/lit/ - Literature

>>12030483
дa

If he was so smart, why didn't he find a way to grow back his hair?

yes

>>12030483
no

maybe

>>12030483
He was litteraly such a retard that he couldn't figure out how to secure his favourite's succession to power (wich went to the ONE GUY he warned everyone about) how to prevent a bunch of "commie atheists" from embalming him and worshipping him like an idol; How his circumcised cocklet worked. Just to name a few.

A scum he was

>>12030511
Stalin was his appointed successor and the most ideologically similar. Lenin's so called 'final testament" was written post-stroke by someone else.
Everyone acts like Lenin and Stalin were at odds with one another ideologically but they weren't, not even close. This is abundantly clear if you've actually read both of them.

>>12030536
Stalin is too crude, and this defect which is entirely acceptable in our milieu and in relationships among us as communists, becomes unacceptable in the position of General Secretary. I therefore propose to comrades that they should devise a means of removing him from this job and should appoint to this job someone else who is distinguished from comrade Stalin in all other respects only by the single superior aspect that he should be more tolerant, more polite and more attentive towards comrades, less capricious, etc.

>>12030536
>>stalinist damage control
Yeah as if

>>12030483
if he was a genius, why do people endlessly prate about Marxism, and not about Leninism?

>how old are you?
>"between 6 and 37"
>what? send me a picture

>>12030676
>Marxism-Leninism

>>12030511
In his defense, his death was rather premature and not like he could go out on his own terms

>>12030676
Leninism IS Marxism. Kautskyism, opportunism and Stalinism ARE NOT Marxism.

>>12030708
>MLism
It's just used for Stalinism now, but Trotsky was a Leninist.

>>12030626
BTFO

>>12030483
State and Revolution is hammed up by some for the wrong reasons, but I love his point about all democracy since Athens being class-based. Therefore, a workers' democracy would still be class-based, until such a time where democracy wilts or fades away for communism (classless).

No. Unfortunately he wasn't an hero, either.

>>12030571
Yeah and when it was brought up, Stalin BTFO everyone who was trying to remove him.

"It is said that in that “will” Comrade Lenin suggested to the congress that in view of Stalin’s “rudeness” it should consider the question of putting another comrade in Stalin’s place as General Secretary. That is quite true.

Yes, comrades, I am rude to those who grossly and perfidiously wreck and split the Party. I have never concealed this and do not conceal it now. Perhaps some mildness is needed in the treatment of splitters, but I am a bad hand at that.

At the very first meeting of the plenum of the Central Committee after the Thirteenth Congress I asked the plenum of the Central Committee to release me from my duties as General Secretary. The congress itself discussed this question. It was discussed by each delegation separately, and all the delegations unanimously, including Trotsky, Kamenev and Zinoviev, obliged Stalin to remain at his post."

>>12030483
He was an orthodox Marxist. It's the easy way to become a "genius". Which is a good thing.
Empirio-criticism is basically physicalist eliminativism 1.0, but with a notion of the "reflection" that is actually dialectical (ideas are products of the human brain, thus mediated, and not a simple reproduction of reality, contrarily to how people so often misunderstand the text). It's v. good if you're not trying way too hard to have a hermetic, unscientific continental ontology.

>>12030511
He knew the Russian revolution depended upon internationalization, upon victory in the West. Who came after him as formal leadership didn't matter. Stalin, in a different, better context, would have been a good militant. Instead he was a bloody, bourgeois modernizer; which was still good, which was the only way Russia could go without a socialist victory in advanced industrial countries anyway.
He wanted independence of the proletarian institution though, typically of the unions. If you wanna reproach him something you can very well argue he should have secured said independence more, to let the proletariat keep defensive weapons during Stalinist counter-revolution and bourgeois modernization and have an economic ground upon which to rebuild a revolutionary Party. But inside the revolutionary State or with regards to his "successors" he couldn't do much.

>>12031931
Actually "Marxism-Leninism" only appeared to designate Stalinism. Indeed, before, the usual expression was Leninism, without the implication that it was an "addition" to Marxism. Imperialism as the final stage of capitalism doesn't put it beyond the scope of Marx, actually one should rather argue it's in total consistency with the 3rd book of Capital.

>>12032551
good post, tho idk how good Stalin being a bloody bourgeois modernizer was i do agree that a lot of the worst of that could have been circumvented if they hadnt stripped so much power from the Soviets. could have served to check to the excesses of the central state very well i think.

>>12032564
Agreed. I don't think we said anything too disparate.