Here is a nice video about what really motivates people. It defies the normal economic view about profit and incentives. It talks about studies done by economists and psychologists about people working for profits and for free.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Homeland Security Goes After Child
A Westlake, Ohio girl named Alyssa Thomas, 6 years old, is apparently some sort of "threat" in the eyes of the US Department of Homeland Security. Alyssa and her family discovered this shocking fact when, on a trip to Minneapolis, her name was found on the no fly list.
Alyssa was allowed to make her flight, but her family was told to contact Homeland Security to clear up this issue. Later on, the little girl received a letter from the US government stating that nothing would be changed on their list. The letter said the government will neither confirm nor deny information they have about her or another person on the list with the same name. The FBI has said it will not discuss why anyone is on the no fly list due to security concerns.
"The watch lists are an important layer of security to prevent individuals with known or suspected ties to terrorism from flying," a spokesperson from the Transportation Security Administration said.
Alyssa has been flying since she was two-months old and has never had any sort of trouble with airport security before. The Thomas family plans on making another appeal to Homeland Security.
Alyssa was allowed to make her flight, but her family was told to contact Homeland Security to clear up this issue. Later on, the little girl received a letter from the US government stating that nothing would be changed on their list. The letter said the government will neither confirm nor deny information they have about her or another person on the list with the same name. The FBI has said it will not discuss why anyone is on the no fly list due to security concerns.
"The watch lists are an important layer of security to prevent individuals with known or suspected ties to terrorism from flying," a spokesperson from the Transportation Security Administration said.
Alyssa has been flying since she was two-months old and has never had any sort of trouble with airport security before. The Thomas family plans on making another appeal to Homeland Security.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Riots in Bangladesh
Bangladeshi garment factories have temporarily closed their doors recently due to violent protests by disgruntled factory workers. All 250 garment factories in one of the country's main economic zones, Ashulia near Dhaka, have closed indefinitely.
Factories that supply Walmart, H&M, Zara, and Carrefour were among those shut down.
The protests began on Saturday. On Monday, workers walked out of the factories to protest in Ashulia. Police responded by firing rubber bullets and tear gas at the workers, who responded by throwing stones at the police. Factory closures were announced for Tuesday due to the violence. This sparked riots, thousands of factory workers took to the streets. Workers burned tires, smashed cars, and set trucks on fire. Around 200 garment factories have been vandalized.
At least 30 people have been reported as injured lately.
Garment workers in Bangladesh make only $25 American dollars each month, minimum wage, and they are demanding that be increased by three times the amount. Bangladeshi garment workers are among the lowest paid in the world. Garments are Bangladesh's biggest export.
Factories that supply Walmart, H&M, Zara, and Carrefour were among those shut down.
The protests began on Saturday. On Monday, workers walked out of the factories to protest in Ashulia. Police responded by firing rubber bullets and tear gas at the workers, who responded by throwing stones at the police. Factory closures were announced for Tuesday due to the violence. This sparked riots, thousands of factory workers took to the streets. Workers burned tires, smashed cars, and set trucks on fire. Around 200 garment factories have been vandalized.
At least 30 people have been reported as injured lately.
Garment workers in Bangladesh make only $25 American dollars each month, minimum wage, and they are demanding that be increased by three times the amount. Bangladeshi garment workers are among the lowest paid in the world. Garments are Bangladesh's biggest export.
Saturday, June 19, 2010
US Dumping Toxic Waste in Iraq
According to the London-based news source called The Times, millions of pounds of toxic chemicals have been dumped in Iraq by the US military.
The Pentagon requires that all waste created by Americans in an occupied country be shipped back to the US or properly recycled. However, American bases in five Iraqi provinces are dumping waste locally rather than obeying the Pentagon's rules. Because of this, waste is now cluttering streets and places where children normally play.
In both the north and the west, open acid containers sit within reach of any unknowing man, woman, or child. Multiple 55-gallon drums of engine oil are also disposed of improperly, some are even leaking. Discarded batteries have also been found, including in places near irrigated farmland. These toxic materials could get into the local water supply.
A Pentagon document, dated 2009, states that there is "an estimated 11 million pounds of hazardous waste" produced by the US military in Iraq.
Iraqis who work and live near the toxic waste have developed rashes and blistering on their hands and feet, and some have developed respiratory problems. One Iraqi was reported to have claimed his doctor told him his rashes and blisters were from the waste. There have even been reports of dead rats near the waste dumps.
One scrap-yard owner, who didn't know he was buying contaminated metal, said of his workers "… many quit work. So when I get this kind of material now I bury it somewhere far away."
Most toxic American waste can be found in the areas where the most fighting took place, such as Baghdad, Fallujah, and Mosul. The labels on much of the waste read: "hazardous waste—federal laws prohibit improper disposal"; "keep out of reach of children"; "no smoking within 50ft"; "caution—hazardous waste"; and "flammable liquid."
The dumping of toxic materials in Iraq is entirely criminal, and we should not turn a blind eye to it. Clearly the invasion of Iraq was carried out for the interests of big business and not the Iraqi people. The USA must leave Iraq immediately, pay for the environmental clean up, and pay reparations to the people of Iraq for the damage it has caused.
The Pentagon requires that all waste created by Americans in an occupied country be shipped back to the US or properly recycled. However, American bases in five Iraqi provinces are dumping waste locally rather than obeying the Pentagon's rules. Because of this, waste is now cluttering streets and places where children normally play.
In both the north and the west, open acid containers sit within reach of any unknowing man, woman, or child. Multiple 55-gallon drums of engine oil are also disposed of improperly, some are even leaking. Discarded batteries have also been found, including in places near irrigated farmland. These toxic materials could get into the local water supply.
A Pentagon document, dated 2009, states that there is "an estimated 11 million pounds of hazardous waste" produced by the US military in Iraq.
Iraqis who work and live near the toxic waste have developed rashes and blistering on their hands and feet, and some have developed respiratory problems. One Iraqi was reported to have claimed his doctor told him his rashes and blisters were from the waste. There have even been reports of dead rats near the waste dumps.
One scrap-yard owner, who didn't know he was buying contaminated metal, said of his workers "… many quit work. So when I get this kind of material now I bury it somewhere far away."
Most toxic American waste can be found in the areas where the most fighting took place, such as Baghdad, Fallujah, and Mosul. The labels on much of the waste read: "hazardous waste—federal laws prohibit improper disposal"; "keep out of reach of children"; "no smoking within 50ft"; "caution—hazardous waste"; and "flammable liquid."
The dumping of toxic materials in Iraq is entirely criminal, and we should not turn a blind eye to it. Clearly the invasion of Iraq was carried out for the interests of big business and not the Iraqi people. The USA must leave Iraq immediately, pay for the environmental clean up, and pay reparations to the people of Iraq for the damage it has caused.
Vatican FM Expresses Admiration of Cuba's Special Schools
Vatican Foreign Minister Monsignor Dominique Mamberti is on an official Pastoral visit to Cuba this weekend. He visited a school for children with handicaps, and expressed his admiration for the Cuban education system's method of working with these children.
He visited a special school in Havana, founded by Fidel Castro in 1989, which has taught 1,276 children with physical handicaps. While Mamberti was there, he was able to see children take part in their daily activities at computer labs, classes, and workshops. He also spoke with them.
The Vatican FM was also learned that there are 496 schools like this in Cuba, teaching over 60,000 children. There are also teachers who visit the homes of children who are physically unable to attend school, and just like the rest of the kids on the island, they are taught free of charge.
The special schools program in Cuba has made it possible for many of these disabled kids to attend universities. Many have graduated as lawyers and teachers in computer science. Mamberti expressed his admiration for the school while signing its guestbook.
He visited a special school in Havana, founded by Fidel Castro in 1989, which has taught 1,276 children with physical handicaps. While Mamberti was there, he was able to see children take part in their daily activities at computer labs, classes, and workshops. He also spoke with them.
The Vatican FM was also learned that there are 496 schools like this in Cuba, teaching over 60,000 children. There are also teachers who visit the homes of children who are physically unable to attend school, and just like the rest of the kids on the island, they are taught free of charge.
The special schools program in Cuba has made it possible for many of these disabled kids to attend universities. Many have graduated as lawyers and teachers in computer science. Mamberti expressed his admiration for the school while signing its guestbook.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Mines, Minerals, and Militias Could Make Afghanistan the New Congo
A US geological survey from 2007 shows that Afghanistan is rich in many minerals, such as lithium, copper, and iron ore. As a matter of fact, it may have one of the world's largest deposits of lithium.
A 2007 press release regarding the geological survey quotes the Afghan ambassador on the richness of the minerals, yet the media is trying to act as if the mineral deposits are a new discovery. Paul Jay of the Real News Network has said that he thinks this helped President Barack Obama's decision to increase the focus on Afghanistan (as well as to get him elected).
