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

Sino-Soviet Split

POST REPLY
Soviet cogitations: 1533
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Oct 2007, 15:55
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Party Member
Post 09 Feb 2008, 04:59
What do you think of the Sino-Soviet split? Do you think that it was one of the biggest mistakes made by socialist governments of the past?
We have beaten you to the moon, but you have beaten us in sausage making.- Nikita Khrushchev
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 09 Feb 2008, 05:00
It came from the different natures of the socialist movements in Europe and Asia.
Soviet cogitations: 1533
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Oct 2007, 15:55
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Party Member
Post 09 Feb 2008, 05:11
To me it was a big error made by the Soviet Union and China because it bought them to see each other as enemies. And gave the capitalists a chance to take advantage of it.
We have beaten you to the moon, but you have beaten us in sausage making.- Nikita Khrushchev
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1175
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 02 Jun 2006, 06:00
Party Member
Post 09 Feb 2008, 19:46
Most people take the side of China. The chinese were also very paranoid about a Soviet "attack" on China from what I understand.

I will always take unity over conflict between elements of the left... so yes, in my mind it was a blunder.
Image

"What has 1 year of Capitalism achieved that 70 years of Communism could not? It has made Communism look good" - Russian joke, 1993.
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 09 Feb 2008, 23:40
It was inevitable. All communist movement up to that point were directed from Moscow, and once they succeeded became sattelites. China wouldn't go along with that kind of policy, and Khruschev's had no interests in another major communist power that acts independently.
Soviet cogitations: 1533
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Oct 2007, 15:55
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Party Member
Post 10 Feb 2008, 02:43
Some countries of the communist movement could've took a stance like Yugoslavia. It wouldn't have been as turbulent between the Soviet Union and other countries compared to PRC. Also including Khrushchev I don't think that any Soviet leader had an interest in a major communist power that acts independently. With the exception of North Korea.
We have beaten you to the moon, but you have beaten us in sausage making.- Nikita Khrushchev
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3711
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Jul 2006, 04:49
Ideology: Juche
Old Bolshevik
Post 14 Feb 2008, 07:56
Frankly, the Sino-Soviet split was one of the biggest tragedies of the Cold War. If they had remained a unified bloc instead of sqabbling over unimportant things, then there might still be a USSR today.
Soviet cogitations: 1533
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Oct 2007, 15:55
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Party Member
Post 14 Feb 2008, 08:02
Yeah like it says in the Communist Manifesto "Working Men of All Countries Unite!". Khrushchev and Mao were once working men.
We have beaten you to the moon, but you have beaten us in sausage making.- Nikita Khrushchev
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 14 Feb 2008, 08:29
Khruschev was just a very stupid working man......


This is not very constructiv. Please stick to serious statements, you're good at that! -sptnz
Soviet cogitations: 2775
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Sep 2004, 23:23
Party Bureaucrat
Post 15 Feb 2008, 01:41
Quote:
I will always take unity over conflict between elements of the left... so yes, in my mind it was a blunder.


Ditto.

The Good Old Days, as it should have been forever:

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/310618
Whoppee for Comrade Sergei.
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 15 Feb 2008, 01:45
Quote:
This is not very constructiv. Please stick to serious statements, you're good at that! -sptnz


But it's true.... who else would plant corn north of the Arctic circle? He was worse then Gorbi.
Soviet cogitations: 1533
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Oct 2007, 15:55
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Party Member
Post 15 Feb 2008, 02:19
Quote:
But it's true.... who else would plant corn north of the Arctic circle? He was worse then Gorbi.

I think he was way better than Brezhnev and Gorbachev. He wasn't that good of a leader domestically. But he helped out Cuba and other countries that were at odds with the capitalists. Under his government he also beat the capitalists to space and established the Warsaw Pact. BTW I just put on the Khrushchev avatar because I've already seen somebody with the Fidel and Lenin avatars. Nice link Sergei
We have beaten you to the moon, but you have beaten us in sausage making.- Nikita Khrushchev
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 15 Feb 2008, 04:58
Quote:
He wasn't that good of a leader domestically. But he helped out Cuba and other countries that were at odds with the capitalists.


That doesn't matter. Communism isn't just about spreading leftist ideology. It's about a genuine transformation of society. Khurschev was the one who essentially gave up on communism in the Soviet Union.
Soviet cogitations: 1533
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Oct 2007, 15:55
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Party Member
Post 15 Feb 2008, 05:49
Like I said Khrushchev wasn't that good of a leader at home. You'll find that mostly every leader whether bad or good wasn't bad or good at everything.
We have beaten you to the moon, but you have beaten us in sausage making.- Nikita Khrushchev
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9306
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 02 Mar 2004, 15:19
Ideology: Other Leftist
Old Bolshevik
Post 15 Feb 2008, 15:35
No actually. Khruschev was just majorly incompetent. Russia is still paying for his destruction of the production of grain. STILL. Stalin's repercussions weren't even that dire.
Image

Fitzy wrote:
Yes, because I am poisoning them. They are my children.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2693
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2006, 08:59
Party Bureaucrat
Post 16 Feb 2008, 01:51
Quote:
unimportant things


They were only arguing over the soul of socialism. Is that unimportant?
Image

"To know a thing you must study it." --Dagoth Ur
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 16 Feb 2008, 05:40
Quote:
I think he was way better than Brezhnev and Gorbachev.


Neither of the things you mentioned were started or truly created by him. If anything, he's responsible for the fact that the USSR eventually fell behind in the space race. Brezhnev's attempts to revive soviet space programs were far more capable. He was the one that destroyed Soviet agriculture, and ended the transformation of a socialist society into a communist one. He's the one that created the conditions which would eventually lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2272
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 May 2005, 13:28
Party Bureaucrat
Post 23 Feb 2008, 11:58
Its too bad that Kruchev had to take such a different line from the traditions in which the PRC was built on.

It was a blunder but only way to avoid it would had been not to hold the speech of Stalin's mistakes in the XX Party Congress.

Unified front of China and USSR would had been awesome...
-With solidarity, FC

Image
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 24 Feb 2008, 02:44
Quote:
It was a blunder but only way to avoid it would had been not to hold the speech of Stalin's mistakes in the XX Party Congress.


Khruschev new that if he just took the reins of power from Stalin, he'd always be overshadowed by Stalin's accomplishments. So he did the only politically prudent thing by doing all he could to tarnish Stalin's name. That way he himself, not matter how feeble or incompetent, wouldn't look too bad.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9816
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 19 Apr 2008, 03:25
Embalmed
Post 24 May 2008, 04:33
The Sino-Soviet split was probably the biggest mistake of the Cold War. Instead of being in conflict with each other they should have worked together to fight their common enemy, the capitalists. Also and Khrushchev lovers don't hate me for this, but I think that he was a major part of the split. Because Stalin and Mao liked each other and got along well, but Khrushchevs policies towards China differed from Stalin's and that caused conflicts.
Once capitalists know we can release the Kraken, they'll back down and obey our demands for sure.
_Comrade Gulper
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.
cron