REPLY
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4032
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Oct 2006, 23:10
Politburo
Post 14 Mar 2009, 22:23
What's going on in Belarus? I never hear much about them.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9816
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 19 Apr 2008, 03:25
Embalmed
Post 14 Mar 2009, 23:25
Last I heard Russia is giving them a 500 million dollar loan.
Once capitalists know we can release the Kraken, they'll back down and obey our demands for sure.
_Comrade Gulper
Soviet cogitations: 3448
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 26 Jun 2006, 15:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Party Bureaucrat
Post 14 Mar 2009, 23:55
You don't hear much because nothing happens there, they're still living in the 1980's.
Last edited by Whitten on 15 Mar 2009, 00:51, edited 1 time in total.
The moment one accepts the notion of 'totalitarianism', one is firmly locked within the liberal-democratic horizon. - Slavoj Žižek
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4953
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 13 Feb 2008, 15:25
Ideology: Other Leftist
Politburo
Post 15 Mar 2009, 00:36
That's a bit harsh Whitten.
Soviet cogitations: 3448
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 26 Jun 2006, 15:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Party Bureaucrat
Post 15 Mar 2009, 04:36
Not really, if they were serious about this last outpost of the soviet union theme they have going they should be leading the way for Europe's progressives, not sitting arround trying their utmost to pretend Gobi never happened. I rewatched 'Goodbye Lenin' earlier and I couldn't stop thinking, "hmm, this must be what Lukashenko's politburo looks like."

also: shouldn't this be in the USSR section?
The moment one accepts the notion of 'totalitarianism', one is firmly locked within the liberal-democratic horizon. - Slavoj Žižek
Soviet cogitations: 495
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 03 Mar 2008, 02:36
Komsomol
Post 15 Mar 2009, 04:38
Agreed, they seem to be keeping the 'bad bits' of the SU without contributing any theory or relevant practice.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9816
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 19 Apr 2008, 03:25
Embalmed
Post 15 Mar 2009, 05:03
Quote:
shouldn't this be in the USSR section?

Yes it should shouldn't it.
Once capitalists know we can release the Kraken, they'll back down and obey our demands for sure.
_Comrade Gulper
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4953
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 13 Feb 2008, 15:25
Ideology: Other Leftist
Politburo
Post 16 Mar 2009, 01:44
I agree that Belarus needs to rethink it's position, however, I would suggest that it is a much more comfortable place to live today than most of the other former republics. We should be encouraging it to change rather than dismissing it.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4501
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 16 Mar 2009, 05:47
Whitten, how do you expect Belarus to lead the way for Europe's progressives? Liberal European socialists and Soviet-style socialists have rarely if ever been friendly towards one another or ready to listen to each other. This reality has persisted in the post-Soviet space (see as a relevant example the rift between the Communist Party of Belarus and the Party of Belarusian Communists). My wish is that Belarus becomes an example not for European socialists, but for former Soviet republics -and particularly Russia and Ukraine. The former Soviet space and the European Union space are distinct, with distinct conditions and problems facing each. The republics of the former USSR, including Belarus, have been struggling to avoid becoming third world countries. What are the Belarusian socialists supposed to do to inspire European progressives? They have already done a lot in the last 15 years to prove the superiority of their approach to those of their former republican neighbours. They can only do so much while they've got the European Union pushing them to make economic and political reforms, and Russia acting like all they care about is their ability to pay for energy supplies.
"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
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 22 Mar 2009, 07:52
Russia cares about a few more things then their ability to pay for energy. Russia also needs Belarus to remain a friendly pro-Russian buffer state. Russia needs conitnuing access to the Dnepr-class RLS in Belarus. Russia needs the Belarussian airspace-control network to be unified with the Russian one, and preferably with the overall CSTO one. Russia needs Belarus to support it with at least token gestures, as a means of giving unilateral Russian actions the appearence of an international decision. Overall Russia needs a more or less obedient colony westward of it. In exchange Russia is willing to provide natural gas at subsidized prices (no small thing, it's been propping up the Belarussian economy), major security guarantees such as coverage under the Russian nuclear umbrella, political support against the west, and economic assistance in times of crisis, as well as profitable mutual projects during normal times (such as the new nuclear power plant being built in Belarus).