The US and allied governments have kept quiet about the discovery of these minerals in order to avoid delegitimizing the Afghan War in the eyes of the misinformed public. Certainly we have every right to assume that Britain and Russia, given their histories with Afghanistan, were also aware of the mineral deposits. Jay went on to speculate that countries with a deep focus on mining, like Canada, must have known about the deposits in Afghanistan. A 2004 World Bank report details mineral wealth in Afghanistan, and it is public knowledge that Afghan President Karzai discussed this matter with Hillary Clinton about a month ago.
The Pentagon once released a memorandum regarding Afghan lithium. The US military leaders could possibly be using this as an excuse to stay in Afghanistan longer than planned. They are also using the minerals as an appeal to Coalition partners to keep their militaries in Afghanistan at a time when many countries are attempting to withdraw.
It is no longer a question of building oil pipelines, it is now also a question of mining Afghanistan. The Pentagon has already started reaching out to individuals and companies that specialize in mining. Such operations take time to set up, and it is possible that foreign armed forces will remain in Afghanistan for years to come despite claims from the bourgeois-liberal establishment.
Afghanistan could possibly be turned into another DR Congo, where paramilitaries hired by companies keep mine workers in check and kill people who go against the interests of the foreign mining companies and their exploitation of the country for access coltan (a composite mineral). Militias, both pro and anti-government, fight with each other over control of mineral-rich areas costing millions of civilian lives.
In 2001, a UN report to the Security Council said, "because of its lucrative nature" war for coltan "has created a `win-win' situation for all belligerents. Adversaries and enemies are at times partners in business, get weapons from the same dealers and use the same intermediaries. Business has superseded security concerns." The UN acknowledged that coltan perpetuated the Congo's civil war, saying that the war "has become mainly about access, control and trade of minerals."
While all of this fighting was happening, mining companies like Barrick Gold Corporation, America Mineral Fields, and OM Group raked in millions upon millions of blood-soaked dollars. Don't be surprised if similar names are mentioned with regard to Afghanistan.
It would be safe to bet that Islamic resistance groups would betray their own causes and principles and become hired guns for mining companies or fight to control the mines and keep the profits for themselves.
Perhaps the future of Afghanistan will also have similarities to Colombia and India as well. In both places, human rights groups are targeted by police and paramilitaries and indigenous populations are forced and scammed off of their traditional lands. Let's not forget the killing of labor union members in Colombia, you can bet that will happen in Afghanistan too.
This, my friends, is the "change" Barack Obama is really bringing the world. For Western foreign policy, however, this is nothing new. This is neo-colonialism, or imperialism is you prefer. Regardless of the name, this kind of exploitation is the true and modern face of the free market and its puppets in the government.
A 2007 press release regarding the geological survey quotes the Afghan ambassador on the richness of the minerals, yet the media is trying to act as if the mineral deposits are a new discovery. Paul Jay of the Real News Network has said that he thinks this helped President Barack Obama's decision to increase the focus on Afghanistan (as well as to get him elected).
The US and allied governments have kept quiet about the discovery of these minerals in order to avoid delegitimizing the Afghan War in the eyes of the misinformed public. Certainly we have every right to assume that Britain and Russia, given their histories with Afghanistan, were also aware of the mineral deposits. Jay went on to speculate that countries with a deep focus on mining, like Canada, must have known about the deposits in Afghanistan. A 2004 World Bank report details mineral wealth in Afghanistan, and it is public knowledge that Afghan President Karzai discussed this matter with Hillary Clinton about a month ago.
The Pentagon once released a memorandum regarding Afghan lithium. The US military leaders could possibly be using this as an excuse to stay in Afghanistan longer than planned. They are also using the minerals as an appeal to Coalition partners to keep their militaries in Afghanistan at a time when many countries are attempting to withdraw.
It is no longer a question of building oil pipelines, it is now also a question of mining Afghanistan. The Pentagon has already started reaching out to individuals and companies that specialize in mining. Such operations take time to set up, and it is possible that foreign armed forces will remain in Afghanistan for years to come despite claims from the bourgeois-liberal establishment.
Afghanistan could possibly be turned into another DR Congo, where paramilitaries hired by companies keep mine workers in check and kill people who go against the interests of the foreign mining companies and their exploitation of the country for access coltan (a composite mineral). Militias, both pro and anti-government, fight with each other over control of mineral-rich areas costing millions of civilian lives.
In 2001, a UN report to the Security Council said, "because of its lucrative nature" war for coltan "has created a `win-win' situation for all belligerents. Adversaries and enemies are at times partners in business, get weapons from the same dealers and use the same intermediaries. Business has superseded security concerns." The UN acknowledged that coltan perpetuated the Congo's civil war, saying that the war "has become mainly about access, control and trade of minerals."
While all of this fighting was happening, mining companies like Barrick Gold Corporation, America Mineral Fields, and OM Group raked in millions upon millions of blood-soaked dollars. Don't be surprised if similar names are mentioned with regard to Afghanistan.
It would be safe to bet that Islamic resistance groups would betray their own causes and principles and become hired guns for mining companies or fight to control the mines and keep the profits for themselves.
Perhaps the future of Afghanistan will also have similarities to Colombia and India as well. In both places, human rights groups are targeted by police and paramilitaries and indigenous populations are forced and scammed off of their traditional lands. Let's not forget the killing of labor union members in Colombia, you can bet that will happen in Afghanistan too.
This, my friends, is the "change" Barack Obama is really bringing the world. For Western foreign policy, however, this is nothing new. This is neo-colonialism, or imperialism is you prefer. Regardless of the name, this kind of exploitation is the true and modern face of the free market and its puppets in the government.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Stalin and Bureaucracy
The following is the text to the YouTube video called "Stalin and Bureaucracy." All information was taken from the pamphlet called "The Fight Against Bureaucracy in the Soviet Union" by Carlos Rule. As of June 13, 2010, Rule's pamphlet can be read here: http://www.oneparty.co.uk/index.html?http%3A//www.oneparty.co.uk/html/crfab.html
Some will argue that Stalin’s words are divorced from his deeds, and therefore mean nothing, but it is important to keep in mind that party officials and rank-and-file members invested much effort into trying to carry out Stalin’s words. Why would he say something that he knew would incite people to harm an institution he supposedly represented? Why would he risk turning people against him or his allies? Clearly bourgeois logic never thought of that, if it ever involved thoughts at all.
"Bureaucracy is one of the worst enemies of our progress. It exists in all our organizations.” - Stalin, Speech delivered at the Eighth Congress of the All-Union of the Leninist Young Communist League, 1927
“Bureaucracy in our organizations must not be regarded merely as routine and red tape. Bureaucracy is a manifestation of bourgeois influence on our organizations. With all the more persistence, therefore, must the struggle against bureaucracy in our organizations be waged, if we really want to develop self-criticism and rid ourselves of the maladies in our constructive work.” - Stalin, Against the Vulgarizing of the Slogan of Self-Criticism, 1928
"The surest remedy for bureaucracy is raising the cultural level of the workers and peasants. One can curse and denounce bureaucracy in the state apparatus, one can stigmatize and pillory bureaucracy in our practical work, but unless the masses of the workers reach a certain level of culture, which will create the possibility, the desire, the ability to control the state apparatus from below, by the masses of the workers themselves, bureaucracy will continue to exist in spite of everything. Therefore, the cultural development of the working class and of the masses of the working peasantry, not only the development of literacy, although literacy is the basis of all culture, but primarily the cultivation of the ability to take part in the administration of the country, is the chief lever for improving the state and every other apparatus. This is the sense and significance of Lenin's slogan about the cultural revolution.” - Stalin (THE FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE C.P.S.U. (B.), December 2-19, 1927.)
In the words of professor J. Arch Getty, who received a PhD at Boston College, taught at UCLA, and is considered to be a famous researcher and authority on Soviet history:
“Stalin and other leaders at the centre perceived this as an ossification, a breakdown and a perversion of the party’s function… the evidence shows that Stalin, Zhdanov and others preferred to revive the educational and agitation functions of the party, to reduce the absolute authority of local satraps, and to encourage certain forms of rank-and-file leadership."
So Stalin was against bureaucracy and wanted to raise the cultural level of the masses in order to combat it. He also wanted to carry out intense education campaigns among the masses and Party members about Leninism.
From 1930 to 1933 the number of Party schools rose from 52,000 to over 200,000 and the number of students went from one million to 4,500,000. In the same time period, the literacy level in the USSR rose from 67% to 90%.
The circulation of newspapers increased from 12,500,000 in 1929 to 36,500,000 in 1933.
The proportion of workers among the students in the higher educational institutions was 51.4 per cent of the total, and that of laboring peasants 16.5 per cent; whereas in Germany, for instance, the proportion of workers among the students in higher educational institutions in 1932-33 was only 3.2 per cent of the total, and that of small peasants only 2.4 per cent. I won’t bore you with anymore numbers, but the amount of children in grade schools also increased dramatically under Stalin.
Miami University history professor Robert W. Thurston once said that Stalin and the Soviet regime favored criticism, self-criticism, and listening to the people. In his books he has even detailed examples of how such things existed in the Soviet regime.
