'Socialism' just fine with Ontario NDP leader

There is no ideology in history that didn't have casualties associated with it.

M. Spector wrote:

thanks wrote:

It really drains me, having to keep coming back here to say this.

Oh, so you're getting sick and tired of it, too? Glad to hear that.

Quote:

Please understand if i don't return again for a while...

Try to imagine my disappointment.

Thanks you went in to post 50 to rewrite it and didn't note the edit. so what did you change?

Now you have rewritten post # 53.

just so you know it is not really appropriate to change your posts. The preferred method is to clarify in a subsequent post. That way other peoples posts don't sound off the wall when they have replied to things that no longer appear in the thread.

Well my mommy and daddy are dead and buried so I just have to form my own opinions.  Maybe you should read some history of the British occupation of India instead of just reading about Russia.  Then you could have angst about that as well.  

Capitalists have murdered more people than socialists and presently they are the dominant ideology killing civilians in numerous places in the world.  How many children has NATO murdered today would be a far more productive place to put your thoughts.

knownothing wrote:

There is no ideology in history that didn't have casualties associated with it.

Some more than others.  Pacifists of the Ghandian school don't generally attract or breed alot of miltarists and assassins, although the Indian/Pakistani partition led to alot of bloodshed.  I don't know if we can blame Ghandi for that though.  And some aboriginal peoples with heir own peticular belief systems have survived centuries without having to rely on inter-or intra-member violence.  Very few formed oppressive authoritarian regimes.

incorporating input from elders in our circles is part of consensus building, no? denigrating the elderly or ignoring their opinions is not helpful.

--

"comparing degrees of mass murder, torture etc. is ridiculous.  denial of historic abuses is to ignore abuses is to perpetuate injustice."

at this particular point in time, ten thousand Canadians voted for Leninists in the last election, the NDP made no gains on the prairies, Russia has refused to release all documentation pertaining to Lenin's and Stalin's crimes, while it expects Ukraine to support its efforts including revision of history.  UK and American investors helped Stalin- gave him the technical support, including Canadian engineers, to dam the Dnipro river,  wipe out millions of peasants, and set up his farm slavery system.  Based on this mass murder, Stalin was able to sell the grain of dead peasants to the west, industrialize, continue to benefit from the resources of Ukraine at the expense of its original inhabitants, expand filthy coal and build nuclear installations like Chernobyl. 

If Lenin and Trotsky hadn't spent three years murdering, torturing, raping and deporting original inhabitants of Ukraine, and others, the Bolshevik system would not have got off the ground. 

In Ukraine, the Central Rada of Ukraine was the successor to the spring revolution of 1917, not the Provisionary Government, even admitted by Soviet scholars.  The Provisionary Government constantly undermined the Central Rada, even though the Ukrainian Central Rada was socialist in policy.  The Central Rada had to fight, politically, reactionary groups as well as the provisional government. Control by Moscow was, prior to the revolution, during, and still is, a central problem.  When Lenin overthrew the Provisionary Government in the fall of 1917, his and Trotsky's Red Army and Cheka began to slaughter Ukrainians.  So the Central Rada called for armed opposition in defense.  Even students tried to help fight, and were massacred.  The Red Army 'won.'

If Ukraine hadn't been demolished earlier by its 'neighbours' in Europe and to the east, if it hadn't suffered the brunt of WW1, if its peoples had been allowed to develop their own governance, based in millenia-old traditions of cooperation, hospitality and generosity, it could have acted as an alternative model to the dispossessed and reactionary peoples in Europe.  Fascism could have been prevented.  

The standard rhetoric of 'Red Army saved the world from Nazis' sweeps a lot of history under the rug.  Somehow it has to get disentangled.  Groups which currently accept the sponsorship of Leninist groups, which work with them in activism, or appear alongside with them in lists of sponsors, participate in the IS with them, do have a responsibility to clarify publicly that they do not accept human rights abuses conducted by Leninists in the past.   Its an opening for a more accurate picture of what went on, and alternatives, which may be more helpful for the world today. 

