[Son of the Sun]

After death of first fascist's leader - Benito Mussolini - and suicide of Adolf Hitler - creator of nazism, more radical form of fascism - this ideology seemed to be striked out from politicial world forever. Nazi's ideology is forbidden in Germany, and many others countries, which suffer from this, or were close to it, and wanted to rehabiliate.

But there are countries which don't blame fascism, they are even proud of it.
After beggining of WWII Stalin conquered Baltic's republics, changing them into Soviet's republics. But after German's atack 22.06.1941 they get on Hitler's influences.
Lithuanian soldiers created Waffen SS units, they fought against Red Army, but either against civilian Polish and Soviet people. Their participation in Hitler's hordes wasn't big, and it may be explained by tries to defend their independence from Stalin, but really SS veterans should have same rights as Red Army soldiers?

And main case - Ukraine. There are even paramilitar, fascists organization on west Ukraine.
Ukrainian's participation in fighting in the name of nazi Europe was very big. One point is, that they created division SS Galizien. They either created pro - German police, they're main point was to exterminate Polish and Soviets civilians. It's difficult to count Polish killed by Ukrainian fascists, estiminated on more than 200 thousands people - much more than died from NKWD's bullets. Ukrainian were going to destroy all traces that Polish were there - same work as German on west. They're crimes were horrible, they were torturing womens and children without any reasons. And these tortures were one of the most terryfing in the world history, quite similiar to Mongolian in medieval...When war was finisehed, Hitler's friends were still fighitng - against Red Army, and agaisnt Polish Forces, hand to hand with Polish nacionalists.

And what do We see now? President Juszczenko - friend of West. There are manifestations, events in name of fascist's criminals. Juszczenko allowed war criminals to have same rights as Red Army soldiers. And now Canadian's Ukrainians want him to make Stiepan Bandera a hero of Ukraine. They except that 'patriot' like president Juszczeko will do it quickly. Stiepan Bandera was a head of ukrainian terrorists during WWII and after it.

Damn, I know that communism - well, stalinism have many people on conscience, but is it really enough to rehabiliate fascism? Because communism was more dangerours for West than fascism?

[Roland Ansgar]

I am not confident that many people on this forum know much about the events to which you refer. Neither will they, generally, know much about the politics you've alluded to, except for the highly filtered and stylised forms taught in Western public school rooms--IOW, most will be ignorant.

Read the book, Friendly Fascism. It is the form of fascism in existence today, in all Western countries, especially G.B. & the U.S. In Europe you had the recent fall of monarchic empires, and then nationalism/democracy/fascism rose to prominence. After WW2 they morphed into what we have today. I am, of course, using Mussolini's definition of fascism, which he called corporatism, which is the combined powers of the state and the corporations. Clearly, this is what's exists today, in the West. Hence, the author's selected title (above).

[Josephine1012]

this topic is very interesting to me, but as mentioned above I'm not well versed in this history. Would you mind posting a few links to what you're describing.

Also in regards to Stalinism vs. Fascism I see the two as very similar. Atrocities during Stalin's time may not be as well publicized as what was done as a result of Fascism, but he tortured his own people and sent them to concentration camps as a way to maintain power. Any post of medium authority generally meant death or at least arrest and work camp for the holder within the next 2 years.

So, I'd like to continue this discussion but some links would be much appreciated.

[Ither]

	Originally Posted by Josephine1012 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Also in regards to Stalinism vs. Fascism I see the two as very similar.

The political philosophies, if that is what one can call them, are distinct. Both are totalitarian.

[Josephine1012]

	Originally Posted by Ither To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The political philosophies, if that is what one can call them, are distinct. Both are totalitarian.

	To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. : A political regime, usually totalitarian, ideologically based on centralized government, government control of business, repression of criticism or opposition, a leader cult and exalting the state and/or religion above individual rights. ...

Ummmmm, from someone who lived and was partially educated in Soviet Russia (my mother grew up during Stalinism, so I also have some first hand accounts), it is exactly the same.

[jesse]

	Originally Posted by Ither To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The political philosophies, if that is what one can call them, are distinct. Both are totalitarian.

