History channel program on the KGB...

[Malachi151]

The history channel did a one hour spot on the NKVD and KGB during the early Bolshevik Revolution and Stalinist phase.

What I found interesting is that they talked about Leon Trotsky for about 10 minutes at various points and talked about how he was so opposed to Stalin and how he gave speaches in the US, andhad to move to Mexico where he was killed.

Guess what they left out during that entire time?

They never said that Trotsky was a Communist!

They totally misrepresented the situation, painted Stalin as the representative of Communism, and they acted like Trotsky was anti-Communist.

They never honestly portrayed the extremely significant element in that Trotsky, and all of his many follwers, was saying essentially that Stalin was not a Communist at all and was not upholding the ideals fo Communism. He was accusing Stalin of betraying Communism, which is what he did do.

This is really one of the most critical concepts in all of 20th century history IMO. Stalin never upheld the initial ideals of the Soviet Union as it was formed under Lenin, nor was he acting in line with the ideals of Marxism in any way shape or form.

Stalin was as much a Marxist Communist as David Koresh was a follower of the teachings of Jesus. Just because you call yourself something means nothing.

This just is one more example, of which I have many, of how the issue of Communism is totally misrepresented in Ameerica.

They talked for 10 minutes about Trotsky being anti-Stalinist and giving speaches in America, said that Mexico was his last refuge (because America kicked him out, which they did not say) and the whole time never did they mention that Trotsky is considered essentially to be the foremost Marxist Revolutionary of all time.

 

[jj]

This just is one more example, of which I have many, of how the issue of Communism is totally misrepresented in Ameerica.

Since every attempt to implement communism anywhere, even on a smallish scale, let alone a grand scale, has suffered from growing a Stalin, or Mao, or the like, it's pretty clear from the RESULTS that communism leads to tyranny.

That isn't misrepresentation, that's fact. It is shabby that they didn't point out that Stalin was a Stalinst Communist, and Trotsky a Trotskyite (communist).

I do hope, however, that they pointed out that every attempt at the silly religion of communism has devolved into a totalitarian fiasco of one sort or another.

That's the outcome that matters, now, isn't it?

 

[Jon_in_london]

Re: Re: History channel program on the KGB...

Since every attempt to implement communism anywhere, even on a smallish scale, let alone a grand scale, has suffered from growing a Stalin, or Mao, or the like, it's pretty clear from the RESULTS that communism leads to tyranny.

Perhaps the reason that communism has failed is that it hasnt ever been allowed to succeed?

Perhaps the reason the soviets felt the need for an iron curtain was that they didnt want to be invaded again by the west like they were after the end of the last war?

 

[espritch]

Perhaps the reason that communism has failed is that it hasnt ever been allowed to succeed?

Perhaps the reason the soviets felt the need for an iron curtain was that they didnt want to be invaded again by the west like they were after the end of the last war?

One could, I suppose, argue that the cost of the Cold War with the West ruined the Soviet Economy and caused it's collapse. But that certainly had nothing to do with the 10 million Russians murdered by Stalin in the purges which all occured prior to the German invasion of WWII and the post war construction of the Berlin wall. In the case of China there was far less Western influence and the death toll was even higher (Mao still holds the distiction of having murdered more people than any other tyrant in history. Nor did Western influence cause Pol Pot to kill one third of the population of Cambodia. Nor can it explain why the Glorious Leader Kim Il Jung can collect Mercedes while his citizens are starving to death.

How many tens of millions of people have to be murdered for the sake of a political theory before you are willing to recognize that it is fundamentally flawed?

 

[Skeptic]

Guess what they left out during that entire time?

They never said that Trotsky was a Communist!

I watched a history channel special about the founding fathers.

Guess what they left out during that entire time?

They never said that Wahington was an American!

The evil capitalistic thought-control conspiracy thickens...

(Well, either that, or they figured the viewers already know these obvious facts anyway, so there's no need to explicitly say them. )

 

[Giz]

I watched a history channel special about the founding fathers.

Guess what they left out during that entire time?

They never said that Wahington was an American!

Surely Washington was British (for most of his life)! Oh wait, you mean "Wahington"

 

[Malachi151]

Yeah right, like anyone knows to Leon Trotsky is. lol Asside from peolpe who study Marxism and maybe people who were really into politics that are over the age of 60, no one in America knows who that is.

Its obvious that the program was being deceptive in its portrayal of the situation. From whating it it looks like, hey this great freeedom loving Russian was even speaking out against Stalin, yes, even the Russians didnt' liek him.