Anarchists then weren't terribly helpful either- assassinating members of the Moscow Central Council did nothing, except lead to more reactionary abuse by Moscow on all the people. 

Today i think, i hope, anarchists or other socialists are clear in rejecting human rights abuses.  How difficult is it to simply say that? a little clause tossed in to press statements or website preambles or in dialogue, would go a long way in clearing the air, and open the door to truths which could prevent a lot of misery, and give hope of justice and peace.

[edited to add 'including Canadian engineers']

[also to add,

UK, American, Canadian, European, and other global investors/financiers continue to be a central problem for all peoples. 

Human rights, democratic rights, rights to water, universal health care, ecological and social rights, labour rights, indigenous rights and the Rights of Nature/Earth have been undermined as private financiers/insurers try to assert dominance through false 'trade' deals like FTA, NAFTA, CETA, other WTO and bilateral 'deals', and through hypocritical whining about 'debts' which in fact are illegitimate - accumulated through unjust military spending, wage and employment reduction, tax cuts for the rich, etc., while funnelling available monies to the bottomless pit of financiers' pockets.

Everyone needs to say they reject human and other rights abuses, and take steps to prioritize human rights, democratic rights, ecological and social rights, labour rights, indigenous rights, and the rights of Nature/Earth.

[edit from 'anarchists and socialists' to 'anarchists or other socialists']

Harper of course is a sycophant for the imperial empire to the south.  A Quisling by any other name is still a Quisling.  How many people voted for his militaristic bomb the brown people for their own good campaign.

Thanks for playing Thanks.

Tell me what to you think of NATO murdering children and other civilians as we speak in our names.  Do you speak out about that to your friends and family and make it clear that our government should get out of NATO and disengage in all our immoral wars we are involved in?

Personally I prefer to talk about the evils being done in my name and not history that has nothing to do with me or the culture I live in.

What's the "IS"? Do you mean the so-called "Socialist International", which has no "Leninist" parties affiliated with it at all?

And why have you chosen this thread to launch your little witch hunt?

NS, I do, as you know, speak out about the North Atlantic Treaty Organization bombing and murdering children and civilians, and the need to stop doing that. I've also said many times that militarism wastes money, destroys the earth through DU ammunition and bombs, and destroys people seeking justice through arms trade.

You, NS, are participating in the culture of rabble and babble and Canada and the world where Leninists, still, today, are active and linked.  You, and others, have responsibility to clarify that you do not accept Lenin's human rights abuses.  Why is that so difficult for you to do?

A: Last i saw, the federal NDP was a member of the IS where Leninists function.  The federal NDP needs to clarify that it does not accept Lenin's human rights abuses.  The Ontario NDP, in choosing to use the word 'socialist', also needs to clarify that it does not accept the human rights abuses done in the name of socialism.  Anyone and everyone using the term 'socialism' or working with those who call themselves 'socialist' need to clarify that they don't accept the human rights abuses done in the  name of socialism. 

[update; The International Socialist website does not include the NDP as members, except to say, in the 'Where we stand' section, "The present system cannot be fixed or reformed as NDP and many trade union leaders say."  The IS critiques Stalin correctly, but fails to critique Lenin.  In the IS Links section, "The International Socialists belong to the  'International Socialist Tendency'" which supports a "tradition of socialist from below, the idea that workers can only emancipate themselves through their own struggles. This tradition was initiated by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, and subsequently developed by revolutionaries such as Lenin, Leon Trotsky.."  

These Socialists, with otherwise many good words and works, also praise Lenin.

I'm glad to see the NDP isn't a member. 

At the same time, if leaders use the word 'socialist', or entertain a 'Socialist Caucus', the term ought to be clarified to reject any human rights abuses of 'socialists' of the past.

It is disappointing to see Rabble.ca and other groups which do good work allowing themselves to be linked at the IS website under 'Links'.

Everyone here has a responsibility to clarify they reject human rights abuses done in the name of 'socialism'.

thanks wrote:

You, NS, are participating in the culture of rabble and babble and Canada and the world where Leninists, still, today, are active and linked.  You, and others, have responsibility to clarify that you do not accept Lenin's human rights abuses.  Why is that so difficult for you to do?