	Originally Posted by Josephine1012 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Ummmmm, from someone who lived and was partially educated in Soviet Russia (my mother grew up during Stalinism, so I also have some first hand accounts), it is exactly the same.

Once a threshold of paranoia and an incessant need to control are mixed up together, the results tend to be a police state where informants, observers and henchmen are frequent and plentiful. The government sets up everything and expects certain behavior from all citizens. Those citizens who do not comply are targeted and it seems a number were probably targeted for show and maintaining high levels of fear and panic in general.

General fascism and Stalinism are indeed very similar on the surface and they can easily be confused and interchanged by people who are not entirely familiar with these political philosophies. Fascism has a strong affinity toward a command economy although there are some forms of industry not directly under state control and it could be described as a union of state and corporate power. This did not exist in the Soviet system under Stalin. Officially everything was state-run and collectivized and from what I gather from a couple of my history lessons many years ago, there was some form of witch hunts against signs of 'entrepreneurship'. Don't let this fool you though, under these conditions there will inevitably be a black market and rife corruption left and right.

[Lucid]

	Originally Posted by Josephine1012 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Ummmmm, from someone who lived and was partially educated in Soviet Russia (my mother grew up during Stalinism, so I also have some first hand accounts), it is exactly the same.

An education is Soviet Russia is as likely warped on this topic as an education from the US is. And ours is very much biased. The first hand accounts are something of another matter though. They are subject to the personal bias of the person in question and to flaws in memory or lack of complete information about a situation. However, they are also much more reliable (in my opinion) than much of what is taught on the subject in school.

Would you mind sharing some of your mother's accounts of Stalinism with us? Would you mind sharing some of your own from living in Soviet Russia? I would be very interested to hear them.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Also, what's your opinion of Lenin?

[Ither]

And was Trotsky mentioned at all in school?

[Josephine1012]

Originally Posted by Lucid To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

An education is Soviet Russia is as likely warped on this topic as an education from the US is. And ours is very much biased. The first hand accounts are something of another matter though. They are subject to the personal bias of the person in question and to flaws in memory or lack of complete information about a situation. However, they are also much more reliable (in my opinion) than much of what is taught on the subject in school. Would you mind sharing some of your mother's accounts of Stalinism with us? Would you mind sharing some of your own from living in Soviet Russia? I would be very interested to hear them. To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Also, what's your opinion of Lenin?

Heh, well you should have a detailed PM in your inbox, but feel free to share it (mine and my mom's perspectives) with the class
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


I don't really have an opinion on Lenin, I don't know what he was all about. It's hard to tell what his motives were, my education is limited to what I learned about him in school, all those things being very positive.

My mom, was not of a high opinion of him, but her and I haven't had that conversation in years, since I think she hates discussing her life in Russia in general.

Lenin died in 1924, I believe... However, during 1917 revolution they did mercilessly execute the entire royal family with the exception of a couple of people who managed to escape. This brutal execution did include a very young (7 or 9 year old, can't remember exactly) heir. People were arrested for bull reasons and were forced to give up all of their property. Whether it was honestly earned or not. Lots of executions, lots of arrests... This was all happening while Lenin was in power, so if I look at those facts he is kind of hard to like.

Interesting thing about bias in education... Just as an example:

Every Russian kid knows the first man in space: Yuri Gagarin, duh

Every American kid knows the first man on the moon: Neil Armstrong.

I had no clue who Neil Armstrong was until I moved here. So yeah, biases are present here and there, that's to be expected. My neighbor during 911 was getting Russian News Channels as far as I remember a lot of information that wasn't released here at the time.

[Lucid]

I see communism as something distinct from totalitarianism. I think this is a distinction that many people are not aware of. Soviet Russia seems as if it was a totalitarian state with a communist economy. I tend to favor capitalism myself, but I don't see actual communism as any better or worse than actual capitalism. And I think the problem with soviet Russia was the totalitarianism involved. It seems that the communist aspect was merely incidental to the totalitarianism except in that it distributed a limited amount of resources across an empire that was far too large to support.