That's the situation. For Belarus this arrangement is almost ideal. The one almost is that Belarus needs decent relations with the west. While Russia can afford to have some fallouts with the west, ultimately Russia and the west will get along at this point and even deal far more on a bilateral basis then on the basis of blocks. The west needs Russia for many things. Not so with Belarus. Which means that when Belarus gets pulled in on Russia's side into the confrontations it has a far harder time getting any good relations with the west.
banistansig1
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 258
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 03 Oct 2009, 17:50
Komsomol
Post 17 Oct 2009, 16:56
Dear comrades,
I know that Belarus has two Communist Parties, split because of support or opposition to the government.
How does the Communist Party of Belarus justify its support for the government, and how does the Party of the Communists of Belarus justify its opposition to it?
Thank you a lot!!!
If you tremble at the slightest indignation done to a fellow human, then you are my comrade-in-arms. Commander E. Guevara de la Serna
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 17 Oct 2009, 17:11
That's a damn good question.

I mean... there already is a planned economy and a state-owned industry. What would Communists want to change in Belarus?
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 5167
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Nov 2007, 06:31
Embalmed
Post 17 Oct 2009, 18:00
Quote:
I mean... there already is a planned economy and a state-owned industry. What would Communists want to change in Belarus?


That's a pretty poor standard, comrade. Fascism created state-owned industries and used an overwhelming amount of economic planning.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4501
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 05 Nov 2009, 09:52
Hey Davide,

Sorry for the late reply. Here's my opinion in response to your questions:

The CPB justifies their support for the government because, as Mabool said, most industry is in the hands of the state, which administrates and preserves it in the interests of the working people of Belarus. Also, they support Lukashenko because he has been effective in dealing with high level government corruption (by rotating ministers every two years, thus preventing them from building patronage networks), and because present day Belarus preserves many of what are considered to be the best features of the Soviet past, including symbology (the anthem, the flag, Soviet era holidays, Pioneers) and more practical things -guaranteed jobs, quality free health care and education, hormone and GM-free foods, etc.

As for the Party of Communists, think of them as analogous in ideology to the Party of Communists of Moldova, communist in name but not in practice, not in politics, not in foreign policy orientation, not in economic policy. They don't support Lukashenko because like other members of the anti-Lukashenko movement they want a politically and economically more liberal country, probably along the lines of present-day Ukraine. They were part of the United Democratic Forces of Belarus coalition during the last election cycle, where Alexander Milinkevic, who is undoubtedly supported by Poland and the USA, if not their outright agent, was the chosen candidate for president. It might seem baffeling that people who call themselves communists align with 'orange revolution' type organizations and hate the market socialist, Soviet style nature of their country, though I suppose stranger and more ridiculous political groupings do exist (like Russian neo-Nazi groups that look up to Hitler).
"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
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 05 Nov 2009, 23:11
Why doesn't Lukashenko admit that his country is socialist?

Also, why would Russian nazis look up to Hitler? He totally fragged up their country...
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3553
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Jul 2006, 00:10
Ideology: Other Leftist
Forum Commissar
Post 05 Nov 2009, 23:22
how can you be a nazi without supporting hitler?
Image


Jugoslavija je bleda slika
premrzlega partizana
zato je njeno ljudstvo navajeno trpeti
zato je njeno ljudstvo pripravljeno umreti.

-Via Ofenziva

Forum Rules
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 05 Nov 2009, 23:23
I've always wondered about that. More specifically, I've wondered how any slav managed to be a nazi WHILE supporting hitler.
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
Soviet cogitations: 3448
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 26 Jun 2006, 15:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Party Bureaucrat
Post 05 Nov 2009, 23:24
Modern Strasserites are kind of like the Nazi version of Trotskyists, they're not all to fond of Hitler.
The moment one accepts the notion of 'totalitarianism', one is firmly locked within the liberal-democratic horizon. - Slavoj Žižek
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3553
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Jul 2006, 00:10
Ideology: Other Leftist
Forum Commissar
Post 05 Nov 2009, 23:28
Quote:
I've always wondered about that. More specifically, I've wondered how any slav managed to be a nazi WHILE supporting hitler.


very simply, they refer themselves as aryans and the usually put teutons, slavs and god knows who else in that category. personally i hate white nationalists because of this generalization since for me there are obvious racial differences between teutons and slavs, not just between whites and blacks.
Image


Jugoslavija je bleda slika
premrzlega partizana
zato je njeno ljudstvo navajeno trpeti
zato je njeno ljudstvo pripravljeno umreti.

-Via Ofenziva

Forum Rules
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 05 Nov 2009, 23:30
But how can they support somebody who wanted to enslave all of them >_<?
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.