Which that's true, but they don't tell you that he was one of the major leaders of Communism in the 20th century so they still play it up in the old good guys vs bad guys light and make it look like good guys vs the evil communists and they didn't explain the rift within Communism itself. They alwyas try to make it look like what Stalin did was what "Communists is all about", which it is nothing of the sort, as Leon Trotsky spent his entire life touring the world trying to explin to people.

They did mention that Stalin essentially killed or imprisoned all the Bolsheviks but they didn't really expound on it any.

What would you say if Dick Cheney fixed the next election George Bush died, and then Dick Cheney had about 80% of the politicans in Washington killed, including 100% of Congressional Republicans all the people on Bush's staff except one or two close allies and he took dictatorial control of the country.

Would it be a fair accessmentthen to say that Dick Cheny was simply following through with the ideals of Republican Democracy and that Dick Cheney represented the ideology of the Consitution of the US and as a Republican the way he acted was really in line with Republican ideology.

Of course not, that would be absurd, its case of a tyrant taking over. Thats what Stalin was as well. What Stalin did was not in line with the ideals of the Communist Revolution in Russia or in line with the ideals of the Constitution of the USSR or the Communist Party.

That's why, when Stalin came ot power, he eliminated all the major Communists in Russia, he killed the Bolsheviks and eventually Leon Trotsky, the former leader of the Red Army and one of the most politically active communists in the history of the world.

This is the guy:

that they were playing up as the opponent to Stalin in the documentary, without ever mentioning that he was a premir communist. If you can't understand that that is dishonest documentary making then I guess that's a weakness on your part.

 

[Skeptic]

Yeah right, like anyone knows to Leon Trotsky is.

For some strange reason, Malachi, I think it is likely that those who bother to tune in to the HISTORY CHANNEL to watch a program on RUSSIAN AND SOVIET HISTORY are pretty likely to know who Trotsky was.

 

[Mike B.]

Re: Re: Re: History channel program on the KGB...

Perhaps the reason the soviets felt the need for an iron curtain was that they didnt want to be invaded again by the west like they were after the end of the last war?

Or farrrrrrrrrrr more likely,

They needed to control and intimidate their Eastern Bloc countries by occupying them with large numbers of divisions and every now and then have the tanks roll over them...i.e. Hungary, Czechslovakia, GDR, and Poland at various times.

Or witness how quick those regimes fell apart as soon as Gorby pulled out Soviet miltary support.

 

[Mike B.]

Re: Re: History channel program on the KGB...

Since every attempt to implement communism anywhere, even on a smallish scale, let alone a grand scale, has suffered from growing a Stalin, or Mao, or the like, it's pretty clear from the RESULTS that communism leads to tyranny.

That isn't misrepresentation, that's fact. It is shabby that they didn't point out that Stalin was a Stalinst Communist, and Trotsky a Trotskyite (communist).

I do hope, however, that they pointed out that every attempt at the silly religion of communism has devolved into a totalitarian fiasco of one sort or another.

That's the outcome that matters, now, isn't it?

Very well said...
Whenever this is brought up, the true believer in Communism says, "Well Pol Pot wasn't really Communism" or "North Korea really isn't communism."

It does seem odd that EVERY government that has called itself communist is never "really communism."

Again, it is perhaps fundametalism that does not allow the idea that maybe there were some serious flaws in Marxism...

 

[Skeptic]

Re: Re: Re: History channel program on the KGB...

Perhaps the reason that communism has failed is that it hasnt ever been allowed to succeed?

that's funny. The communists merely controlled half the globe for the better part of a century, but somehow they "weren't given a chance to succeed". I agree: Communism only killed, oh, about 100,000,000 people or so, either directly (firing squads, show trials, gulags) or indirectly (starvation, etc.) Let's give it another chance. THIS time I'm sure it'll do better, if it is only "allowed to succeed". All those millions of dead must be the nasty capitalists' fault, somehow. Marx said so.

But wait, Malachi and Jon, don't tell me: all those communist countries--including the USSR--weren't "true communism". So where WAS there "true communism"?

The communists' complaint about the lack of "true communism" is like the paranormalists' stock reply about the lack of "true psychics". The latter says when so-and-so is exposed as a fraud that this isn't fair criticism since he wasn't a "true psychic". The former says when this or that countries is exposed as a hell on earth that it isn't fair criticism since it isn't "truly communist".

The problem is, EVERY SINGLE PSYCHIC who was EVER tested competently turned out not to be a "real psychic". Similarly, EVERY SINGLE COMMUNIST COUNTRY that EVER existed came complete with dictatorship, gulags, show trials, and opression. The reasonable conclusion is that there are no "true psychics", just as there is no "true Communism": psychics simply ARE all fake, just like Communism simply IS opression, gulags, and show trials.