Here it seems that while the propaganda is much less overt, and people are not actually turned in for having anti-capitalist sentiments, there is much the same attitude toward such sentiments as there was in the U.S.S.R. about anti-communist sentiments. The same is true of religion. In Soviet Russia, as I understand it, there were severe consequences for not being an atheist. In the US there are severe consequences for being an atheist. The consequences are certainly different, and the government here (because it's not totalitarian) does not take the same actions against atheists that the Soviets did against religion. I don't mean to imply that I think there's no difference in the degree of enforcement - to the best of my knowledge no one here is being disappeared by the government for expressing dissent - but I certainly do see similarities. Perhaps a certain amount of enforced conformism is human nature?

It's very interesting for me to see the differences and, most of all, the similarities between modern America and Soviet Russia.

What are your thoughts on the difference between communism and totalitarianism (if you agree that there is a difference) and how do you think moving to the US has changed your perspective on any of these issues? Do you see similarities between the US and the U.S.S.R.?

[Josephine1012]

Originally Posted by Lucid To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I see communism as something distinct from totalitarianism. I think this is a distinction that many people are not aware of. Soviet Russia seems as if it was a totalitarian state with a communist economy. I tend to favor capitalism myself, but I don't see actual communism as any better or worse than actual capitalism. And I think the problem with soviet Russia was the totalitarianism involved. It seems that the communist aspect was merely incidental to the totalitarianism except in that it distributed a limited amount of resources across an empire that was far too large to support. Here it seems that while the propaganda is much less overt, and people are not actually turned in for having anti-capitalist sentiments, there is much the same attitude toward such sentiments as there was in the U.S.S.R. about anti-communist sentiments. The same is true of religion. In Soviet Russia, as I understand it, there were severe consequences for not being an atheist. In the US there are severe consequences for being an atheist. The consequences are certainly different, and the government here (because it's not totalitarian) does not take the same actions against atheists that the Soviets did against religion. I don't mean to imply that I think there's no difference in the degree of enforcement - to the best of my knowledge no one here is being disappeared by the government for expressing dissent - but I certainly do see similarities. Perhaps a certain amount of enforced conformism is human nature? It's very interesting for me to see the differences and, most of all, the similarities between modern America and Soviet Russia. What are your thoughts on the difference between communism and totalitarianism (if you agree that there is a difference) and how do you think moving to the US has changed your perspective on any of these issues? Do you see similarities between the US and the U.S.S.R.?

Well, I will agree with your assessment regarding communism vs. totalitarianism, but I think in order for communism to be successful you need to work with an idealistic group of people. No one country is full of idealists. If you think about it, taking just an average Joe and telling him regardless of how well you can do your job, if you work hard we will give you what you need. I significantly doubt, he will work very hard. There is no reword for working harder other than praise and sense of accomplishment. I will agree that almost everyone enjoys praise, but sense of accomplishment is something that some people don't care that much about. My guess is our average Joe may give it his best for a little while and then spend his time more constructively towards his own enjoyment.

I'm not sure, but does communism include collective punishments or do we move that to totalitarianism. Collective punishments, essentially work via fear of isolation and mob justice, so I don't really love the idea, but they were very commonly used in Soviet Russia.

Also, is anyone familiar with
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
? It was described in great detail in World War Z (book, I highly recommend). That was also used in Soviet Russia, and it's the same idea as the collective punishment.

I think, I'm a very strong individualist, so overall it's very hard for me to accept that type of system. I think it sounds very kind on paper, but it doesn't take human nature into consideration. I don't know of a single communist country that isn't also totalitarian. It's like peanut butter and jelly.

I'm a very strong libertarian in my economic beliefs. Ron Paul supporter etc... I'm also very liberal regarding person's personal freedoms and rights. This is the exact opposite of what Soviet government was teaching me, perhaps I'm lashing out
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Having lived in USSR, I'm particularly sensitive to anything that reminds me of the old country. So I suppose that really effected my perspective. Politically, both republicans and democrats make me very unhappy. I often think I understand more things than an average person because I was educated by two very different ideologies and I tend to see hypocrisy and government manipulation in a lot of things others view as benign. There is definitely a benefit to being able to sift any information through the two filters I now have (instead of just one, as is the case with most people who lived in a single country). Granted, smarter people probably have better filters and they may not need the worldly education that I got.