"Precisely in order to develop self-criticism and not extinguish it, we must listen attentively to all criticism coming from Soviet people, even if sometimes it may not be correct to the full and in all details. Only then can the masses have the assurance that they will not get into "hot water" if their criticism is not perfect, that they will not be made a "laughing-stock" if there should be errors in their criticism. Only then can self-criticism acquire a truly mass character and meet with a truly mass response." (J. V. Stalin, REPORT TO THE SEVENTEENTH PARTY CONGRESS ON THE WORK OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE C.P.S.U. (B.) Pravda, No. 27, January 28, 1934
There was a system of workers’ and peasants’ inspection set up by the Stalin regime. It worked by drawing a committee from among the masses who would act as a sort of jury and visit officials, sometimes without notice, in order to point out what needed reform and punish the officials who did poorly.
According to professor Thurston, production conferences were used in order for workers to voice their grievances about production and the administrators.
A Soviet émigré, interviewed by J. K. Zawodny in the early 1950s, as saying: "Honestly, I have to say that the People’s Court usually rendered just sentences favoring the workers, particularly with regard to housing cases". Another interviewee said: "anyone could complain in a formal way, especially when he had the law behind him. He could even write to a paper, and in this way let the higher officials know about his complaint."
The Central Control Commission purged anyone from the Party who they found to be guilty of being corrupt or bureaucratic. Then there were elections. During the May 1937 electoral campaign, for the 54,000 Party rank and file organizations for which we have data, 55% of the directing committees were replaced. In the Leningrad region, 48% of the members of the local committees were replaced. This is according to research done by J. Arch Getty.
“The Party … must firmly and resolutely adopt the course of inner-Party democracy; our organizations must draw the broad mass of the Party membership, which determines the fate of our Party, into discussing the questions of our constructive work. Without this, there can be no question of raising the activity of the working class.” - Stalin, The Economic Situation Of The Soviet Union And The Policy Of The Party, 1926
“The principle of election must be applied in practice to all Party bodies and official posts, if there are no insuperable obstacles to this such as lack of the necessary Party standing, and so forth. We must eliminate the practice of ignoring the will of the majority of the organizations in promoting comrades to responsible Party posts, and we must see to it that the principle of election is actually applied." (J. V. Stalin, THE FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE C.P.S.U. (B.), December 2-19, 1927)
Inner-party democracy should not be confused with factionalism, which is causes members to form various groups within the Party and fight with others in order to form an alternative Party program. Factionalism can be very dangerous when a socialist country is surrounded by enemies and plagued by foreign spies and wreckers because it distracts and ruins the attention and discipline of the Party.
Some will argue that Stalin’s words are divorced from his deeds, and therefore mean nothing, but it is important to keep in mind that party officials and rank-and-file members invested much effort into trying to carry out Stalin’s words. Why would he say something that he knew would incite people to harm an institution he supposedly represented? Why would he risk turning people against him or his allies? Clearly bourgeois logic never thought of that, if it ever involved thoughts at all.
"Bureaucracy is one of the worst enemies of our progress. It exists in all our organizations.” - Stalin, Speech delivered at the Eighth Congress of the All-Union of the Leninist Young Communist League, 1927
“Bureaucracy in our organizations must not be regarded merely as routine and red tape. Bureaucracy is a manifestation of bourgeois influence on our organizations. With all the more persistence, therefore, must the struggle against bureaucracy in our organizations be waged, if we really want to develop self-criticism and rid ourselves of the maladies in our constructive work.” - Stalin, Against the Vulgarizing of the Slogan of Self-Criticism, 1928
"The surest remedy for bureaucracy is raising the cultural level of the workers and peasants. One can curse and denounce bureaucracy in the state apparatus, one can stigmatize and pillory bureaucracy in our practical work, but unless the masses of the workers reach a certain level of culture, which will create the possibility, the desire, the ability to control the state apparatus from below, by the masses of the workers themselves, bureaucracy will continue to exist in spite of everything. Therefore, the cultural development of the working class and of the masses of the working peasantry, not only the development of literacy, although literacy is the basis of all culture, but primarily the cultivation of the ability to take part in the administration of the country, is the chief lever for improving the state and every other apparatus. This is the sense and significance of Lenin's slogan about the cultural revolution.” - Stalin (THE FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE C.P.S.U. (B.), December 2-19, 1927.)
In the words of professor J. Arch Getty, who received a PhD at Boston College, taught at UCLA, and is considered to be a famous researcher and authority on Soviet history:
“Stalin and other leaders at the centre perceived this as an ossification, a breakdown and a perversion of the party’s function… the evidence shows that Stalin, Zhdanov and others preferred to revive the educational and agitation functions of the party, to reduce the absolute authority of local satraps, and to encourage certain forms of rank-and-file leadership."
So Stalin was against bureaucracy and wanted to raise the cultural level of the masses in order to combat it. He also wanted to carry out intense education campaigns among the masses and Party members about Leninism.
From 1930 to 1933 the number of Party schools rose from 52,000 to over 200,000 and the number of students went from one million to 4,500,000. In the same time period, the literacy level in the USSR rose from 67% to 90%.
The circulation of newspapers increased from 12,500,000 in 1929 to 36,500,000 in 1933.
The proportion of workers among the students in the higher educational institutions was 51.4 per cent of the total, and that of laboring peasants 16.5 per cent; whereas in Germany, for instance, the proportion of workers among the students in higher educational institutions in 1932-33 was only 3.2 per cent of the total, and that of small peasants only 2.4 per cent. I won’t bore you with anymore numbers, but the amount of children in grade schools also increased dramatically under Stalin.
Miami University history professor Robert W. Thurston once said that Stalin and the Soviet regime favored criticism, self-criticism, and listening to the people. In his books he has even detailed examples of how such things existed in the Soviet regime.
"Precisely in order to develop self-criticism and not extinguish it, we must listen attentively to all criticism coming from Soviet people, even if sometimes it may not be correct to the full and in all details. Only then can the masses have the assurance that they will not get into "hot water" if their criticism is not perfect, that they will not be made a "laughing-stock" if there should be errors in their criticism. Only then can self-criticism acquire a truly mass character and meet with a truly mass response." (J. V. Stalin, REPORT TO THE SEVENTEENTH PARTY CONGRESS ON THE WORK OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE C.P.S.U. (B.) Pravda, No. 27, January 28, 1934
There was a system of workers’ and peasants’ inspection set up by the Stalin regime. It worked by drawing a committee from among the masses who would act as a sort of jury and visit officials, sometimes without notice, in order to point out what needed reform and punish the officials who did poorly.
According to professor Thurston, production conferences were used in order for workers to voice their grievances about production and the administrators.
A Soviet émigré, interviewed by J. K. Zawodny in the early 1950s, as saying: "Honestly, I have to say that the People’s Court usually rendered just sentences favoring the workers, particularly with regard to housing cases". Another interviewee said: "anyone could complain in a formal way, especially when he had the law behind him. He could even write to a paper, and in this way let the higher officials know about his complaint."
The Central Control Commission purged anyone from the Party who they found to be guilty of being corrupt or bureaucratic. Then there were elections. During the May 1937 electoral campaign, for the 54,000 Party rank and file organizations for which we have data, 55% of the directing committees were replaced. In the Leningrad region, 48% of the members of the local committees were replaced. This is according to research done by J. Arch Getty.
“The Party … must firmly and resolutely adopt the course of inner-Party democracy; our organizations must draw the broad mass of the Party membership, which determines the fate of our Party, into discussing the questions of our constructive work. Without this, there can be no question of raising the activity of the working class.” - Stalin, The Economic Situation Of The Soviet Union And The Policy Of The Party, 1926
“The principle of election must be applied in practice to all Party bodies and official posts, if there are no insuperable obstacles to this such as lack of the necessary Party standing, and so forth. We must eliminate the practice of ignoring the will of the majority of the organizations in promoting comrades to responsible Party posts, and we must see to it that the principle of election is actually applied." (J. V. Stalin, THE FIFTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE C.P.S.U. (B.), December 2-19, 1927)
Inner-party democracy should not be confused with factionalism, which is causes members to form various groups within the Party and fight with others in order to form an alternative Party program. Factionalism can be very dangerous when a socialist country is surrounded by enemies and plagued by foreign spies and wreckers because it distracts and ruins the attention and discipline of the Party.
Stalin and Ukraine
The following is the text to the YouTube video called "Stalin and Ukraine." The bulk of the information comes from the book cited at the end written by Douglas Tottle. Tottle wrote his book through interviewing many Ukrainian immigrants and descendants of Ukrainian immigrants. One would assume this mostly took place in Canada, where his book was published.
During the Plenum of the Party Central Committee in October 1931, regional Party secretaries insisted that grain collection quotas be decreased due to a bad harvest. In response, Stalin called a meeting of Party secretaries in the grain regions and reduced the amount of grain that was to be collected. In the May of 1932, Stalin introduced a grain collection plan that required lower amounts than the last year (Davies and Harris, 132).
