Red_Scare [he/him]

It’s hilarious to me because it’s exactly the kind of “political” joke you would hear in the Soviet Union, where ideological proclamations of party leaders are put in absurd or sexual contexts.

Probably the most famous one:

Dzerzhinsky and Trotsky are arguing: which is better, a wife or a mistress?

Dzerzhinsky says: “A mistress.”

Trotsky says: “A wife.”

They can’t agree, so they ask Lenin.

Lenin replies:

“Both! Tell your wife you’re with your mistress, tell your mistress you’re with your wife… and meanwhile, go up to the attic and study, study, and study again.”

(“Study, study, and study again” was the most famous Lenin quote in the USSR, the placard with those words would hang in every single classroom of every school).

That’s not fair to Leon

When Russia took over Crimea, Ukraine cut water supply to the peninsula, depriving civilian population of water for drinking and agriculture (which is a human rights violation) and causing a humanitarian crisis.

So Russia built the longest bridge in Europe to provide water and other essential supplies.

On the first day of the invasion Russian forces reopened the water flow into Crimea, but on the third day of the Ukrainian counteroffensive the Kakhovka Dam was destroyed, causing massive flood in Kherson region and again water shortage and agriculture crisis in Crimea, so the bridge remains vital infrastructure.

Since the beginning of the war Ukraine is trying to blow it up, when they do, Western outlets report it with absolute fucking glee:

Pressure on Putin grows as his ‘jewel in the crown’ bridge to Crimea is blown up

Long threatened, the hated $4bn Russian symbol of Moscow’s occupation of Crimea – one that Russia had boasted was impossible to attack – had been blown up.

The symbolism of the moment – a day after Russian president Vladimir Putin’s 70th birthday and just over a week after he announced the illegal annexation of four more Ukrainian territories amid huge pomp in Moscow – was lost on nobody.

But it is not simply the fact this is Putin’s bridge that underlines the symbolism. The blast has real-term consequences too for Putin’s war, coming hard on the heels of a series of humiliating defeats on the eastern and southern fronts that has seen large-scale Russian retreats.

NP! I liked it so I reverse searched for a high quality version.

Free high quality version on the artist page:

https://www.davidrevoy.com/article43/yin-and-yang-of-world-hunger/show

Isn’t it basically petty bourgeoisie + labour aristocracy?

There’s exactly the same sentiment expressed in one of the exhibits in the Berlin Stasi museum (predictably).

I think the term originated within CPGB (a Marxist-Leninist party in the UK) so Trots had nothing to do with this one.

By the way, Vijay Prashad explained it very well a few years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsqE9kEsDVY

https://lemmygrad.ml/post/7357419/6115188

Stalin had nothing to do with Hungary though, that was Khrushchev.

Eton Mouse

“Everyone should do as they please” is such entitled bullshit.

People were provided homes, jobs, education, healthcare, maternal leave, holidays for children in pioneer camps, and so on and forth, in a poor country that didn’t benefit from imperialism and didn’t exploit other nations.

To achieve that, able-bodied people were expected to contribute and parasitism was not tolerated.

(Edit) You probably grew up in a capitalist society so maybe you just have trouble imagining a different one.

Under capitalism, the most vulnerable people end up homeless and unemployed, but in the USSR nobody was left behind, vulnerable people were provided homes and given jobs they were able to perform. People with mental health issues were treated, as a matter of fact Western propaganda painted the high number of hospitalised people as an example of how repressive USSR is, instead of recognising that in the West many of those people would be homeless, freezing to death in winter and suffering all kinds of abuse.

Hospitalisation was not the first thing to do either - USSR had a huge “sanatorium” industry, with entire towns built in beautiful locations like seaside, mountain ranges, etc. Workers who were suffering from stress, anxiety etc would be sent there by their doctors to rest and rehabilitate from entire USSR in hundreds of thousands - someting only the rich could afford in the West at the time. Of course now those huge sanatorium complexes are mostly empty ruins, one of the most striking examples is Tskhaltubo in Georgia (https://wander-lush.org/visit-tskaltubo-travel-guide-tips/)

If people were unhappy with their housing situation they could apply to change it and enter a queue for a new accomodation, similarly those unhappy with their jobs had all kinds of free evening education courses available, re-training schemes, and so forth.

Laws against vagrancy and parasitism didn’t victimise the vulnerable, rather they existed to control the criminality. If you didn’t work legally, where were you getting money from? If you didn’t live under your registered address, how did you get an unregistered accomodation?

What do you mean “still”, of course that’s a good thing.

Unironically, being homeless or unemployed was illegal in the USSR, everyone was provided with a place to live and a job and if you instead chose vagrancy or parasitism you could serve time.

“Patriotic socialism” is simply a new coat of linguistic paint for the good old “national socialism”, same as “cultural Marxism” is just an updated name for “cultural Bolshevism”.

WPB was set up by Joti Brar of CPGB-ML and Galloway the rape apologist which should tell one everything they need to know.

I’m sorry but that passage from Foundations doesn’t apply to every war you support. Vietnam was not waging a war of national liberation against Cambodian colonisers and it had nothing to do with Vietnamese self determination. I don’t understand anymore why you say the things you’re saying so I think I’ll leave it here.

I don’t even know what you’re talking about anymore, are you equating Vietnam liberating Cambodia from Pol Pot with Russia invading Ukraine?

Russia is protecting it’s sovereignty when it e.g. puts Navalny behind bars. But it was simply protecting it’s security interests when it invaded Ukraine. Ukraine did not colonise Russia, this is not a war of national liberation. This invasion is not anti-imperialist, and it wasn’t necessary - Russia absolutely had enough power in Ukraine to meddle and pull strings, hell do some assassinations, sanctions, etc.

This war has accelerated the European descent into fascism, it made Europe dependent on the US energy, it triggered European countries to join NATO and to raise their defense budgets by billions. This is exactly what the US wanted, and Trump will likely push NATO countries to increase their defense budgets even further.

(Edit) If Russia starts an all out war with Georgia I won’t support that either.

The Foundations of Leninism was published in 1924 when India was under the British rule and China was in the Century of Humiliation, both would only end in the aftermath of WW2.