[Night Runner]

Although they may be quite different, at their extremes fascism and Stalinism have a lot of overlap...

[Son of the Sun]

One member wrote an answer that Ukrainian nacionalism isn't fascism, and in my answer I placed quotes, and works about this but...posts were deleted, when forum crushed.

Yep, I can agree that fascism and stalinism have much in common. Stalinism was opposition to real, or rather theoretical communism. Both stalinism and fascism had totalitarian control above citizens, militarization, secret political police, conservative law, nacionalism, cult of dictator, one party (no pluralism), no balance between executive authority, judiciary authority and legislative authority.

Theory of communism was in moments similar to anarchism, at least not totalitarian, it demanded very liberal law, no military ( only democrative milice), equality, no privileges for any social group.

But what can excuse rehabilitation, even cult of fascism on Ukraine? Marches of fascists black units, monuments of WWII criminalists, gloryfying Ukrainian crimes and participation in war hand to hand with Reich.

[Ray9]

	And I think the problem with soviet Russia was the totalitarianism involved.

I've heard this before. Communism is a good idea, it's just run by the wrong people. Cummunism cannot exist without totalitarianism because no person is going to voluntarily live under the circumstances necessary to make communism work. The concept of communism runs contrary to human nature because it sees its subordinates as unimportant components of the state, not as individuals. Since humans are individuals who think and act independantly with different talents and abilities, they must be forced to live under the constraints of the state. In other words the state takes away any incentive any person would have to contribute to society in any meaningful way because frankly there's no reward or even recognition for it. In order for the state to maintain order and to ensure compliance it must constantly and ubiquitously surveil the people issuing harsh punishments to those who fall out of line.

Because much of the talent of the population is wasted communist economies suffer severe and frequent shortages of even basic necessities. Communism cannot exist without totalitarianism and where it has been tried there are massive black markets where the population cheats in the shadows. Russian society is more dangerous today than ever because of the criminal element of the "Red Mafia" which is far more widespread and powerful than anything that existed in the US. Communism is a very close first cousin of Facism. You appear to be fishing for someone who has something nice to say about Communism. Good luck.

[jhbowden79]

Fascism is just hopenchange socialism that uses a hurry-up offense instead of set plays.

A more interesting question-- rather than merging business and government into a bundle, as the fascists and increasing numbers of so-called progressives desire, what if one had a free-market tyranny, such as Pinochet in Chile? That may be what flourishes in the 21st century, since tyrannies don't have to worry about demagogues pimping obsolescent socialist obesity to the mob as a cure for all man's problems-- thereby achieving a higher rate of economic growth. Exhibit A: modern China.

Don't get me wrong -- I love the open society and the freedom of criticism and debate it permits. I'm only increasingly skeptical and despondent about whether the democracies can hack it in a world that is becoming economically smarter.

[thod]

I guess we all have different definitions. I see some people arguing that fascism is the opposite of communism and others saying they are the same.

Communism is governed by the principle of equality. Its most obvious manifestation being income equality. However it is not limited to such, it extends to treating women, ethnic minorities and anyone else equally. Thus it is socially liberal. To look at lower living standards under communism and say it has failed is to fail to grasp the concept. So long as there is equality absolute levels do not matter. There will still be those who seek to gain advantage over other men. Thus the state must act to prevent such an inequality arising. These men will feel oppressed. They feel that their superior strengths and talents entitle them to more. Some probably could add to society yet most do not. They use their strength to take from the weaker. Thus the freedom they desire is the freedom of the predator to kill its prey. If we are to strive for equality, such men must be suppressed, the same applies to groups. This is why Trotskyism would not work. You simply replace competing individuals with competing worker collectives. Not so different from corporatism. The only way to maintain equality is a central state. Thus we cannot have equality of power between workers and the elite, a contradiction inherent in communism. Authoritarianism is necessary to maintain equality against those that would unbalance it.