Of course, the best argument against Communism comes from Jon_In_London and Malachi themselves: both, for some strange reason, are willing to TALK in favor of Communism, but are only willing to LIVE in the "decadent capitalistic west". They, too, obviously, prefer capitalism to communism; they just think it's cool to talk as if they really support it.

Action speaks louder than words, Malachi and Jon_In_London. Your words say things like according to the communist manifesto, we all know that the revolution of the workers must blah blah blah..; but your actions say, thank GOD, I live in a capitalist country!


Anyway, back to dealing with your words:

Perhaps the reason the soviets felt the need for an iron curtain was that they didnt want to be invaded again by the west like they were after the end of the last war?

"The West" Invaded Communist Russia??? "The West" was AT WAR AGAINST GERMANY FOR TWO YEARS before that invasion. And if it wasn't for "the West's" help, Russia might very well have collapsed.

Actually, the need for the "Iron Curtain" is very clear: it isn't to keep the capitalists out, it's to KEEP THE OPRESSED PEOPLE IN. Nobody wants to live in a communist country (yourself included, of course), so drastic measures had to be used--barbed wires, attack dogs, armed sentries, etc.--to keep those who were under the communist heel within the "paradise of the workers" and stop them from fleeing to the "decadent west".

 

[Kodiak]

Re: Re: Re: History channel program on the KGB...

Perhaps the reason that communism has failed is that it hasnt ever been allowed to succeed?

Perhaps the reason the soviets felt the need for an iron curtain was that they didnt want to be invaded again by the west like they were after the end of the last war?

Hope springs eternal!

Try, try again, eh Jon?...eh Malachi?

Get all your buddies together someplace and start your own little communist Utopia.

After you've personally tried and failed, maybe you'll finally give up on the idea...

 

[Kodiak]

Its obvious that the program was being deceptive in its portrayal of...

...obvious...

There's that word again!

Evidence please...

 

[Kodiak]

Re: Re: Re: Re: History channel program on the KGB...

Or farrrrrrrrrrr more likely,

They needed to control and intimidate their Eastern Bloc countries by occupying them with large numbers of divisions and every now and then have the tanks roll over them...i.e. Hungary, Czechslovakia, GDR, and Poland at various times.

Or witness how quick those regimes fell apart as soon as Gorby pulled out Soviet miltary support.

Yeah...

Didn't you know that they put up the Berlin wall to keep westerners out??!!

 

[Kodiak]

Re: Re: Re: Re: History channel program on the KGB...

"The West" was AT WAR AGAINST GERMANY FOR TWO YEARS before that invasion. And if it wasn't for "the West's" help, Russia might very well have collapsed.

Whatever you do, don't bring up the lend/lease program. That really pisses them off...

 

[Skeptic]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: History channel program on the KGB...

Whatever you do, don't bring up the lend/lease program. That really pisses them off...

Or that little agreement known as the Ribbentrop-Molotov agreement, where the poor, innocent USSR agreed to divide Poland with Nazi Germany. Of course, nobody bothered to ask the Poles on the Russian side if they want to be "liberated from the yoke of capitalism".

To Stalin's utter shock, it turned out later that his partner in crime, Hitler, could not be trusted to keep his word! Imagine that--you made a gentlemen's agreement to destroy Poland and carve it up FAIRLY, and then the evil fascist double-crosses you. Disgusting, isn't it, the moral depths non-communists will sink to. If you can't trust your partner in plunder, who CAN you trust?

But, then again, Stalin's moral outrage has a point: what can you expect from the dirty capitalists, who lie and say (for instance) that 20,000,000 died in your communist-funded gulags when in fact only 15,000,000 or so did?

 

[Kodiak]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: History channel program on the KGB...

Or that little agreement known as the Ribbentrop-Molotov agreement, where the poor, innocent USSR agreed to divide Poland with Nazi Germany. Of course, nobody bothered to ask the Poles on the Russian side if they want to be "liberated from the yoke of capitalism".

To Stalin's utter shock, it turned out later that his partner in crime, Hitler, could not be trusted to keep his word! Imagine that--you made a gentlemen's agreement to destroy Poland and carve it up FAIRLY, and then the evil fascist double-crosses you. Disgusting, isn't it, the moral depths non-communists will sink to. If you can't trust your partner in plunder, who CAN you trust?

But, then again, Stalin's moral outrage has a point: what can you expect from the dirty capitalists, who lie and say (for instance) that 20,000,000 died in your communist-funded gulags when in fact only 15,000,000 or so did?

The nerve!!