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

Stasi

POST REPLY
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4511
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 24 May 2007, 02:51
arif_moin:

Quote:
Internal dissent is a blatant byproduct of public dissatisfaction & only gains fruit if the system you're ruling over is unable to fulfill the aspirations of the common folk.


Dissent in a socialist state is an inevitability. As long as other capitalist states exist to sabatoge socialist progress and poison the minds of ordinary people with their extravagent promises, and while some individuals within the new society continue to have an interest in a return to the old order, dissent will exist, as will the need for security organizations like the Stasi.

Quote:
If the Stasi was truly a guarantor of the existence of the East German state, we would still have a GDR today.


Small states like the GDR require alliances and protection from larger ones, like the USSR. It was an inevitabily for socialist governments across Eastern Europe to fall once the USSR ended their security guarantees and political and economic support.

Quote:
I could see the Stasi as a necessity during perhaps the early post WWII years- but in the 60s, 70s and 80s


The Stasi and other security organizations like the KGB did a good job. The issue is, they didn't expect a 'revolution from above', from the group of people that were given a legal mandate over them, and who prevented them from carrying out their duties when the situation became dire (1989 in Eastern Europe, 1991 in the USSR).

Quote:
If lots of people are leaving your borders, giving them a Western Hezegovina, or a Termez is far more beneficial & result yielding & cheaper for the State than having them monitored to the brim actively by special police.


Do you think citizens of the GDR were not allowed to travel to other socialist countries or even in some cases to the West?

Quote:
If GDR & Socialist countries w/ strong interior police forces- spent more of their military & defence budget on say- bailing out Nasser- instead of putting all the $$ into some saddistically clownish interior police units, there's a greater chance Socialism would've still been preserved today.


In the nuclear age that was not a realistic policy stance to take. The Soviets' 'Bailing out Nasser' would result in the end of humanity.

...


fontis:

Quote:
Obviously, bourgeois elements will exist and they will be fought, but all in all - there is no need for a secret police.


That point is confusing to me. How will bourgeois elements (and lets include opportunists, nationalists, monarchists, etc for good measure) be fought without a state security organization in an established, peaceful socialist state?


...


The war against anti-socialist thought and action does not end once we take control of a state. There are many challenges both in the short and long term that will result in dissent, even from individuals otherwise supportive of our ideology and aims. Then, as mentioned, there are those committed to destroying our progress within the state, and outsiders infiltrating it to do the same. To believe that orgs like the Stasi were a waste of time and resources is extremely naive considering the radical transformation in social relations that our ideology seeks to make, and the power which it seeks to take from capitalist elites. The case of the USSR and the explosion in radical anti-socialism triggered by 'glasnost' is proof in my mind of the necessity for constant vigilance and the necessary security aparatus to deal with the multitude of threats we face.
"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: 2693
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2006, 08:59
Party Bureaucrat
Post 24 May 2007, 04:51
All states have coercive mechanisms to maintain their continued existence. Only idealists and anarchists could quibble with that. Yet thanks to copious western propaganda, the idea that the Stasi is somehow more 'fearsome' than any other given state's secret police apparatus retains currency in some circles. Arguably the Stasi was 'nicer' than say, the CIA, who went out of their way to recruit as many Nazis as they possibly could. In contrast the Stasi scrupulously removed Nazis from all levels of government wherever possible.

Quote:
The war against anti-socialist thought and action does not end once we take control of a state.


Correct. Marxists like Lenin and Stalin knew that class struggle continues for a long time under the dictatorship of the proletariat in the same way that class struggle continues under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.

It was Mao's great contribution that he called out the revisionist leadership of the USSR beginning under Krushchev & co. for the fantasy that they could somehow rule in the name of all the people, or that peaceful coexistence with the bourgeoisie in other countries is a realistic option. Societies simply don't work that way.
Image

"To know a thing you must study it." --Dagoth Ur
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1785
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Jan 2005, 07:15
Unperson
Post 24 May 2007, 07:10
You are both showing totalitarian and authoritarian signs.