Fascism is very different from communism. Communism does not care who is a citizen, yet this is the central issue for Fascism. Its focus is group membership, it could be called tribalism. Any economic system may apply within that group. I recognises the in-group, us, the chosen people and out-groups, them, infidels, blacks, gays, etc. It focuses on the in-group and each members loyalty to that group. Unlike communisms equality, we now have the concept of purity. The in-group must be distinct from out-groups. Thus non-conforming individuals must be purged, altered or eliminated. The distinction between in-group and out-groups must be maintained for the in-group to exist. The focus is now on strength, external strength is to required to defend the in-group against the out-groups and to defeat them. Internal strength and purity to hold the group together. Nationalism, or in its more acceptable form 'patriotism', is simply defining the in-group according to place of birth. The Nazi's purge the Jews because they are a competing chosen people and worse, one operating within their borders like a virus. Once again we need authoritarianism. Should the in-group diverge such that they no longer identify as a single group we have no state, no strength, and shall be crushed by the out-groups.

Authoritarianism must always arise whenever there is a guiding principle to the organisation of society. One could argue that an entirely anarchistic, liberal society is no society at all. History has taught us that such arrangements are fragile. The principle of liberalism prevents coercion and thus they cannot compel members to unite against threats. This reminds of the herd of zebra unable to unite and kick the lion to death. Each zebra calculates it gains from dead lions if it helps or not. Thus none help, and the lions, the strong, are able to pick them off one by one forever. The lions will always argue against zebra collectivism. They will say to each zebra, "You will be oppressed by other zebra's and forced to act against your will". Their agenda is to maintain their own advantage.

[Ray9]

This reminds of the herd of zebra unable to unite and kick the lion to death. Each zebra calculates it gains from dead lions if it helps or not. Thus none help, and the lions, the strong, are able to pick them off one by one forever. The lions will always argue against zebra collectivism. They will say to each zebra, "You will be oppressed by other zebra's and forced to act against your will". Their agenda is to maintain their own advantage.

The flaw in this logic is readily apparent. The zebra as part of a herd will never become a lion because it has relinquished its ability or opportunity to think and act independantly. It has surrendered its will to the herd and so must suffer the fate of the herd mentality. The safety of the herd is purchased at the price of freedom of choice and unrestricted movement. There are no creative solutions for the zebra only its anonymous position among the faceless masses of other indentical stripes.

[angelmarauder]

Communism is the enactment of government force onto the economy. It's an ideology of Production and Supply whereas Fascist is descriptive of the role and size of government in any area.
Totalitarian AND Fascist was the Soviet State.
Germany claimed to be democratic during it's Fascist times.
The U.S.S.R. claimed to be a Socialist state although it was centrally controlled and was the ONLY power with no competition.

They are both fascist states whereas talking about current day Ukraine.....
Ukraine is not anywhere near fascist although it is very much influenced by mob interests and rich businessmen. It is democratic though barely succeeding at it. If it DOES succeed and becomes stable it will be the central democratic influence in the East as Russia is having a very hard time controlling it's mob interest as opposed to it's people.

[thod]

Communism is the enactment of government force onto the economy. It's an ideology of Production and Supply whereas Fascist is descriptive of the role and size of government in any area. Totalitarian AND Fascist was the Soviet State. Germany claimed to be democratic during it's Fascist times. The U.S.S.R. claimed to be a Socialist state although it was centrally controlled and was the ONLY power with no competition.

What an odd set of definitions. Germany was democratic, Hitler was elected. WW2 is often called 'the war against the fascists' in the USSR, not the war against the Germans.

[angelmarauder]

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	What an odd set of definitions. Germany was democratic, Hitler was elected. WW2 is often called 'the war against the fascists' in the USSR, not the war against the Germans.

Germany claimed to be democratic. Democratic governments don't give total control to their leaders and even when they do give lots of powers to them they have control over ousting people they foolishly elected out of office. Which could not have happened.

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	"WW2 is often called 'the war against the fascists' in the USSR, not the war against the Germans."

Yep. The Great Patriotic War. But just because they (the USSR) were calling themselves by a different name does not mean that they weren't Fascists.





angelmarauder added to this post, 3 minutes and 7 seconds later...

I'm using this definition of Fascism.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Tenacious B]

All of the systems mentioned have one thing in common: the death camp.