“But bear in mind that an exception must be made for the districts in Ukraine which have specially suffered.” – Stalin, letter to Kaganovich and Molotov, 1932 (ibid)
Any possible natural causes of a Ukrainian famine are always ignored by anti-Soviet scholars. They never mention natural occurrences like droughts. Nor do they ever mention saboteurs within the Soviet Union. In the book A History of Ukraine by Mikhail Hrushevsky , a man who was described by Ukrainian Nationalists themselves as Ukraine’s leading historian, the author states that a drought spread throughout Ukraine. But nowhere does he mention any man-made famine-genocide in the book. However, the book was published posthumously and updated by Ukrainian anti-communist Nationalists (Tottle, 91).
University professors Nicholas Riasnovsky and Michael Florinsky both mention a drought in their writings as well as saboteurs.
What really caused the conditions that could be misconstrued to look like a famine was the fact that farming was still privatized in Ukraine as well as the use of antiquated, backwards farming methods. When the time of collectivization came, the Kulaks, the class that owned the land the peasants farmed, resisted fiercely. They slaughtered livestock and destroyed crops. Their resistance even reached Civil War proportions in some areas of Ukraine. Frederick Schuman, a professor of government at Williams College, traveled through Ukraine at this time and noted that the Kulaks were doing these things (Tottle, 93). Some Kulaks torched the collective farms and many more Kulaks refused to sow or reap their fields. All according to Schuman (Tottle, 94).
Because of the Kulak resistance and their sabotage technique of livestock slaughter, the number of horned cattle in the Soviet Union went from 70 million to only 38 million, and hogs decreased from 20 million to 12 million (Tottle, 94).
Some Nationalists even give enthusiastic descriptions of sabotage against agriculture that Kulaks and themselves carried out. Isaac Mazepa, for example, was the former Premier of a Nationalist government in Ukraine. He himself admits that sabotage by the Kulaks caused a significant portion of the so-called genocide famine.
“At first there were disturbances in the collective farms or else the communists officials and their agents were killed, but later a system of passive resistance was favored which aimed at the systematic frustration of the Bolsheviks’ plans for the sowing and gathering of the harvest. Whole tracts were left unsown….in many areas, especially in the south, 20, 40, even 50 percent was left in the fields, and was either not collected at all or ruined in the threshing.” - Isaac Mazepa (Tottle, 94)
Local organizations in charge of collectivization sometimes even issued incorrect instructions (Tottle, 96). This, coupled with the fact that peasants who were used to backwards farming techniques were being quickly transitioned into a newer form of farm and equipment also made things in Ukraine a little rough (Tottle, 95).
The first news of the Ukrainian famine, this supposed genocide, appeared in the press of Nazi Germany in 1933 (Tottle, 2). Hardly a reliable source given the strong anti-communist views and policies of the Hitler regime. The tales of the supposed genocide were propagated even further when Ukrainian Nationalists, who were far right-wing and even Nazi collaborators, arrived in North America (Tottle, 3).
It was Thomas Walker, a journalist employed by American media baron William Hearst, who provided the first American documentation of the so-called famine-genocide in Ukraine when he visited the USSR for thirteen days. He was hyped as a known journalist who studied Russian affairs (Tottle, 5). Louis Fischer, an American writer for the New Republic and The Nation, had also traveled to the Soviet Union. He was also interested in the Soviet Union, but he had never heard of Walker nor did he know anyone who did. Fischer did some research of his own and found out that Walker did go to the USSR, but not during the times he said he did (Tottle, 7). Walker claims to have visited the famine-suffering areas of Ukraine in late spring, but Fischer pointed out that several of Walker’s photographs of the supposed famine victims show winter and fall seasons in the background (Tottle, 8).
At the same time Fischer noted that Lindsay Parrott, a Hearst correspondent who also went to Ukraine, claimed he never saw any signs of a famine (Tottle, 8). James Casey, an American investigative writer, found that the Art department under Hearst was ordered to search the archives for old pictures from before the Ukrainian famine so that they could be touched up and relabeled as being from Soviet Ukraine. One photo was actually discovered to have been from World War I, showing an Austro-Hungarian soldier next to a dead horse (Tottle, 9). Some of the photos used by the Hearst media originally appeared in a London Daily Express article about a supposed famine in Belgorod, located in Russia proper as opposed to Ukraine (Tottle, 11).
It was later discovered that Thomas Walker was actually an escaped convict named Robert Green. Here is an excerpt from a July 16, 1935 article regarding his arrest after being discovered as a fraud. “Robert Green, a writer of syndicated articles about the conditions in Ukraine, who was indicted last Friday by a Federal grand jury on a charge of passport fraud, pleaded guilty yesterday….the judge learned that Green was a fugitive from Colorado State Prison, where he escaped after having served two years of an eight-year term for forgery.” A journalist covering Green/Walker’s trial noted that Green himself admitted that his photos of the Ukrainian famine were faked (Tottle, 11).
Hearst was known for years as “America’s Number One Fascist.” As a matter of fact, he once employed Mussolini as a writer. William Hearst visited Nazi Germany in 1934 and met with top Nazi officials (Tottle, 13).
Among the Ukrainian Nationalist writers of the book The Black Deeds of the Kremlin is Petro Pavlovich. In Pavlovich’s original account of Stalinist terror in Ukraine, titled Crimes in Vynnitsya, he praises Hitler. As a matter of fact, he collaborated with the Nazis in order to publish his account and unite Ukrainians under the banner of fascism (Tottle, 37). Another Nazi collaborator who helped write The Black Deeds of the Kremlin is former SS member and SS propagandist Oleksander Hay-Holowko (Tottle, 41). As a matter of fact, Hay-Holowko himself describes attending a 1933 New Years party in Ukraine where there was an abundance of food (Tottle, 140).
Post-war testimonies of German soldiers reveals that the unearthing of mass graves in Ukraine was simply Nazi propaganda (Tottle, 37).
According to Israel’s Yad Washem Studies, German Senior Lieutenant Erwin Bingel witnessed the SS and Ukrainian militias commit a mass execution of Ukrainian Jews in Vynnitsya Park. He said the Nazis later returned to the same park in order to examine exhumed mass graves of “Soviet murder victims.” When in reality the dead bodies were Nazi victims (Tottle, 40).
The supposed death toll for Ukraine ranges from estimates of one million up to ten million (Tottle, 45). Why should we trust academics if they can’t even get their numbers straight?
In 1934, the British Foreign Office stated, “But there is no information to support Lord Charnwood’s apparent suggestion that the Soviet government has pursued a policy of deliberate impoverishment of agricultural districts of the country, whether or not their policy is considered to have had that effect” (Tottle, 48).
Works Cited:
Davies, Sarah, and James Harris. Stalin: A New History. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Print.
Tottle, Douglas. Fraud, Famine, and Fascism - The Ukrainian Genocide Myth from Hitler to Harvard. Toronto: Progress Books, 1987. Print.
During the Plenum of the Party Central Committee in October 1931, regional Party secretaries insisted that grain collection quotas be decreased due to a bad harvest. In response, Stalin called a meeting of Party secretaries in the grain regions and reduced the amount of grain that was to be collected. In the May of 1932, Stalin introduced a grain collection plan that required lower amounts than the last year (Davies and Harris, 132).
“But bear in mind that an exception must be made for the districts in Ukraine which have specially suffered.” – Stalin, letter to Kaganovich and Molotov, 1932 (ibid)
Any possible natural causes of a Ukrainian famine are always ignored by anti-Soviet scholars. They never mention natural occurrences like droughts. Nor do they ever mention saboteurs within the Soviet Union. In the book A History of Ukraine by Mikhail Hrushevsky , a man who was described by Ukrainian Nationalists themselves as Ukraine’s leading historian, the author states that a drought spread throughout Ukraine. But nowhere does he mention any man-made famine-genocide in the book. However, the book was published posthumously and updated by Ukrainian anti-communist Nationalists (Tottle, 91).
University professors Nicholas Riasnovsky and Michael Florinsky both mention a drought in their writings as well as saboteurs.
What really caused the conditions that could be misconstrued to look like a famine was the fact that farming was still privatized in Ukraine as well as the use of antiquated, backwards farming methods. When the time of collectivization came, the Kulaks, the class that owned the land the peasants farmed, resisted fiercely. They slaughtered livestock and destroyed crops. Their resistance even reached Civil War proportions in some areas of Ukraine. Frederick Schuman, a professor of government at Williams College, traveled through Ukraine at this time and noted that the Kulaks were doing these things (Tottle, 93). Some Kulaks torched the collective farms and many more Kulaks refused to sow or reap their fields. All according to Schuman (Tottle, 94).
Because of the Kulak resistance and their sabotage technique of livestock slaughter, the number of horned cattle in the Soviet Union went from 70 million to only 38 million, and hogs decreased from 20 million to 12 million (Tottle, 94).