Why is it so obvious for a secret-police?
You are doing the same humanitarian mistake that all supposed Leftists have done throughout time; you start making decisions for others. I'm fully aware of the capitalist argument saying that communists intrude on your private life, removing your ability to chose for yourself - and we both know this is a load of shit.

If you take away the freedom the people has to contribute and actively maintain the situation in society... It doesn't matter what army or secret police you put in place, your government will fall. The people should NEVER fear the government, the government should fear its people because the people will always be more righteous than any government in the universe. The mass' > the few. I know this sounds stupid, but if Sweden was ruled by 10 communists, and 10 communists alone and it would turn out that these 10 communists are opposed POLITICALLY by everyone else in the society.. I would resign the government. Fighting against public opinion is futile.

You want to secure socialists structures? Include the support of the mass'. The people are the ones who supposedly put us in power in the first place, and they will be the ones who will defend the system. If you open up the society, there will be no room for bourgeois elements to grasp straws, nor will there be any need for a secret police to fight bourgeois elements because the people will exterminate these with time.

You my friend, are by all means far from being capable of representing any government.
banistansig2
Soviet cogitations: 1103
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 26 Jul 2006, 10:21
Party Member
Post 24 May 2007, 10:38
Quote:
Small states like the GDR require alliances and protection from larger ones, like the USSR. It was an inevitabily for socialist governments across Eastern Europe to fall once the USSR ended their security guarantees and political and economic support.


So, as far as the GDR goes- in the end- the Stasi didn't contribute to anything. And by no means did it contribute to the integrity of the DDR state, as the chain of events that happened in Germany around the late 80s shows.

Quote:
The issue is, they didn't expect a 'revolution from above', from the group of people that were given a legal mandate over them, and who prevented them from carrying out their duties when the situation became dire (1989 in Eastern Europe, 1991 in the USSR).


So, mammoth resources were spent on public policing, whereas select masters of these police corps wrecked the system from the inside all along- what a waste.

A better use of public resources would've been keeping a tab on the political elite, the bureaucrats rather than the masses...for which you won't need an organization as extensive as Stasi. The chances are- a high level bureaucrat or a party official would see more of a personal gain in dislodging the system & more importantly- would have the resources to do some serious damage, more so than a plumber or a school teacher.

Quote:
Do you think citizens of the GDR were not allowed to travel to other socialist countries or even in some cases to the West?


The issue isin't East German travel policy in general, but specific cases of prosecution of East Germans fleeing to the FRG. A lion's share of Stasi's operations was directed in this front especially in the 80s.

Quote:
In the nuclear age that was not a realistic policy stance to take. The Soviets' 'Bailing out Nasser' would result in the end of humanity.


One could've argued the same on Korea- when Mao bailed the DPRK out. Many pro PRC circles cautioned Mao about a nuclear attack if he intervenes, but he still did & that nuclear strike never happened.

As long as the capitalists' direct existence isin't threatened they wouldn't resort to a nuclear war. Especially if that nuclear war will disrupt oil supplies regionwide (throughout the entire ME- which a nuclear war would've done).

You would've seen a UAR run ME on one side and the pro capitalist bloc on another.

But coming back to the topic, the bottom line is: People don't like being policed & will make it known either today or tomorrow.

I would perhaps send in "secret units" to find out what my fellow citizens like, and try to fashion a society around that.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2693
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2006, 08:59
Party Bureaucrat
Post 24 May 2007, 19:17
Quote:
You are both showing totalitarian and authoritarian signs.


How so? Be specific.

Quote:
Why is it so obvious for a secret-police?


I answer your question with a question: Have you, fontis, read The State and Revolution by Lenin?

Seriously, this is standard Leninism. All states have the perogative of their own self-preservation. It is insane idealism to think that magically the fundamental needs of statecraft disappear because the workers rule instead of the capitalists. Your version of 'leftism' may be more 'pure' but it will never be verified in the crucible of practice, because it is impossible. This is the basic problem of Trotskyism. Hope you are enjoying the company!