The biggest difference between Stalin and Hitler was the style of moustache.

It is refreshing to read some of the comments here regarding the implementation of collectivist systems being inherently unnatural due to the individual nature of humans. I think this is the first time I've heard this side of the argument coming from someone other than myself.





Tenacious B added to this post, 6 minutes and 28 seconds later...

	Originally Posted by Ither To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	And was Trotsky mentioned at all in school?

I highly doubt it. Much of Lenin's own work was not released in the USSR since some of it did not agree with Stalin. In fact, Lenin tried to warn others about Stalin and recommended that he be removed. Those left in power after Lenin's death kept Lenin's last writing from being released, which was very critical of Stalin and the other high ranking Bolsheviks. I think the last one was called Lenin's Testament.

[Lucid]

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	You appear to be fishing for someone who has something nice to say about Communism. Good luck.

What on earth gave you this idea? I think you should stop trying to figure out what my intentions are. You have yet to be successful.

[Josephine1012]

Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I guess we all have different definitions. I see some people arguing that fascism is the opposite of communism and others saying they are the same. Communism is governed by the principle of equality. Its most obvious manifestation being income equality. However it is not limited to such, it extends to treating women, ethnic minorities and anyone else equally. Thus it is socially liberal. To look at lower living standards under communism and say it has failed is to fail to grasp the concept. So long as there is equality absolute levels do not matter. There will still be those who seek to gain advantage over other men. Thus the state must act to prevent such an inequality arising. These men will feel oppressed. They feel that their superior strengths and talents entitle them to more. Some probably could add to society yet most do not. They use their strength to take from the weaker. Thus the freedom they desire is the freedom of the predator to kill its prey. If we are to strive for equality, such men must be suppressed, the same applies to groups. This is why Trotskyism would not work. You simply replace competing individuals with competing worker collectives. Not so different from corporatism. The only way to maintain equality is a central state. Thus we cannot have equality of power between workers and the elite, a contradiction inherent in communism. Authoritarianism is necessary to maintain equality against those that would unbalance it.

These are very interesting ideas. Keep in mind, this will NEVER be more than just ideas. Implementation of what you're describing is impossible with humans. PERIOD. How the heck is the government going to control human prejudices, when the government itself consists of humans who are likely prejudiced in one way or another.

When you have militarily proctored equality, you do not have equality, you have a wet dream. Regarding my experiences in Russia. Women were treated as "equals", meaning they could get the same jobs..... You know why? Because there was no competition, no one cared if you were a man or a woman you weren't stepping on their turf. Also the government was more than happy to reap the benefits of extra workforce. At home, women worked their day job, came home, cooked, cleaned and usually got beat by their drunk husband (very common). Oh, yeah, and try looking just a little different in mother Russia and see what happens there... Jews were persecuted, so were any minority groups (from any of the adjoining Soviet Republics, especially Armenians, Georgians and other noticeably different looking people), and if a black person came for a visit he was gawked at as if he was a circus freak. I'm quarter Jewish, quarter Ukrainian and half Russian. I have dark hair and almond shaped eyes as a result of this mix, but good heavens this makes me look as if I was part Asian. I was ostracized in most new social groups I ever attended. Yes eventually people warmed up to me, but it wasn't easy.

The idea of communism will never be more than a fun theory, it goes against every ounce of human nature, with possible exception of very select few individuals who are hopeless idealist and haven't quite got to deal with the harshness of real world, IMO.

Here is a part of what I sent to Lucid earlier, in response to a rep comment:

Originally Posted by Josephine1012

So, Communist Russia (circa 80s) via my eyes Things got significantly better in the 80s, but our school system still brainwashed people in a major way. In 1983 (I was 3) General Secretary Chernyenko dies. I get scolded in the day care for not crying. Show up home sobbing. Lenin is referred to as Grand-pa Lenin My mom buys Atheist's Encyclopedia, as that is the only way to have any kind of education on religious terms. Each article ends with explaining how each term is really bunk. Ban on various foreign and Russian books. In 1986, I had ruptured spleen (from a stupid kid accident). I was taken to the hospital, not diagnosed until the evening (the only reason I survived was because it was sub-capsular break). I stayed in a room with 8 other girls all with various injuries. Because the healthcare was government sponsored, the only way you could get the doctor you wanted was through bribes. The got me the bribed doctor. My condition kept deteriorating daily. He went golfing for the weekend and I got an intern, who realized they need to drain my lungs immediately (that saved my life). Note: there was no checks and balances, no second opinions, no competition. They had no nurses, my mom was allowed to stay in the room with me under the condition that she was a nurse for the other girls too. She had to sleep in a chair or at the bottom of my bed. In 1st grade, we were required to show up 30 mins early so that the teacher could explain the news to us and tell us what to think. 3 channels on TV all showing movies about the nasty Germans in WW2 or about hardworking Russians in a Kolkhoz. Another words no information. In 1989 - the Berlin wall falls. Government changes, people strongly opposed separation of the Soviet Union. People also strongly opposed any kind of free market endeavors. Most people were brainwashed from pre-school through university. Even if their parents knew better (my mom was one of the few people who never joined The Party), they still were terrified of educating their kids because of fear. Communist Russia (circa 50s) via my mom's eyes Father Stalin The story of Pavlik Morozov is the most is a huge part of the first grade curriculum. The story goes something like this. Pavlik found out that his parents were not Communists and he turned them in, the parents were executed by the firing squad and Pavlik was a hero for being such a good 8 year old communist. My mom can not get gold medal (equivalent of graduating summa cum laude) at the end of high school because she isn't in Komsomol (a party for young communists). When she started working, they applied collectivist ideas to everything. If one person is late in the department, the whole department doesn't get a bonus. Very few people made any effort at work, since their individual work made very little difference to their salary. People live in communal apartments. Each family has a room, but they share bathroom and kitchen. The families get assigned randomly to the apartment, so it's not like you're sharing with friends. People have a tendency to report "non-communist" activities, especially if they are interested in your room in the apartment. People get arrested, and simply disappear. To buy anything at all, you need to bribe people who work at the store to save you something when it "comes in". Interesting sales people in Russia were always the once who had the highest overall standard of living. I can probably go on further, if you're interested take a look at "Master and Margarita", it's a satire you have to read between the lines and think about implications it doesn't openly denounce communist Russia, but it very much implies so. I strongly believe that this philosophy can not work on a large scale among a large group of people. People are people and they will always take advantages of the situation. Some people may genuinely believe in this philosophy, while majority will simply be taking advantage of the situation.

[Son of the Sun]

About low healthcare level and not enough flats for families - we have to keep in mind that Russia was always poor country, yes, in military and political meaning it was Great Power, but people had not really high standard of living.

Great work about Stalin's system of justice and penelogy is Gustav Herling - Grudziński " Another World". We can notice there system wasn't consequently, it even wasn't connected with justice in any way - today we would call it sick. You could become political prisoner for everything - joke about Stalin, accident with shooting on Stalin's portret, in WWII having German surname or family in Germany. Society, and especially ordinary criminalists treated them as enemies of peoples and nation. Guards mistrated politicals as well as criminalists, even often executing them. Some prisoners started to think that they are really guilty. If 10 - years sentence was over, you couldn't be sure of freedom - NKWD could extend it for next 10 years for no reason. They may realese prisoner if he was f.e. doctor, but often realesed started to live near camp, just increasing they're position as a free man. Connected with camp for all life.
Workers were working all year, sometimes one day per month or less was free. Work norm was even horrible for well - nourished, free people. If they worked really hard they may received a little bit more food, but if they work less, they receive much less food.

Stalin wasn't fighting with political opposition, he was getting twentieh - century slaves.

Is it connected in any way with communism?

[zibber]

Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The flaw in this logic is readily apparent. The zebra as part of a herd will never become a lion because it has relinquished its ability or opportunity to think and act independantly. It has surrendered its will to the herd and so must suffer the fate of the herd mentality. The safety of the herd is purchased at the price of freedom of choice and unrestricted movement. There are no creative solutions for the zebra only its anonymous position among the faceless masses of other indentical stripes.

Blah.

What if "the herd" consists of deliberate individuals who are on the same frequency?