3 ms·

>I don't know whether you're accepting this at face value or just pointing out it was the justification offered for treating people with certain political leani

>I don't know whether you're accepting this at face value or just pointing out it was the justification offered for treating people with certain political leanings as people without rights. A little of both, I was going to point out the existence of opposition communists, but they seemed too minor to merit mention. Unless of course you want to show me the non-trotskyists who weren't in the pay of the U.S.S.R? I admit my knowledge of the various communist parties is pretty flimsy.[0] [0]: This is why I qualify most of my statements with things like "pretty much" or "most of" or "almost every", guess I slipped up here. EDIT: "pay" is probably the wrong word there, maybe "under the ideological command of" would be a better description.

scarmig 13y ago
I mean, pick one at random. There were a good number of Communist Parties who accepted the Moscow line hook line and sinker--the CPUSA being the foremost example of that, at times worse than non-Soviet Warsaw Pact CPs. But, to name a couple... Spain, Italy, and the rest of the Eurocommunists (which probably should include Australia); Japan and it's very peace and anti-nuclear oriented party; China and its affiliated Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist-Mao Zedong thought-style parties, which killed more USSR troops in armed conflict than the USA ever did; the Khmer Rouge, which was effectively a murderous pariah state only supported by the PRC (ultimately being replaced by a leftist Soviet and Vietnamese-affiliated government); India with its half a dozen of Communist sects that I can never keep straight in elected office; Yugoslavia with its market socialism and Non-Aligned foreign policy. There are even oddities like Albania, which took an ultra-pro-Soviet position that outpaced the Soviet Union's CP (it argued that it was turning too far away from Stalin). And ideologically the Cuban Communist Party had few moorings, mostly providing a gloss for nationalism until it actually achieved power. Even in the USA, although CPUSA was effectively defined as the group of people with slavish devotion to the USSR, it constantly shed members or purged them, who formed their own groups that were anti-Soviet in principle, though many still grudgingly thought it was the lesser of two evils when it came to foreign policy. And the UK Communist left was infamous for its variety of views leading to a "one person, one party" system. I'd say the biggest issue with your claim, though (aside from ignoring truculent Trotskyites, whose level of influence has persistently remained stuck at zero) is it ignores the China-USSR split. This isn't to the credit of those Communists who weren't on the USSR's side; they were the cheerleaders of the Khmer Rouge, Cultural Revolution, and Shining Path. Most USSR-affiliated ones, by contrast, steadfastly supported parliamentary tactics because they were more likely to rebound to Soviet benefit. It was a very real and relevant split.
- unimpressive 13y ago
  >I'd say the biggest issue with your claim, though (aside from ignoring truculent Trotskyites, whose level of influence has persistently remained stuck at zero) is it ignores the China-USSR split. You're right, I was thinking of western Communist parties, but you already covered those. Have an upvote.
coldtea 13y ago
>Unless of course you want to show me the non-trotskyists who weren't in the pay of the U.S.S.R? Are you kidding me? Maoist parties (prevalent in Western Europe, especially with younger people) were against the USSR. The New Left was anti-USSR. In the UK too, the prevalent notion was anti-USSR. As were tons of other communist party genres (like those based on the "Frankfurt School" of thinking, or those influenced by "Worker's councils" etc etc).
dragonwriter 13y ago
> Unless of course you want to show me the non-trotskyists who weren't in the pay of the U.S.S.R? > EDIT: "pay" is probably the wrong word there, maybe "under the ideological command of" would be a better description. The biggest obvious exception are Maoists, who were quite numerous Communists but very much not under the ideological command of the USSR.
betterunix 13y ago
"Unless of course you want to show me the non-trotskyists who weren't in the pay of the U.S.S.R?" Not sure about here in the USA, but after the 1965 the USSR was not supporting this communist party: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maki_%28historical_political_party%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maki_%28historical_political_p...

scarmig 13y ago

I mean, pick one at random. There were a good number of Communist Parties who accepted the Moscow line hook line and sinker--the CPUSA being the foremost example of that, at times worse than non-Soviet Warsaw Pact CPs. But, to name a couple... Spain, Italy, and the rest of the Eurocommunists (which probably should include Australia); Japan and it's very peace and anti-nuclear oriented party; China and its affiliated Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist-Mao Zedong thought-style parties, which killed more USSR troops in armed conflict than the USA ever did; the Khmer Rouge, which was effectively a murderous pariah state only supported by the PRC (ultimately being replaced by a leftist Soviet and Vietnamese-affiliated government); India with its half a dozen of Communist sects that I can never keep straight in elected office; Yugoslavia with its market socialism and Non-Aligned foreign policy. There are even oddities like Albania, which took an ultra-pro-Soviet position that outpaced the Soviet Union's CP (it argued that it was turning too far away from Stalin). And ideologically the Cuban Communist Party had few moorings, mostly providing a gloss for nationalism until it actually achieved power. Even in the USA, although CPUSA was effectively defined as the group of people with slavish devotion to the USSR, it constantly shed members or purged them, who formed their own groups that were anti-Soviet in principle, though many still grudgingly thought it was the lesser of two evils when it came to foreign policy. And the UK Communist left was infamous for its variety of views leading to a "one person, one party" system. I'd say the biggest issue with your claim, though (aside from ignoring truculent Trotskyites, whose level of influence has persistently remained stuck at zero) is it ignores the China-USSR split. This isn't to the credit of those Communists who weren't on the USSR's side; they were the cheerleaders of the Khmer Rouge, Cultural Revolution, and Shining Path. Most USSR-affiliated ones, by contrast, steadfastly supported parliamentary tactics because they were more likely to rebound to Soviet benefit. It was a very real and relevant split.

unimpressive 13y ago
>I'd say the biggest issue with your claim, though (aside from ignoring truculent Trotskyites, whose level of influence has persistently remained stuck at zero) is it ignores the China-USSR split. You're right, I was thinking of western Communist parties, but you already covered those. Have an upvote.

coldtea 13y ago

>Unless of course you want to show me the non-trotskyists who weren't in the pay of the U.S.S.R? Are you kidding me? Maoist parties (prevalent in Western Europe, especially with younger people) were against the USSR. The New Left was anti-USSR. In the UK too, the prevalent notion was anti-USSR. As were tons of other communist party genres (like those based on the "Frankfurt School" of thinking, or those influenced by "Worker's councils" etc etc).

dragonwriter 13y ago

> Unless of course you want to show me the non-trotskyists who weren't in the pay of the U.S.S.R? > EDIT: "pay" is probably the wrong word there, maybe "under the ideological command of" would be a better description. The biggest obvious exception are Maoists, who were quite numerous Communists but very much not under the ideological command of the USSR.

betterunix 13y ago

"Unless of course you want to show me the non-trotskyists who weren't in the pay of the U.S.S.R?" Not sure about here in the USA, but after the 1965 the USSR was not supporting this communist party: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maki_%28historical_political_party%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maki_%28historical_political_p...