Quote:
I'm fully aware of the capitalist argument saying that communists intrude on your private life, removing your ability to chose for yourself - and we both know this is a load of shit.


Non seqitur. Your point is what?

Quote:
If you take away the freedom the people has to contribute and actively maintain the situation in society... It doesn't matter what army or secret police you put in place, your government will fall.


Take away the Stasi, and it is one less thing the bourgeois have to destroy in order to rescind the 'freedom of the people to contribute' to society and in exchange bestow the 'freedom' for the workers to starve. The bourgeoisie don't fight with one hand tied behind their back, why on earth are you demanding that the workers should?

Quote:
The people should NEVER fear the government, the government should fear its people because the people will always be more righteous than any government in the universe....You want to secure socialists structures? Include the support of the mass'.


This is so stupid. You are presenting a false dichotomy. . Secret police + Soviet /CDR power = dictatorship of the proletariat. There is nothing more to add, really.

Quote:
You my friend, are by all means far from being capable of representing any government.


Sorry to burst your bubble, but the real world is a little more complicated than CyberNations.
Image

"To know a thing you must study it." --Dagoth Ur
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1785
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Jan 2005, 07:15
Unperson
Post 24 May 2007, 23:57
Quote:
How so? Be specific.


Because you crave for the need of mass-policing your inhabitants.

Quote:
I answer your question with a question: Have you, fontis, read The State and Revolution by Lenin?


I counter you with saying that Lenin may have been right a century ago, but now he isn't. Besides, there is no ONE WAY OF WORKING SOCIALISM~~, since all experiments so far have failed.

I'm not naive, and I fully understand several points that Lenin brought up, however I choose to implement them in different ways. Where you see the extravagant need of a secret police, I see the opportunity of enlightening the proletariat into making them all vigilantes. I come from a country were I've been shitscared of the secret-police, so trust me, I know that it does more harm than good. I don't want my society to be a ratting one, where no one dares to share any criticism because GESTAPO or whatever will come storming in arresting them for being anti-communists.
banistansig2
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2693
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2006, 08:59
Party Bureaucrat
Post 25 May 2007, 01:49
Quote:
I come from a country were I've been shitscared of the secret-police,


Yes, and your country is ruled by the bourgeoisie. So you'd conversely want the bourgeoisie in our hypothetical workers' state to have complete liberty to scheme and plot their return to power, to exploit the workers once again? Great. With communists like you, who needs capitalists?

Quote:
Lenin may have been right a century ago, but now he isn't


False.
Image

"To know a thing you must study it." --Dagoth Ur
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1785
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Jan 2005, 07:15
Unperson
Post 25 May 2007, 02:11
Let me put it this way, once the revolution arises, I wonder who the mass' will find the most convenient type of socialism in.

A) My experiment which puts trust into the citizens, decentralizes governmental power and allows the citizens to grow vigilant and protect the society

or

B) Your experiment which puts no trust whatsoever in the citizens, actively monitors them via the secret-police and continues to covertly oppress those who think differently.
banistansig2
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2693
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2006, 08:59
Party Bureaucrat
Post 25 May 2007, 04:05
Quote:
B) Your experiment which puts no trust whatsoever in the citizens, actively monitors them via the secret-police and continues to covertly oppress those who think differently.


Thats a total strawman. Can't you do any better than that?
Image

"To know a thing you must study it." --Dagoth Ur
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4511
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 25 May 2007, 07:46
arif_moin:

Quote:
So, as far as the GDR goes- in the end- the Stasi didn't contribute to anything. And by no means did it contribute to the integrity of the DDR state, as the chain of events that happened in Germany around the late 80s shows.


