Go To Hell, Chumpsky

One thing this thread illustrates is that if Stalin didn’t exist he would have to be invented. Demonization of Stalin has been a fundamental necessity in the anticommunist crusade. The point is to make it clear that the absolute worst fate that could befall a society is communism. It has been a part of the effort to form the equation in everybody’s heads that socialism = gulag. This is not to say that Stalin wasn’t a criminal. Look, EVERYBODY AGREES WITH THAT, EVEN COMMUNISTS!

Most socialists and communists consider Stalin to be a criminal and a traitor of the Russian revolution. He was denounced by most of the prominent socialists, notably Trotsky of course, for his crimes, and for betraying the socialist revolution. Kruschev even denounced his ass in the Communist Party congress after he was dead.

The thing is, though, that Stalin’s ACTUAL crimes were not good enough for the anticommunist crusaders. He wasn’t quite evil enough to match up with evil spawned from the capitalist reactionaries in Italy and Germany, so a whole mythology had to be created where Stalin killed 43 million. At that point, it just gets insane.

OK, bong. Take a look, for example, at one of Rummel’s pages. I mean, it’s a joke! It reads almost like a parody of anticommunist hysteria. He says, for example,

“Marxism is thoroughly uncompromising. It knows the truth, absolutely; it absolutely knows the Good (communism) and the Evil (capitalism, feudalism); it absolutely knows the way (a socialist dictatorship of the proletariat).”

Anybody familiar with actual Marxist philosophy should read this as a joke. For one thing, Marxism is all about how societies change, and how history progresses. Capitalism is neither good nor bad in isolation. It fulfills a historical function, being progressive in one era, and regressive in another. And so on… Rummel’s take on Marxism is not nearly as absurd, though, as his claims on how many those evil demons Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin killed. (Stalinism always taken to be a natural outgrowth of Leninism, naturally, and not a direct contradiction of Marxist-Leninist ideology.)

Just to take one of Rummel’s claims, consider this:

“…the execution of perhaps a million Party members in the Great Terror of 1937-38…”

How does he arrive at this figure? I cannot find a reference for this figure. His footnote is to a quote from a book by Taagepera dealing with the deportation of Kulaks and Estonians. Notably, he apparently has not considered the most extensive study of the gulag, drawing on never before released Soviet records in 1993, by Getty, Rittersporn and Zemskov, which I referenced in another thread, which found that 799,455 executions were carried out in the USSR for all crimes from 1921 to 1953. And, of these, perhaps 20% were for political crimes. Yet, Rummel claims that up to a million Party members executed in 1937-38! This really just reaches into the absurd.

The other figures Rummel gives are equally as absurd. Yet, the greatest deception Rummel tries to pull off is in pretending that he is being “fair,” by providing low and high figures. Thus, he claims that Robert Conquest’s figure of 20 million represents a low estimate! Conquest’s political ideology can be easily discerned from this website, where he claims, among other things, that “socialism carried with it the primitive belief that the state could solve all problems.” I would like to know about the socialist who believes that “the state could solve all problems,” or who believes anything even remotely similar. Yet, for Rummel, Conquest’s figures represent the moderate position!

This is all familiar stuff. It is part of a determined effort to make socialism appear as the worst possible fate that could befall mankind, to close off discussion before it even begins.

Uh-huh. And then I can cite this page, which seems to show Rummel as an equally rabid anti-American reactionary. And on and on it goes.

Anyhow, you can relax now; you’ve successfully managed to bore even me, and believe me, I don’t bore easily.

Hey, sometime sacrifices have to be made for the greater good of the people. Anymore talk like this and you will be next to be sacrificed.

Not necesarily, it also equals the ovens and mass planned starvation.

Hear, hear Chumpsky. It IS unfortunate that people equate socialism with the events as practiced by the likes of Stalin. Stalin was NOT a socialist folks…he was a psychopathic dictator and this fact is recognised by all of the communist states. Mao can be considered the same. But do not revile socialism because of some errant leaders…would you want to judge the success of capitalism by the activities of Robert Mugabe or Margaret Thatcher??

I’d counter that most people associate socialism with interminably greyness, product shortage, and bad central administration rather than Stalinism. I certainly do, and to this day East Germany is still marked with telltale bad architecture and housing.

As for Thatcher, I’d say she was an excellent example of a good capitalist leader. Hell, most of Blair’s policies are based on hers.