Some Nationalists even give enthusiastic descriptions of sabotage against agriculture that Kulaks and themselves carried out. Isaac Mazepa, for example, was the former Premier of a Nationalist government in Ukraine. He himself admits that sabotage by the Kulaks caused a significant portion of the so-called genocide famine.
“At first there were disturbances in the collective farms or else the communists officials and their agents were killed, but later a system of passive resistance was favored which aimed at the systematic frustration of the Bolsheviks’ plans for the sowing and gathering of the harvest. Whole tracts were left unsown….in many areas, especially in the south, 20, 40, even 50 percent was left in the fields, and was either not collected at all or ruined in the threshing.” - Isaac Mazepa (Tottle, 94)
Local organizations in charge of collectivization sometimes even issued incorrect instructions (Tottle, 96). This, coupled with the fact that peasants who were used to backwards farming techniques were being quickly transitioned into a newer form of farm and equipment also made things in Ukraine a little rough (Tottle, 95).
The first news of the Ukrainian famine, this supposed genocide, appeared in the press of Nazi Germany in 1933 (Tottle, 2). Hardly a reliable source given the strong anti-communist views and policies of the Hitler regime. The tales of the supposed genocide were propagated even further when Ukrainian Nationalists, who were far right-wing and even Nazi collaborators, arrived in North America (Tottle, 3).
It was Thomas Walker, a journalist employed by American media baron William Hearst, who provided the first American documentation of the so-called famine-genocide in Ukraine when he visited the USSR for thirteen days. He was hyped as a known journalist who studied Russian affairs (Tottle, 5). Louis Fischer, an American writer for the New Republic and The Nation, had also traveled to the Soviet Union. He was also interested in the Soviet Union, but he had never heard of Walker nor did he know anyone who did. Fischer did some research of his own and found out that Walker did go to the USSR, but not during the times he said he did (Tottle, 7). Walker claims to have visited the famine-suffering areas of Ukraine in late spring, but Fischer pointed out that several of Walker’s photographs of the supposed famine victims show winter and fall seasons in the background (Tottle, 8).
At the same time Fischer noted that Lindsay Parrott, a Hearst correspondent who also went to Ukraine, claimed he never saw any signs of a famine (Tottle, 8). James Casey, an American investigative writer, found that the Art department under Hearst was ordered to search the archives for old pictures from before the Ukrainian famine so that they could be touched up and relabeled as being from Soviet Ukraine. One photo was actually discovered to have been from World War I, showing an Austro-Hungarian soldier next to a dead horse (Tottle, 9). Some of the photos used by the Hearst media originally appeared in a London Daily Express article about a supposed famine in Belgorod, located in Russia proper as opposed to Ukraine (Tottle, 11).
It was later discovered that Thomas Walker was actually an escaped convict named Robert Green. Here is an excerpt from a July 16, 1935 article regarding his arrest after being discovered as a fraud. “Robert Green, a writer of syndicated articles about the conditions in Ukraine, who was indicted last Friday by a Federal grand jury on a charge of passport fraud, pleaded guilty yesterday….the judge learned that Green was a fugitive from Colorado State Prison, where he escaped after having served two years of an eight-year term for forgery.” A journalist covering Green/Walker’s trial noted that Green himself admitted that his photos of the Ukrainian famine were faked (Tottle, 11).
Hearst was known for years as “America’s Number One Fascist.” As a matter of fact, he once employed Mussolini as a writer. William Hearst visited Nazi Germany in 1934 and met with top Nazi officials (Tottle, 13).
Among the Ukrainian Nationalist writers of the book The Black Deeds of the Kremlin is Petro Pavlovich. In Pavlovich’s original account of Stalinist terror in Ukraine, titled Crimes in Vynnitsya, he praises Hitler. As a matter of fact, he collaborated with the Nazis in order to publish his account and unite Ukrainians under the banner of fascism (Tottle, 37). Another Nazi collaborator who helped write The Black Deeds of the Kremlin is former SS member and SS propagandist Oleksander Hay-Holowko (Tottle, 41). As a matter of fact, Hay-Holowko himself describes attending a 1933 New Years party in Ukraine where there was an abundance of food (Tottle, 140).
Post-war testimonies of German soldiers reveals that the unearthing of mass graves in Ukraine was simply Nazi propaganda (Tottle, 37).
According to Israel’s Yad Washem Studies, German Senior Lieutenant Erwin Bingel witnessed the SS and Ukrainian militias commit a mass execution of Ukrainian Jews in Vynnitsya Park. He said the Nazis later returned to the same park in order to examine exhumed mass graves of “Soviet murder victims.” When in reality the dead bodies were Nazi victims (Tottle, 40).
The supposed death toll for Ukraine ranges from estimates of one million up to ten million (Tottle, 45). Why should we trust academics if they can’t even get their numbers straight?
In 1934, the British Foreign Office stated, “But there is no information to support Lord Charnwood’s apparent suggestion that the Soviet government has pursued a policy of deliberate impoverishment of agricultural districts of the country, whether or not their policy is considered to have had that effect” (Tottle, 48).
Works Cited:
Davies, Sarah, and James Harris. Stalin: A New History. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Print.
Tottle, Douglas. Fraud, Famine, and Fascism - The Ukrainian Genocide Myth from Hitler to Harvard. Toronto: Progress Books, 1987. Print.
Stalin: Politics and Power
The following is the text and sources to the YouTube video called "Stalin: Politics and Power." It is set up in somewhat of an essay format. The material comes from research done by the author. The main source is the book cited at the end from Cambridge University Press, which found its information by deeply examining the Soviet government archives. The rest comes from world-renowned professor Grover Furr.
In 1936 a draft for a new Soviet Constitution was approved. It called for secret ballots, contested elections, and candidates from local, non-party organizations. However, this was never put into effect. The democratic parts of the constitution were added because Stalin himself insisted on having them, but he had to give up on having them because the Central Committee refused to add them. They were worried about this because they were afraid of infiltrators who were collaborating with Japan and Germany to overthrow the USSR. Considering the hostility the Soviet Union faced throughout the early half of the 20th Century, this was not a case of baseless paranoia (Furr).
In 1935, Stalin insisted on having secret ballots. He was in disagreement with Avel' Yenukidze, who was assigned by the Politburo to write a new Constitution earlier in the year (Furr).
In a 1936 newspaper interview with American Roy Howard, Stalin said:
“We shall probably adopt our new constitution at the end of this year. As has been announced already, according to the new constitution, the suffrage will be universal, equal, direct, and secret.”
He also said:
“Evidently, candidates will be put forward not only by the Communist Party, but by all sorts of public, non-Party organizations. And we have hundreds of them.”
Speaking at the 7th Congress of Soviets on February 6, 1935 Molotov said that secret elections "will strike with great force against bureaucratic elements and provide them a useful shock" (Furr).
In 1952, during the 19th Party Congress, the position of General Secretary (Stalin’s position) was abolished, making Stalin only one of ten secretaries. All of the secretaries were in the new Presidium which also had 25 other members and 11 candidate members. Stalin followed this up by resigning from the Central Committee (Furr).
When Stalin was unconscious during his last days alive, the Presidium, essentially the old Politburo members, had a meeting and tried to annul the entire 19th Congress. Khrushchev was made the coordinator of the secretariat. Since then, information and dialogue from the 19th Party Congress has been suppressed by the Soviet and Russian governments (Furr).
Although Stalin provided security of tenure to Party secretaries, he was unable to personally select members of the Party organizations. These organizations often refused candidates proposed by the centre. These organizations were influenced more so by their own petty departmental agendas than by Stalin and the political higher ups. In the early 1930’s, many Party members who had voted for Stalin began to question whether or not Stalin was right for the job (Davies and Harris, 65).
After WWII, Stalin felt the effects of old age. He began to decrease his participation in the government, leaving many responsibilities to various committees that adopted a collective decision making process (Davies and Harris, 11). Before this, when he was younger, he never had unlimited personal power. His power was limited by others in the government who could act autonomously. Considerable influence over decision making was held by institutions and individuals that were in charge of providing information on the topic which a decision was to be made (Davies and Harris, 8).
When Stalin took over the Secretariat in 1922, one of his first moves was to decrease the responsibilities of the Secretariat in appointing cadres. The number of party cadre assigned from the centre was reduced from approximately 22,500 to a little over 6,000 (Davies and Harris, 70). At the Party Congress of 1925, Central Committee elections were held and 87 people voted against Stalin and 83 voted against Bukharin. The others lost a lot more votes. So if Stalin was stacking the Party with his cronies, then he certainly wasn’t doing a very good job (Davies and Harris, 79). Probably in 1922, Lenin once proposed that Politburo meetings be held without Trotsky (Davies and Harris, 85).
“I cannot and should not have to decide any and all questions that animate the Politburo… you yourselves can consider things and work them out.” - Stalin letter to Kaganovich and the Politburo, 1933 (Davies and Harris, 97)
In the August to October of 1934 the Politburo made 919 decisions without Stalin’s participation (Davies and Harris, 96).