It is not fair to use this type of historical hindsight to prove that the Stasi 'didn't contribute anything'. By this logic I can argue that the Soviet era was a waste of time because it all collapsed in the end. As I've said, the GDR failed because the Soviet Union, along with the post-Honecker government literally surrendered the country to the West. There is nothing that the Stasi could have done in light of this national and international situation.

Quote:
The issue isin't East German travel policy in general, but specific cases of prosecution of East Germans fleeing to the FRG. A lion's share of Stasi's operations was directed in this front especially in the 80s.


I don't fully understand. Please elaborate.
"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: 1103
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 26 Jul 2006, 10:21
Party Member
Post 25 May 2007, 08:55
Quote:
It is not fair to use this type of historical hindsight to prove that the Stasi 'didn't contribute anything'. By this logic I can argue that the Soviet era was a waste of time because it all collapsed in the end.


Two different things, because while the USSR ran, it guaranteed the proletariats it encompassed a steadily improving quality of life & set a benchmark as to what a Socialist (or at least semi Socialist) system should translate as far as living standards go.

The SOviet Union developed a legacy which people would remember for being proletariat friendly (at least in a comparative sense). Stasi left no such legacy whatsoever. The only people who seem to miss the Stasi these days are the German bourgesois elements, who are now keen on using their methods (k-9 scent technique) to zero in on G-8 protest leaders.

The Stasi had no accomplishment to date in sense that it averted the kind of major mishap it was designed to avoid. The USSR till it lived- created exactly what its founding fathers intended.

Usually, the shotcallers of a system who deem mass policing of others as a necessary step to "preserve Socialism" more often than not need to be policed themselves


Quote:
I don't fully understand. Please elaborate.


In particular- Stasi's operations in the late 70s all the way till their collapse.

Quote:
Yes, and your country is ruled by the bourgeoisie. So you'd conversely want the bourgeoisie in our hypothetical workers' state to have complete liberty to scheme and plot their return to power, to exploit the workers once again? Great. With communists like you, who needs capitalists?


The Stasi wasn't publically accountable, eventhough they engaged in mass policing (which makes them different from other SOcialist run "secret units" like RAW). The structural & operational aspect of the Stasi doesn't make them a proletariat organization. State secret services of other Socialist systems like RAW kept out of public life operationally, so public accountability wasn't required.

Also, the folks involved in a string of corruption & sabotauge charges- which destabilised the GDR from the inside & eventually engulfed it- were powerful political heavyweights who weren't scrutinized by Stasi operations, as they held ranks much greater than the Stasi's outreach.

Socialist systems like Tito's Yugoslavia, Nasser's Egypt & Nehru's India didn't police their citizens like Stasi- yet ran pretty successful Socialist run systems I must add...

In all reality, the "fear factor" groups like Stasi invoke can only delay the inevitable- not thwart it. Even if the East Germans didn't know this in the 80s, we should know that by now...
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 16
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Mar 2010, 20:17
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 03 Apr 2010, 21:06
I have a complete/original Stasi officers uniform, which I wore last Halloween. Of course, many people assumed it was a Nazi uniform of some kind. Several people even praised the uniform because they thought it was a Nazi uniform.


The Stasi were thugs and thieves plain and simple. Their budget helped to bankrupt the DDR. I must say, however....they were very efficient and, for a great while, very effective thugs.
Last edited by STURZA on 05 Apr 2010, 23:36, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 10814
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Dec 2004, 23:53
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 05 Apr 2010, 08:37
If a war between the USA and the USSR happened the main battlefield would be Germany. Plain and simple. There was a damn big need for an efficent security force that the Stasi fullfilled. iirc Western Germany had more spies in the DDR than than the East had. Calling them thugs is rather unneccesary unless you follow Bakunin "When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called "the People's Stick."

Also I haven't found any infomration on them actually bankrupting the government (ok only checked wiki..).