There is something else I wanted to point out about Rummel’s ranking of bad regimes. From Cecil:

Take a look at number 9 there: Vietnam. Which Vietnamese regime, exactly, killed 1.7 million? Now, I can think of another state which killed that many in Indochina, but nowhere does this state appear on Rummel’s list. This state is, of course, the U.S. Isn’t this the height of irony? Vietnam, the target of a classic colonial conquest at the hands of the French, and then a ferocious assault at the hands of the U.S., THEY are counted as one of the worst regimes, and given credit for killing 1.7 million. Since Rummel does not count as “democide” those killed in war, I am mystified as to how he comes up with this figure. And, at the same time, the civilians killed by the U.S. are downplayed.

Just in Indochina alone (counting the hundreds of thousands killed by U.S. bombs in Cambodia and Laos) the U.S. killed at least 2 million. This should place the U.S. at number 7 at least. Then, there are the killings in Central America. In the 1980’s alone, the U.S. gave massive support to dictatorial regimes in El Salvador and Guatemala that killed 200,000 plus. Does the U.S. get no “credit” for these killings? Or, how about the 30,000 plus killed by the Contras? We could go around the globe and add many more in, but nope, apparently, these do not count. Nor, apparently, do the many millions who have starved to death or had their lives cut short by other factors as a direct result of U.S. actions get added in.

In fact, this is all Rummel has to say about the U.S.:

“But in foreign wars, the American military may have killed hundreds of thousands of foreigners in cold blood, virtually all civilians, and the greater majority of these by bombing. … in this century the United States probably murdered about 583,000 people”

May… MAY have killed!? Probably? Hundreds of thousands? What the FUCK!?

The double standard is blinding. Whereas he counts as murder every single person who starved to death due to policies carried out in China during the Great Leap Forward, none of the policies carried out by the U.S. which have led to mass deaths are even considered. There is nothing about the imperialist policies that have led to widespread poverty in Central America, not a mention of the Contra war, not a mention of the death squads trained at the School of the Americas, not a mention of the arming of the Indonesian military that murdered 200,000 Timorese, not a mention of the Iraqi sanctions, and so on and so forth.

In short, the crimes of the U.S. are simply glossed over, while every single death that can even concievably be considered to have the slightest connection to policies carried out by communists are placed directly at the feet of the communist leaders.

Bullshit, Chumpsky. He only counts what governments do to their own people. Notice he doesn’t credit the USSR for what their puppet government in Poland did. Or any of the other satellites. So why would he credit the US for things done by other countries?

Take off your fucking blinders and use your goddammed head once in a while, you stupid fuck.

Well, I certainly wouldn’t in the former case, since Mugabe considers himself a Marxist by ideology.

Also a plagiarist, documented here.

And a liar, documented too many places to list.


Wrong again.

Emphasis mine. Seeing as how this is the second time you’ve been wrong about what this article says, you might want to take the time to actually read it.

Reecent events would suggest that they weren’t your words to start with, plagiarism-boy.

Traitor of the Russian revolution? Lenin was a mass murderer too, you fucking idiot.

And, and just in case you’re stupid (as seems to be evident), Trotsky was no angel himself.

Dammit, I somehow posted that. Anyway:

To quote Trotsky, from his book The Defense of Terrorism (he actually had a book called that):

“Our Extraordinary Commissions shoot landlords, capitalists, and generals who are striving to restore the capitalist order. Do you grasp this … distinction? Yes? For us communists it is quite sufficient.”

“The man who recognizes the revolutionary historic importance of the very fact of the existence of the Soviet system must also sanction the Red Terror.”

"As for us, we were never concerned with the Kantian-priestly and vegetarian-Quaker prattle about the “sacredness of human life”

Then, outside of that publication, there’s the refreshing insight of him in a quote to Lenin:

“It is impossible to maintain discipline without a revolver.”

Fenris you ignorant tool, again you distract us with your valueless mud-slinging. How about another one of your long-winded, baseless and speculative rants about how stupid or morally reprehensible somebody with whom you’re not intellectually equipped to argue, is supposed to be? You’re free to post any crap you want, but your sentiments alone will not be enough to sway anyone.

Fenris, thank you for posting your sentiments. They have swayed me.


I’m not Fenris, obviously, but I’ll try to suggest a couple of "long-winded, baseless and speculative rants:
Santa And The System Of Lies
Hiroshima Day: A Worthy Cause

Halo13 after the thorough asskicking you got at the hands of Fenris in the Hiroshima Day, you really should know better than to step up and challenge him. Now run away or he will taunt you a second time, you and all your commie kniggets.

So, you’re saying that you can be easily distracted by valueless mud-slinging? How 'bout bright, shiny objects? Do they distract you too?

Hm. I see your intellect hasn’t improved since the last time you were here.



Let’s test those waters, shall we?

Ok, pals ‘n’ gals, Sua’s started the ball rolling. Who else here is intrigued by my ideas and wants to subscribe to my newsletter?