Another claim is that Stalin wasn’t a Marxist and abandoned Marxism, but a look at Stalin’s personal collection of non-fiction books shows that most of these books were Marxist books which he studied and annoted until the end of his life. You’d think that if Stalin wasn’t a Marxist, then he wouldn’t speak like one in private. Even in his most personal and private letters to Molotov, Kaganovich, and others he continued to speak using Marxist phrases and frameworks (Davies and Harris, 12). Erik van Ree, the author of a widely proclaimed comprehensive analysis of Stalin’s political thought, states that the antecedents of Stalin’s ideas came from Marx and Engels, as well as their interpreters such as Lenin (Davies and Harris,13).
Stalin didn’t abandon internationalism, he just wanted to use the Red Army to spread socialism (Davies and Harris, 161). Stalin constantly called for the old ways of organization and thinking to be smashed (Davies and Harris, 198).
Some scholars have argued that Stalin built a cult of personality around himself in order to unify the USSR during the times of crisis and not because he was power-mad (Davies and Harris, 250). Party ideologists after 1929 used a cult around Stalin to bolster support for the Party (Davies and Harris, 251).
There was no official biography of Stalin up through the early 1930’s (Davies and Harris, 253).
“I am against the idea of a biography about me. Maksim Gorky had a plan like yours, and he asked me about it, but I have backed away from the issue. I don’t think the time has come for a Stalin biography.” - Stalin, letter to Iaroslavskii. August 1935 (Davies and Harris, 258)
In 1938, Stalin wrote a letter to Detizdat, the Children’s Publishing House, criticizing them over their biography of him called Stories of Stalin's Childhood. Stalin criticized the biographies needless praises of him and said that it was harmful to children’s minds. He also criticized the idea of a “great hero” who leads the masses (261). He repeated the same criticisms for the 1946 IMEL biography of him (Davies and Harris, 266).
“I am against them as such undertakings will lead to a strengthening of the 'cult of personalities.’” - Stalin, letter to the Society of Old Bolsheviks regarding writings about his career, 1933. (Davies and Harris, 261)
Works Cited:
Davies, Sarah, and James Harris. Stalin: A New History. Cambridge University Press, 2005. Print.
Furr, Grover. "Grover Furr: "Stalin and the Struggle for Democratic Reform, Part One." Cultural Logic. Cultural Logic, 2005. Web. 13 Jun 2010. http://clogic.eserver.org/2005/furr.html.
In 1936 a draft for a new Soviet Constitution was approved. It called for secret ballots, contested elections, and candidates from local, non-party organizations. However, this was never put into effect. The democratic parts of the constitution were added because Stalin himself insisted on having them, but he had to give up on having them because the Central Committee refused to add them. They were worried about this because they were afraid of infiltrators who were collaborating with Japan and Germany to overthrow the USSR. Considering the hostility the Soviet Union faced throughout the early half of the 20th Century, this was not a case of baseless paranoia (Furr).
In 1935, Stalin insisted on having secret ballots. He was in disagreement with Avel' Yenukidze, who was assigned by the Politburo to write a new Constitution earlier in the year (Furr).
In a 1936 newspaper interview with American Roy Howard, Stalin said:
“We shall probably adopt our new constitution at the end of this year. As has been announced already, according to the new constitution, the suffrage will be universal, equal, direct, and secret.”
He also said:
“Evidently, candidates will be put forward not only by the Communist Party, but by all sorts of public, non-Party organizations. And we have hundreds of them.”
Speaking at the 7th Congress of Soviets on February 6, 1935 Molotov said that secret elections "will strike with great force against bureaucratic elements and provide them a useful shock" (Furr).
In 1952, during the 19th Party Congress, the position of General Secretary (Stalin’s position) was abolished, making Stalin only one of ten secretaries. All of the secretaries were in the new Presidium which also had 25 other members and 11 candidate members. Stalin followed this up by resigning from the Central Committee (Furr).
When Stalin was unconscious during his last days alive, the Presidium, essentially the old Politburo members, had a meeting and tried to annul the entire 19th Congress. Khrushchev was made the coordinator of the secretariat. Since then, information and dialogue from the 19th Party Congress has been suppressed by the Soviet and Russian governments (Furr).
Although Stalin provided security of tenure to Party secretaries, he was unable to personally select members of the Party organizations. These organizations often refused candidates proposed by the centre. These organizations were influenced more so by their own petty departmental agendas than by Stalin and the political higher ups. In the early 1930’s, many Party members who had voted for Stalin began to question whether or not Stalin was right for the job (Davies and Harris, 65).
After WWII, Stalin felt the effects of old age. He began to decrease his participation in the government, leaving many responsibilities to various committees that adopted a collective decision making process (Davies and Harris, 11). Before this, when he was younger, he never had unlimited personal power. His power was limited by others in the government who could act autonomously. Considerable influence over decision making was held by institutions and individuals that were in charge of providing information on the topic which a decision was to be made (Davies and Harris, 8).
When Stalin took over the Secretariat in 1922, one of his first moves was to decrease the responsibilities of the Secretariat in appointing cadres. The number of party cadre assigned from the centre was reduced from approximately 22,500 to a little over 6,000 (Davies and Harris, 70). At the Party Congress of 1925, Central Committee elections were held and 87 people voted against Stalin and 83 voted against Bukharin. The others lost a lot more votes. So if Stalin was stacking the Party with his cronies, then he certainly wasn’t doing a very good job (Davies and Harris, 79). Probably in 1922, Lenin once proposed that Politburo meetings be held without Trotsky (Davies and Harris, 85).
“I cannot and should not have to decide any and all questions that animate the Politburo… you yourselves can consider things and work them out.” - Stalin letter to Kaganovich and the Politburo, 1933 (Davies and Harris, 97)
In the August to October of 1934 the Politburo made 919 decisions without Stalin’s participation (Davies and Harris, 96).
Another claim is that Stalin wasn’t a Marxist and abandoned Marxism, but a look at Stalin’s personal collection of non-fiction books shows that most of these books were Marxist books which he studied and annoted until the end of his life. You’d think that if Stalin wasn’t a Marxist, then he wouldn’t speak like one in private. Even in his most personal and private letters to Molotov, Kaganovich, and others he continued to speak using Marxist phrases and frameworks (Davies and Harris, 12). Erik van Ree, the author of a widely proclaimed comprehensive analysis of Stalin’s political thought, states that the antecedents of Stalin’s ideas came from Marx and Engels, as well as their interpreters such as Lenin (Davies and Harris,13).
Stalin didn’t abandon internationalism, he just wanted to use the Red Army to spread socialism (Davies and Harris, 161). Stalin constantly called for the old ways of organization and thinking to be smashed (Davies and Harris, 198).
Some scholars have argued that Stalin built a cult of personality around himself in order to unify the USSR during the times of crisis and not because he was power-mad (Davies and Harris, 250). Party ideologists after 1929 used a cult around Stalin to bolster support for the Party (Davies and Harris, 251).
There was no official biography of Stalin up through the early 1930’s (Davies and Harris, 253).
“I am against the idea of a biography about me. Maksim Gorky had a plan like yours, and he asked me about it, but I have backed away from the issue. I don’t think the time has come for a Stalin biography.” - Stalin, letter to Iaroslavskii. August 1935 (Davies and Harris, 258)
In 1938, Stalin wrote a letter to Detizdat, the Children’s Publishing House, criticizing them over their biography of him called Stories of Stalin's Childhood. Stalin criticized the biographies needless praises of him and said that it was harmful to children’s minds. He also criticized the idea of a “great hero” who leads the masses (261). He repeated the same criticisms for the 1946 IMEL biography of him (Davies and Harris, 266).
“I am against them as such undertakings will lead to a strengthening of the 'cult of personalities.’” - Stalin, letter to the Society of Old Bolsheviks regarding writings about his career, 1933. (Davies and Harris, 261)
Works Cited:
Davies, Sarah, and James Harris. Stalin: A New History. Cambridge University Press, 2005. Print.
Furr, Grover. "Grover Furr: "Stalin and the Struggle for Democratic Reform, Part One." Cultural Logic. Cultural Logic, 2005. Web. 13 Jun 2010. http://clogic.eserver.org/2005/furr.html.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Obama Can Now Detain People Indefinitely
The Obama administration recently won the legal right to indefinitely imprison people without charges. In the eyes of many people, Obama has now successfully rewritten the US Constitution.
On June 9, a three judge panel in the Washington DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the government, stating that detainees taken from outside of Afghanistan and relocated to Bagram (in Afghanistan) have no right to contest their imprisonment in US Federal Court due to the fact that Afghanistan is a war zone (unlike Guantanamo). Long story short, non-citizens captured by the US have no right to appeal if they are held in a war zone, even if they were arrested and transported into a war-zone.
The Obama White House lawyers argued that prisoners in Afghanistan have no right to habeas corpus, regardless of where they were captured, simply because the US authorities sent them to Afghanistan.