Quite frankly IMO that is an absurd proposition.  You are wrong I have no obligation to clarify anything I think about Lenin or any other historic figure.   I come here to discuss politics and other subjects from a left wing progressive point of view.   I see no reason to start each post with a list of people and movements I denounce.  Now if someone starts a thread extolling the virtues of the USSR I will likely step in and say something.  But that is the same as when people come here and extoll the virtues of Israel or Amerika.  

thanks wrote:

I also happen to believe that Rabble and other groups, currently listed as linked to the IS, ought to remove their link unless they praise Lenin as the IS does, or clarify distinctions on their own websites.  It is not enough to say, for babble for example, 'we are not to argue basic rights', and still link with a Lenin-honouring site.  The atrocities and fallout were too horrendous and too significant for current work of the left.

Go back to Fox News, troll.

Andrea Horwath is travelling around the province, prior to the fall election.  She hopes to garner support for the provincial NDP.  As the article in the OP noted, the word 'socialist' is not in the Ontario NDP constitution.  The Ontario NDP website uses the word "progressive".  However, the Ontario NDP constitution does explicitly say it follows the program and policy of the federal NDP.  The federal NDP has a Socialist Caucus.  Also, in the article from the OP, Horwath does try to define socialism positively, which is good, however it would also be useful if she clarified that she does not accept the human rights abuses of those who called themselves 'socialists'.  Similarly the federal NDP and/or its Socialist Caucus should also clarify that it does not accept the human rights abuses of those who called themselves 'socialist'.

I also happen to believe that Rabble and other groups, currently listed as linked to the IS, ought to remove their link unless they praise Lenin as the IS does, or clarify distinctions on their own websites.  It is not enough to say, for babble for example, 'we are not to argue basic rights', and still link with a Lenin-honouring site.  The atrocities and fallout were too horrendous and too significant for current work of the left.

From the human rights thread here; the Cheka was established under Lenin and Trotsky, whose Red Army also massacred five thousand Ukrainian civilians in Kyiv on Feb.9 1918.

"Babenko, Vira, b 1902 d 7 September 1921 in Katerynoslav.  Liason officer of the Ukrainian insurgents, responsible for liaison between the Katerynoslav district insurgent staff and the UNR government in exile in Tarnow, Poland.  After returning to Ukraine in the spring of 1921 she was seized by the Cheka and, together with insurgent staff officers, tortured to death." (Encyclopedia of Ukraine. Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, 1985. Vol.1, p. 152.)

" Cheka...Soviet security agency confirmed by the decree of the RSFSR of 20 December, 1917...The Cheka justified its repressions and terror as the struggle 'against counterrevolution, espionage, and banditry, but 'banditry' encompassed every activity of the governments' political opponents.  The Cheka carried out the policy of the so-called Red Terror with its mass killings, executions of hostages, coercion [rape], and sadistic torture...In 1920-2 the Cheka fought Ukrainian insurgents and terrorized the peasants." ibid, p. 406/7.)

" The terror was also directed against the leaders of the anti-Soviet political parties, anti-government guerillas,etc. During the years 1919-1921 not less than 100,000 members and supporters of these groups in Ukraine were annihilated." (Ukraine, a Concise Encyclopedia, Shevchenko Scientific Society, 1963, p.804.) "...and many more were exiled to Siberia." (Ukrainian History, D. Doroshenko, Trident, 1975, p.80.)

Also, in a thread about 'socialism', babblers involved ought to clarify that they do not accept the human rights abuses of those who called themselves 'socialist' in the past.  Babblers here have failed to do so.  Babble policy says that basic human rights aren't to be fought over again and again, yet here I am having to fight the battle over.  The ongoing fight here is unjust and i need justice, for myself, and for 'socialism', because with the clarification I think socialism is full of hope.

To be just to myself, I  expect babblers, Rabble, and others to clarify that they understand 'socialism' does not involve the human rights abuses of those who called themselves 'socialist'.

