8 ms·

> I think the most unusual characteristics of his story was that everyone tried to control him. First, the priests at the seminary by disciplining him Priests

> I think the most unusual characteristics of his story was that everyone tried to control him. First, the priests at the seminary by disciplining him Priests tried to control him ? He entered the school voluntarily. They did not lock him up. He left of his own accord and priests encouraged him to return. I don't think that was 'trying to control him' > He seemingly did everything for the sole purpose of global Marxist revolution Stalin's policy was 'Socialism in one country'. Apart from some modest actions like supporting the Spanish communists in the Spanish Civil War etc, he did not work that hard to advance the Marxist revolution abroad.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
chr1 8y ago
> Stalin's policy was 'Socialism in one country' He started a war with Finland, signed a treaty with Germany to split Poland, helped communists in China and North Korea and set communist regimes in all countries that soviet Army freed from Germany. Also some historians think that Stalin had plans to start a war with Germany, but Germany started the war several days sooner (For instance Mark Solonin talks about this).
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- simula67 8y ago
  Ah, I am wrong about this. Thanks for the correction
- rangibaby 8y ago
  USSR was willing to go to war with Germany as early as 1938 but France didn’t want to, and Poland refused to allow Soviet movement thru their country.
iguy 8y ago
> Stalin's policy was 'Socialism in one country' Although he did annex quite a few of neighbours into that one country.
robocat 8y ago
> Apart from some modest actions like [Stalin] supporting the Spanish communists in the Spanish Civil War etc, he did not work that hard to advance the Marxist revolution abroad. Yet I recall that in ‘Homage to Catalonia’, George Orwell says that Stalin undermined the Marxist cause... Although it could be my bad memory, or Orwell's lack of understanding... Not that I know anything about Marxism!!!
- dmos62 8y ago
  I'm a poor historian, but my understanding was that Lenin was the Marxism-oriented one, while Stalin, who murdered Lenin, by slowly poisoning him by putting heavy metals in his hat, highjacked the revolution and went on a mass-murderous power-grabbing rampage. Reading back the end of my last sentence, I'm obviously skewing this against Stalin, reducing his legacy to murder and egomania, but my main point is that he is seen by some (many?) to have highjacked the revolution.
  - iguy 8y ago
    And many see Lenin's October revolution as hijacking the February one for his own murderous egomania. But often this just this seems like a way of pretending there was some pure utopian vision which was unfortunately corrupted, every time. In reality total power is always total power. Independent enthusiasm was welcomed when it was minor and useful (like in western communist parties, or the recruiting of western volunteers for Spain) but crushed completely if it had any chance of getting in the way of naked power (like the pre-war Polish communists, almost all murdered).
    - microcolonel 8y ago
      > Independent enthusiasm was welcomed when it was minor and useful (like in western communist parties, or the recruiting of western volunteers for Spain) but crushed completely if it had any chance of getting in the way of naked power (like the pre-war Polish communists, almost all murdered). True believers are vulnerable because they are too stupid or too delusional to realize the weakness of their cookie cutter ideology. Invariably, true believers are converted to useful idiots if there is anyone who wants them (or sometimes upgraded to cynical tyrants).
dmos62 8y ago
Introduction to Wikipedia's article for "Socialism in one country" [0]: > Socialism in one country was a theory put forth by Joseph Stalin and Nikolai Bukharin in 1924 which was eventually adopted by the Soviet Union as state policy. The theory held that given the defeat of all the communist revolutions in Europe in 1917–1923 except Russia, the Soviet Union should begin to strengthen itself internally. > This turn toward national communism was a shift from the previously held position by classical Marxism that socialism must be established globally. However, proponents of the theory argue that it contradicts neither world revolution nor world communism. The theory was in opposition to Leon Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_One_Country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_One_Country
- onetimemanytime 8y ago
  This makes perfect sense: you do away with nationalism, since in their view socialism knows no boundaries and should trump all. The same they say for Islamic Caliphates, you're an Algerian or Malian, you're a Muslim, obey the word of god and that trumps all.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

chr1 8y ago

> Stalin's policy was 'Socialism in one country' He started a war with Finland, signed a treaty with Germany to split Poland, helped communists in China and North Korea and set communist regimes in all countries that soviet Army freed from Germany. Also some historians think that Stalin had plans to start a war with Germany, but Germany started the war several days sooner (For instance Mark Solonin talks about this).

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
simula67 8y ago
Ah, I am wrong about this. Thanks for the correction
rangibaby 8y ago
USSR was willing to go to war with Germany as early as 1938 but France didn’t want to, and Poland refused to allow Soviet movement thru their country.

iguy 8y ago

> Stalin's policy was 'Socialism in one country' Although he did annex quite a few of neighbours into that one country.

robocat 8y ago

> Apart from some modest actions like [Stalin] supporting the Spanish communists in the Spanish Civil War etc, he did not work that hard to advance the Marxist revolution abroad. Yet I recall that in ‘Homage to Catalonia’, George Orwell says that Stalin undermined the Marxist cause... Although it could be my bad memory, or Orwell's lack of understanding... Not that I know anything about Marxism!!!

dmos62 8y ago
I'm a poor historian, but my understanding was that Lenin was the Marxism-oriented one, while Stalin, who murdered Lenin, by slowly poisoning him by putting heavy metals in his hat, highjacked the revolution and went on a mass-murderous power-grabbing rampage. Reading back the end of my last sentence, I'm obviously skewing this against Stalin, reducing his legacy to murder and egomania, but my main point is that he is seen by some (many?) to have highjacked the revolution.
- iguy 8y ago
  And many see Lenin's October revolution as hijacking the February one for his own murderous egomania. But often this just this seems like a way of pretending there was some pure utopian vision which was unfortunately corrupted, every time. In reality total power is always total power. Independent enthusiasm was welcomed when it was minor and useful (like in western communist parties, or the recruiting of western volunteers for Spain) but crushed completely if it had any chance of getting in the way of naked power (like the pre-war Polish communists, almost all murdered).
  - microcolonel 8y ago
    > Independent enthusiasm was welcomed when it was minor and useful (like in western communist parties, or the recruiting of western volunteers for Spain) but crushed completely if it had any chance of getting in the way of naked power (like the pre-war Polish communists, almost all murdered). True believers are vulnerable because they are too stupid or too delusional to realize the weakness of their cookie cutter ideology. Invariably, true believers are converted to useful idiots if there is anyone who wants them (or sometimes upgraded to cynical tyrants).

dmos62 8y ago

Introduction to Wikipedia's article for "Socialism in one country" [0]: > Socialism in one country was a theory put forth by Joseph Stalin and Nikolai Bukharin in 1924 which was eventually adopted by the Soviet Union as state policy. The theory held that given the defeat of all the communist revolutions in Europe in 1917–1923 except Russia, the Soviet Union should begin to strengthen itself internally. > This turn toward national communism was a shift from the previously held position by classical Marxism that socialism must be established globally. However, proponents of the theory argue that it contradicts neither world revolution nor world communism. The theory was in opposition to Leon Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_One_Country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_in_One_Country

onetimemanytime 8y ago
This makes perfect sense: you do away with nationalism, since in their view socialism knows no boundaries and should trump all. The same they say for Islamic Caliphates, you're an Algerian or Malian, you're a Muslim, obey the word of god and that trumps all.