The Bush administration also argued the same thing regarding Bagram. Obama, just like Bush, also wants to detain people in order to prevent hypothetical future "crimes." Oddly enough, Barack Obama has criticized similar Bush policies regarding detention as "neither effective nor sustainable." In order to make his own policy of prolonged detention "effective and sustainable," Obama aims to set up a new "legal regime" outside of the current court and military commission system.
Right-wing judge John Bates, who was appointed by Bush, surprisingly disagreed with the ruling because even he knows that the President should not have the right to detain people anywhere.
There has been speculation that Obama could possibly have the US-Mexico border labeled as a war zone in order to detain immigrants indefinitely.
We communists, socialists, and anarchists knew from the very beginning that Barack Obama would bring only half-hearted, and arguably worthless, "change." Despite those pseudo-Marxists who wanted to give the Democrats another chance, the majority of communist groups knew he was just another criminal. If you want real change, join us!
On June 9, a three judge panel in the Washington DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the government, stating that detainees taken from outside of Afghanistan and relocated to Bagram (in Afghanistan) have no right to contest their imprisonment in US Federal Court due to the fact that Afghanistan is a war zone (unlike Guantanamo). Long story short, non-citizens captured by the US have no right to appeal if they are held in a war zone, even if they were arrested and transported into a war-zone.
The Obama White House lawyers argued that prisoners in Afghanistan have no right to habeas corpus, regardless of where they were captured, simply because the US authorities sent them to Afghanistan.
The Bush administration also argued the same thing regarding Bagram. Obama, just like Bush, also wants to detain people in order to prevent hypothetical future "crimes." Oddly enough, Barack Obama has criticized similar Bush policies regarding detention as "neither effective nor sustainable." In order to make his own policy of prolonged detention "effective and sustainable," Obama aims to set up a new "legal regime" outside of the current court and military commission system.
Right-wing judge John Bates, who was appointed by Bush, surprisingly disagreed with the ruling because even he knows that the President should not have the right to detain people anywhere.
There has been speculation that Obama could possibly have the US-Mexico border labeled as a war zone in order to detain immigrants indefinitely.
We communists, socialists, and anarchists knew from the very beginning that Barack Obama would bring only half-hearted, and arguably worthless, "change." Despite those pseudo-Marxists who wanted to give the Democrats another chance, the majority of communist groups knew he was just another criminal. If you want real change, join us!
Distinguished Swiss Doctor Praises Cuban Health System
Swiss doctor Martin Herrmann praised the Cuban health system earlier this week for its willingness to give its people access to non-invasive surgery, which is very expensive in developed countries.
The First International Course on Laparoscopic Surgery on Stomach Wall Hernias, conducted in Ciego de Avila, Cuba, ended on June 9. Herrmann gave lectures to students and other doctors on advanced techniques for this kind of surgery during the course. While he was there, he said that the operation costs around 20,000 dollars in other countries, but in Cuba it is free.
In the first world, development and performance of this operation is limited only to special buildings with the required staff. In Cuba, however, they look for alternatives in order to reach more patients.
Felipe Jorge Aragon, a Second Degree Specialist of General Surgery, announced that two people would receive an operation for abdominal hernias after the event. These two people will be the first ones to ever receive such an operation in that part of Cuba.
The First International Course on Laparoscopic Surgery on Stomach Wall Hernias, conducted in Ciego de Avila, Cuba, ended on June 9. Herrmann gave lectures to students and other doctors on advanced techniques for this kind of surgery during the course. While he was there, he said that the operation costs around 20,000 dollars in other countries, but in Cuba it is free.
In the first world, development and performance of this operation is limited only to special buildings with the required staff. In Cuba, however, they look for alternatives in order to reach more patients.
Felipe Jorge Aragon, a Second Degree Specialist of General Surgery, announced that two people would receive an operation for abdominal hernias after the event. These two people will be the first ones to ever receive such an operation in that part of Cuba.
The Cost of US War and World Peace
The US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have cost American taxpayers more than one trillion dollars as of June according to the National Priorities Project. The group went on to say that these wars are the most expensive American military operations since the end of World War Two.
The National Priorities Project highlighted the size of war spending by saying that the money could have been used to give grants to all 19 million American college students for the next nine years.
The Australia-based Institute for Economics and Peace has stated that since 2007 the world has become a more violent place. It uses statistics regarding murders, the number of prisoners, and military spending in order to rank a country based on how peaceful it is. According to their study, China and Cuba are more peaceful than the United States.
According to the IEP documents, world peace would save the global economy about seven trillion dollars each year. Imagine the number of people across the world that could be given an education with that money.
The National Priorities Project highlighted the size of war spending by saying that the money could have been used to give grants to all 19 million American college students for the next nine years.
The Australia-based Institute for Economics and Peace has stated that since 2007 the world has become a more violent place. It uses statistics regarding murders, the number of prisoners, and military spending in order to rank a country based on how peaceful it is. According to their study, China and Cuba are more peaceful than the United States.
According to the IEP documents, world peace would save the global economy about seven trillion dollars each year. Imagine the number of people across the world that could be given an education with that money.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Russia May Confront America in Afghanistan
Reports coming from the Kremlin earlier this week have stated that Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has ordered the military to prepare to confront the American military in Afghanistan over the thriving drug trade in Afghanistan. Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov has said that the Afghan drug trade is the "greatest threat to international peace and security."
The EU Times is reporting that the top intelligence agencies of the West (mainly the CIA) have gained billions of dollars from heroin production in Afghanistan and other parts of the region. Before the invasion of 2001, however, the Taliban had virtually eliminated all of the heroin.
Since the installation of Hamid Karzai as Afghan President the country has seen heroin production increase to levels unheard of in modern times. As a result, tens of thousands of Russian citizens have died due to the fact that the drug is constantly being smuggled into Russia.
Viktor Ivanov, the head of Russia’s Federal Drug Control Service, said that the flow of opiates from the US occupied parts of the Middle East into Russia was "the second edition of opium wars." He said this in May to the Russian parliament.
“I can name you a lot of politicians in Russia who said that the Americans specially arranged the situation in Afghanistan so that we would receive a lot of drugs, and this is the real aim of their occupation,” said Andrei Klimov, the deputy head of the Foreign Affairs Committee in Russia’s lower house of parliament.
German President Horst Koehler said last month that the war in Afghanistan was securing free trade routes for the West and had nothing to do with terrorism. He was forced to resign for saying this.
Head of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, Antonio Maria Costa, said that he has evidence showing that the proceeds from organized crime were "the only liquid investment capital" to certain banks that were at risk of collapsing last year. He stated that most of the $352 billion in drug profits was absorbed into the economic system as a result.
The EU Times is reporting that the top intelligence agencies of the West (mainly the CIA) have gained billions of dollars from heroin production in Afghanistan and other parts of the region. Before the invasion of 2001, however, the Taliban had virtually eliminated all of the heroin.
Since the installation of Hamid Karzai as Afghan President the country has seen heroin production increase to levels unheard of in modern times. As a result, tens of thousands of Russian citizens have died due to the fact that the drug is constantly being smuggled into Russia.
Viktor Ivanov, the head of Russia’s Federal Drug Control Service, said that the flow of opiates from the US occupied parts of the Middle East into Russia was "the second edition of opium wars." He said this in May to the Russian parliament.
“I can name you a lot of politicians in Russia who said that the Americans specially arranged the situation in Afghanistan so that we would receive a lot of drugs, and this is the real aim of their occupation,” said Andrei Klimov, the deputy head of the Foreign Affairs Committee in Russia’s lower house of parliament.
German President Horst Koehler said last month that the war in Afghanistan was securing free trade routes for the West and had nothing to do with terrorism. He was forced to resign for saying this.
Head of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, Antonio Maria Costa, said that he has evidence showing that the proceeds from organized crime were "the only liquid investment capital" to certain banks that were at risk of collapsing last year. He stated that most of the $352 billion in drug profits was absorbed into the economic system as a result.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
US and Yemen Killing Civilians
Amnesty International reported on Monday that an American cruise missile carrying cluster bombs was responsible for the death of 55 people in Yemen, most of them civilians, back in December.
The human rights group released photos showing the remains of a US tomahawk missile and unexploded cluster bombs. The attack happened on December 17, 2009 in Al-Maajala in Yemen's southern Abyan province.
"Amnesty International is gravely concerned by evidence that cluster munitions appear to have been used in Yemen," said Mike Lewis, the AI arms control researcher.
"Cluster munitions have indiscriminate effects and unexploded bomblets threaten lives and livelihoods for years afterward," he said.
When questioned, a Pentagon official refused to comment.
The Yemeni defense ministry has taken credit for the attack without mentioning the US role in the attack. They claim between 24 and 30 militants had been killed. Local officials, however, are saying that 49 civilians, among them 23 children and 17 women, were killed indiscriminately.
A Yemeni Parliamentary report from February stated that only 14 Al-Qaeda militants were killed and 41 civilians died as well.
"The fact that so many of the victims were actually women and children indicates that the attack was in fact grossly irresponsible, particularly given the likely use of cluster munitions,"said Philip Luther, Deputy Director of Amnesty International's Middle East and North Africa Programme.