EDIT: Old S-E thread
Image

"By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master?" - Walter Rodney
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 05 Apr 2010, 11:17
Quote:
If a war between the USA and the USSR happened the main battlefield would be Germany. Plain and simple. There was a damn big need for an efficent security force that the Stasi fullfilled


STASI was the most pervasive secret service the world has ever seen.It's operations were almost pathological.They spent most of their resources on spying prominent members of the society.
It's primary goal was the "protection" of SED from public dissent.It couldn't do much against foreign danger:that's what NVA was for.
Also,even western analysts say,that in the event of WW3,Warsaw pact's armies would advance to Paris in a matter of weeks,'cause NATO didn't have the troops or machinery to stop that advance.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 10814
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Dec 2004, 23:53
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 05 Apr 2010, 11:50
The DDR was wise to spy on "prominent members of society." Look at the USSR the president caused its downfall. Purges of corrupt party officials are necessary to have a healthy democratic-centralist system. Corruption was a problem with people in the DDR because of the dreams of having the luxury goods of the West and people went through illegal means to obtain those goods.

Also as the link I posted stated: 10,000 East Germans spied for the West.

I'm rather paranoid about stuff but the idea of capitalists pulling every dirty trick in the book are well founded. Using dissent in socialist countries during a war: destroys the unity of the working class and hurts the conventional war effort.
Image

"By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master?" - Walter Rodney
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 05 Apr 2010, 12:46
Quote:
The DDR was wise to spy on "prominent members of society." Look at the USSR the president caused its downfall. Purges of corrupt party officials are necessary to have a healthy democratic-centralist system. Corruption was a problem with people in the DDR because of the dreams of having the luxury goods of the West and people went through illegal means to obtain those goods.


I don't know if they spied on the Party.Most likely not,'cause,as far as i know,there haven't been major purges in the SED throughout it's rule.
Erich Mielke was STASI chief from 1957-1989! Just like other decadent Eastern leaders after 70's(Hedonist thug Tito,Brezhnev who awarded himself with dozens of medals etc...)
Makes you wonder how healthy the Party was...Also,Honecker had a disgusting habit of mass-murder hunting(there's a video of him and his associates standing among hundreds! of dead rabbits and deers and so).
STASI mostly focused on writers,artists,intellectuals,as well as ordinary workers.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 16
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Mar 2010, 20:17
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 06 Apr 2010, 23:46
Quote:
Also I haven't found any infomration on them actually bankrupting the government (ok only checked wiki..).


According to reports made to the Cental Round Table in 1990, the Stasi budget for 1989 was four billion marks.
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 07 Apr 2010, 09:38
That's so helpful.
What's the total state budget? Budget for army,agriculture?
Soviet cogitations: 31
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 23 Mar 2010, 23:25
Pioneer
Post 04 May 2010, 00:10
according to wikipedia the GDP was 250 billion DM, because all that was produced in the DDR is in fact sate-property we could say the income of the state was approximatly 250 billion DM.

I have other questions:
-What was the impact of the stasi on the daily life. In films like "Das Leben Der Andere" you get the impression everybody had a record. Is that true?
-What did the stasi to avoid the collapse of the DDR (because they lost there power, I assume they were against a collapse)?
-What are the main differences between the stasi and the KGB, and why weren't all the Warsaw-pact country supervised by the KGB (Cheka,NKVD,...)?
-Was the stasi a part of the army like the Gestapo was?
Learn, Learn, Learn - Vladimir Lenin
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 04 May 2010, 00:32
Quote:
-What was the impact of the stasi on the daily life. In films like "Das Leben Der Andere" you get the impression everybody had a record. Is that true?


Most people had a file, but then again, most files were empty.

Quote:
-What did the stasi to avoid the collapse of the DDR (because they lost there power, I assume they were against a collapse)?


Not much. It practically happened overnight anyways.

Quote:
-What are the main differences between the stasi and the KGB, and why weren't all the Warsaw-pact country supervised by the KGB (Cheka,NKVD,...)?


Why should the KGB (officially) supervise foreign countries?

Quote:
-Was the stasi a part of the army like the Gestapo was?


No, but it was organized like an army.
"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.
cron