I'll check occasionally in the next month or so, otherwise need some justice in time expenditure.

thanks wrote:

To be just to myself, I  expect babblers, Rabble, and others to clarify that they understand 'socialism' does not involve the human rights abuses of those who called themselves 'socialist'.

I'll check occasionally in the next month or so, otherwise need some justice in time expenditure.

Don't bother.

As Catchfire has pointed out, this is a left-wing site, with all that entails.  We do not need to explain or justify its existence or its values to you.  Your expectations are completely unrealistic, and you obviously have little understanding - and a great deal of antipathy for - socialism, communism, and babble policy.

Pol Pot was a communist?

ygtbk, since the politics underpinning your assertion have been discussed and dis(re)puted many times on babble, the answer to your question is obvious. Perhaps you believe the best place to discuss Lenin's alleged atrocities is in a thread about Andrea Horwath? I disagree.

Certainly repeating right-wing myths about communism and socialism in general is against babble's left-wing mandate. But what got thanks banned was repeated trolling and derailing. It had nothing to do with politesse.

I hope we can get back to the intended subject now. 

So you're not going to address the counter point either, ygbk?  One last time then, from a unapologtic anti-ideological leftist ---most mainstream leftists here, there, and everywhere have long rejected (re/denounced has another shading) the 'communist' experiment, as directly experienced in other parts of the world between 1917 and 1991.  Even most open Marxists reject what is commonly called "Stalinism" on the left, sometimes offering up some of the best critiques IMO.  A few diehards might still prfer to dissemble about the history, but once again, they are a very much smallr and less influntial faction than say those currently holding the United States, Britain and Canada hostage.   When our deary departed 'Friend' insisted that the mainstream NDP make mass public 'denunciations' for even 'associating' with 'socialists' he himself was displaying an unpleasant authoritarian streak.   I'm glad you took the extra time to join in. 

Erik Redburn wrote:

So you're not going to address the counter point either, ygbk?  One last time then, from a unapologtic anti-ideological leftist ---most mainstream leftists here, there, and everywhere have long rejected (re/denounced has another shading) the 'communist' experiment, as directly experienced in other parts of the world between 1917 and 1991.  Even most open Marxists reject what is commonly called "Stalinism" on the left, sometimes offering up some of the best critiques IMO.  A few diehards might still prfer to dissemble about the history, but once again, they are a very much smallr and less influntial faction than say those currently holding the United States, Britain and Canada hostage.   When our deary departed 'Friend' insisted that the mainstream NDP make mass public 'denunciations' for even 'associating' with 'socialists' he himself was displaying an unpleasant authoritarian streak.   I'm glad you took the extra time to join in. 

Erik, I think I agree with most of your points. But I think that you might find some here reluctant to reject Stalinism - and, of course, on babble, Lenin's well-documented atrocities are thought of as only being "alleged".

So, moving along at a sprightly pace, how about that Andrea Horwath, eh?

Erik Redburn wrote:

Re Horvath, I think she's great!   And she looked very nice in those scanty outfits they advertised her in....

Seriously, I think she's an improvement on the probably well meaning but stodgy Hampton.    I'm glad they never tried dressing him up though. 

Oh please Erik.  Get your head around the fact that this woman might not be a puppet and might actually want to dress the way SHE feels comfortable. 

I found that last comment quite disrespectful of her as a leader and implies she is not really a leader at all.

Sorry I often miss sarcasm when it has no body and voice clues. 

Clearly someone doesn't get out much if they think a woman looking fairly normal in a pants suit is "scantily" clad.  What next -an admonishment for her to stop wearing her hair down.  The attacks on women in politics just get weirder and weirder.  What seems to disturb a certain kind of man -and they are found on the left and right- is a woman politician not trying to be a man.  There seems to be a much greater comfort level with women politicians who ape male attitudes and ways of doing things.   Just be a woman, and make no bones about it- well then that's a problem.

Not sure when this thread jumped the shark, but it seems to have jumped a whole school of them.

Clearly she displays shocking amounts of skin constantly - if she were running for office in Afghanistan, perhaps.