"A military strike of this kind against alleged militants without an attempt to detain them is at the very least unlawful," Luther said.
The Yemeni Parliamentary committee said that when it visited the site it found "all the homes and their contents were burnt and all that was left were traces of furniture."
The human rights group released photos showing the remains of a US tomahawk missile and unexploded cluster bombs. The attack happened on December 17, 2009 in Al-Maajala in Yemen's southern Abyan province.
"Amnesty International is gravely concerned by evidence that cluster munitions appear to have been used in Yemen," said Mike Lewis, the AI arms control researcher.
"Cluster munitions have indiscriminate effects and unexploded bomblets threaten lives and livelihoods for years afterward," he said.
When questioned, a Pentagon official refused to comment.
The Yemeni defense ministry has taken credit for the attack without mentioning the US role in the attack. They claim between 24 and 30 militants had been killed. Local officials, however, are saying that 49 civilians, among them 23 children and 17 women, were killed indiscriminately.
A Yemeni Parliamentary report from February stated that only 14 Al-Qaeda militants were killed and 41 civilians died as well.
"The fact that so many of the victims were actually women and children indicates that the attack was in fact grossly irresponsible, particularly given the likely use of cluster munitions,"said Philip Luther, Deputy Director of Amnesty International's Middle East and North Africa Programme.
"A military strike of this kind against alleged militants without an attempt to detain them is at the very least unlawful," Luther said.
The Yemeni Parliamentary committee said that when it visited the site it found "all the homes and their contents were burnt and all that was left were traces of furniture."
Friday, June 4, 2010
Recording Police is Now Illegal
Due to recent internet videos of police brutality, at least three states have outlawed recording on-duty police officers. It doesn't matter if the encounter with police involves you, is necessary for your defense, or is in a public area, video recording on-duty police officers is now illegal.
The so-called legal basis for this rests on eavesdropping and wiretapping laws. In some states, all parties must consent to being recorded unless a TV news crew is doing the recording. Police never consent, and so the non-press camera operators can be arrested. Illinois, Massachusetts and Maryland are among the 12 states with all-party consent laws.
Massachusetts Chief Justice Margaret Marshall said, "Citizens have a particularly important role to play when the official conduct at issue is that of the police. Their role cannot be performed if citizens must fear criminal reprisals."
"The police are basing this claim on a ridiculous reading of the two-party consent surveillance law - requiring all parties to consent to being taped. I have written in the area of surveillance law and can say that this is utter nonsense," said Jonathan Turley, a professor and Legal scholar.
Most courts seem to support the ban on recording police, however. An Illinois court recently refused to drop the eavesdropping charges against Christopher Drew, who recorded himself being arrested for selling art on the Chicago streets without a permit. Eavesdropping is a Class I felony and carries from 4 to 15 years in prison.
In 2001, Michael Hyde of Massachusetts was also arrested for recording his encounter with police, and the court supported his imprisonment for doing so in a 4 to 2 decision.
A recent arrest in Maryland during the month of March also provides another example. John Graber III was pulled over for speeding by a plainclothes policeman in an unmarked car. The officer approached Graber while screaming and waving his gun. Graber wasn't arrested right away, but he had recorded his encounter with the cop and uploaded it to YouTube. The police, feeling embarrassed, secured a warrant for Graber's arrest and he is now being accused of wiretapping.
"It's more [about] ‘contempt of cop' than the violation of the wiretapping law," said Baltimore criminal defense attorney Steven D. Silverman. He also stated that he had never heard of the police using the wiretapping law in this manner before Graber's arrest.
Carlos Miller of Photography is Not a Crime, apparently an expert on the matter, had this to say: "For the second time in less than a month, a police officer was convicted from evidence obtained from a videotape. The first officer to be convicted was New York City Police Officer Patrick Pogan, who would never have stood trial had it not been for a video posted on Youtube showing him body slamming a bicyclist before charging him with assault on an officer. The second officer to be convicted was Ottawa Hills (Ohio) Police Officer Thomas White, who shot a motorcyclist in the back after a traffic stop, permanently paralyzing the 24-year-old man."
However, Spring City and East Vincent Township of Pennsylvania have written into law that it is legal to record on-duty police in public places. This came as part of a settlement with the ACLU.
The so-called legal basis for this rests on eavesdropping and wiretapping laws. In some states, all parties must consent to being recorded unless a TV news crew is doing the recording. Police never consent, and so the non-press camera operators can be arrested. Illinois, Massachusetts and Maryland are among the 12 states with all-party consent laws.
Massachusetts Chief Justice Margaret Marshall said, "Citizens have a particularly important role to play when the official conduct at issue is that of the police. Their role cannot be performed if citizens must fear criminal reprisals."
"The police are basing this claim on a ridiculous reading of the two-party consent surveillance law - requiring all parties to consent to being taped. I have written in the area of surveillance law and can say that this is utter nonsense," said Jonathan Turley, a professor and Legal scholar.
Most courts seem to support the ban on recording police, however. An Illinois court recently refused to drop the eavesdropping charges against Christopher Drew, who recorded himself being arrested for selling art on the Chicago streets without a permit. Eavesdropping is a Class I felony and carries from 4 to 15 years in prison.
In 2001, Michael Hyde of Massachusetts was also arrested for recording his encounter with police, and the court supported his imprisonment for doing so in a 4 to 2 decision.
A recent arrest in Maryland during the month of March also provides another example. John Graber III was pulled over for speeding by a plainclothes policeman in an unmarked car. The officer approached Graber while screaming and waving his gun. Graber wasn't arrested right away, but he had recorded his encounter with the cop and uploaded it to YouTube. The police, feeling embarrassed, secured a warrant for Graber's arrest and he is now being accused of wiretapping.
"It's more [about] ‘contempt of cop' than the violation of the wiretapping law," said Baltimore criminal defense attorney Steven D. Silverman. He also stated that he had never heard of the police using the wiretapping law in this manner before Graber's arrest.
Carlos Miller of Photography is Not a Crime, apparently an expert on the matter, had this to say: "For the second time in less than a month, a police officer was convicted from evidence obtained from a videotape. The first officer to be convicted was New York City Police Officer Patrick Pogan, who would never have stood trial had it not been for a video posted on Youtube showing him body slamming a bicyclist before charging him with assault on an officer. The second officer to be convicted was Ottawa Hills (Ohio) Police Officer Thomas White, who shot a motorcyclist in the back after a traffic stop, permanently paralyzing the 24-year-old man."
However, Spring City and East Vincent Township of Pennsylvania have written into law that it is legal to record on-duty police in public places. This came as part of a settlement with the ACLU.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Israeli MP on the Flotilla Raid
Haneen Zuabi, an Israeli Parliament member, recently gave an interview with Russia Today news. In the interview she recounted what she witnessed while on the Gaza-bound flotilla that was boarded by the Israeli military.
Zuabi stated that she was on the third floor of the ship with unarmed people such as photojournalists, organizers, and a nurse. She went on to say that the Israeli ships began to shoot at the flotilla before soldiers even landed on the ship.
She continued by stating that the Israeli commandos confiscated all of the cameras. Now the Israeli military has all of the documentation of what went on during the raid of the flotilla, but they have only released information convenient to the official Zionist line. Zuabi questioned why the military would do this if they were supposedly in the right, just defending themselves.
Zuabi stated that she was on the third floor of the ship with unarmed people such as photojournalists, organizers, and a nurse. She went on to say that the Israeli ships began to shoot at the flotilla before soldiers even landed on the ship.
She continued by stating that the Israeli commandos confiscated all of the cameras. Now the Israeli military has all of the documentation of what went on during the raid of the flotilla, but they have only released information convenient to the official Zionist line. Zuabi questioned why the military would do this if they were supposedly in the right, just defending themselves.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Richmonders Protest Israeli Attack
A protest was held outside of Richmond, Virginia's City Hall today to speak out against the Israeli raid on the Freedom Flotilla. According to NBC 12, at least 200 people showed up.
The protest started at 5PM. People brought signs condemning the actions of the Israeli state and demanding an end to American aid to Israel. Others brought Palestinian flags, anarchist flags, and PFLP flags. The protesters chanted "Free free Palestine," "End US aid," and The Partisan got its "War of liberation" chant picked up by the anarchists. That certainly made our day!
After the protest a few activists of both Arab and Jewish descent spoke about the crimes of the Israeli regime and demanded that politicians from Richmond and the national government take action against Israeli aggression.
The protest started at 5PM. People brought signs condemning the actions of the Israeli state and demanding an end to American aid to Israel. Others brought Palestinian flags, anarchist flags, and PFLP flags. The protesters chanted "Free free Palestine," "End US aid," and The Partisan got its "War of liberation" chant picked up by the anarchists. That certainly made our day!
After the protest a few activists of both Arab and Jewish descent spoke about the crimes of the Israeli regime and demanded that politicians from Richmond and the national government take action against Israeli aggression.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
