1. Death of Lenin

2. Communism vs Fascism

3. Kazakhstan: Popular unrest or Colour Revolution?

4. Russian Communists move to Recognize Donetsk and Luhansk

Death of Lenin

“Lenin lived – Lenin lives – and Lenin will live!” – Vladimir Mayakovsky

 

Vladimir Lenin will live forever! 

In everyone’s hearts and minds, at least, if they have not already visited his body at the Lenin Mausoleum in Moscow’s Red Square.

In honor of the anniversary of Lenin’s death, we at TheRevolutionReport want to discuss the finer points concerning Lenin and the Bolsheviks.

What made Lenin particularly noteworthy was not actually his speaking ability – Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin were considered more charismatic. But Lenin was able to organize many different people together. One example being when he convinced Trotsky, a man with whom he had many disagreements, to leave the Mensheviks and join the Bolsheviks. The latter had wealthier people from Russia including Lenin, Trotsky, Aleksandra Kollantai, Lenin’s wife Nadezhda Krupskaya, Anatoly Lunacharsky, Inessa Armand, etc. as well as poorer people from all over the Russian Empire, including the rural Georgian Stalin who at one time attended seminary school to become an Orthodox priest.

The Bolsheviks strove for a peaceful revolution and had one, until they were forced to militarily defend themselves following invasions by 15 capitalist countries. They supported the White Army that the Bolsheviks were already busy fighting.

The Bolsheviks supported multi-party elections, having already been elected to many government seats even during the Tsar’s days. The Bolsheviks were able to create a coalition after they led the defense against Kornilov’s failed coup and then the October Revolution. However, during the invasion, the Socialist Revolutionary Party assassinated government officials associated with the Soviet Russian government and attempted to overthrow them, even attempting to assassinate Lenin. This was all due to the fact that the Bolsheviks kept their promise to Russian citizens regarding withdrawal from WWI, which Kerensky’s Provisional Government previously broke its promise to do. The Mensheviks did similar things to help the Russian people’s enemies during the most desperate time in the former Russian Empire’s history. Thus the coalition had to be broken and there could only be one party defending the country when no one else would.

Amidst the turmoil, Lenin spearheaded the construction of the world’s first socialist state in what was once one of the poorest countries in Eurasia, making the former Russian Empire literate, industrializing the economy, and modernizing the country’s agriculture.

However, aside from communists and people who are just familiar with the history, Lenin is not that well-remembered. Stalin is more favorably looked back upon because there was more stability and no civil war when he was leading the country, the five-year plans modernizing and economically developing the country excited just about every Soviet citizen, the Soviet government under Stalin ended famines by drought and other natural disasters that were so common in 19th and early 20th century Russia.

People certainly have not forgotten Lenin’s accomplishments and contributions. The BBC even reported in September 2018 that Muslim clerics from multiple mosques across Tajikistan put their money together to fix a statue of Lenin, putting it back in the town center. As one commenter put it: “They did the right thing. If it had not been for Lenin, all Central Asians would be illiterate like in Afghanistan.”

 

Communism vs Fascism

The ever-so common conflation of communism with fascism is one of the biggest deceptions of our time. A great understanding of the difference between the two can be found in the writings of Communist Bulgaria’s first leader Georgy Dimitrov, or the old Communist Party USA leader William Z. Foster’s 1941 pamphlet aptly titled “Communism Versus Fascism.” The latter draws heavily from Dimitrov’s outline of what fascism is.

The definitions can be summed up quite easily. Communism is an economic and political system where natural resources and major centers of the economy including banks, factories, and industries are nationalized. There is a state-run central plan that the economy, private or public sector, is bound to follow, with production focused not on making profits but on social need and the public good. The ultimate goal is the elimination of scarcity. Eventually, a society with so much wealth and abundance, that the need for a state to make sure everyone is fairly treated, will emerge. Fascism is a reaction to capitalism in a state of crisis. Liberalism, purporting that the individual comes before the whole of society, collapses and becomes violently illiberal (believing in a greater good and not putting the wants of an individual before the rest of society) to ultimately preserve capitalism.

I call fascism a reaction, as opposed to a system, because there are not many specific similarities between the systems of different fascist countries. Perhaps there were similar privatizations (a term coined by the Nazis) of state industries, similar state assistance, and collaboration with wealthy private industrialists. However, while Nazi Germany and fascist Japan were more focused on going back to a more feudal social order in which everyone knew their place in society (the Nazis, by the way, loved the Dalai Lama’s Tibetan Buddhism [the book later adapted into a movie with Brad Pitt called 7 Years in Tibet was written by Nazi SS Heinrich Harrer]), Mussolini’s Italy, Franco’s Spain, and corporatist Portugal (NATO’s blatantly fascist founding member) had more futurist aesthetics and at least the message was more about progressing their societies forward, they were also less anti-semitic than the Nazis, Jewish people held government positions in fascist Italy, many Jews were big supporters of Mussolini.

Sometimes people say that the Soviets and Nazis were all socialist, pointing out that the Nazis comprised the National Socialist Party. While the Nazis were the “National Socialist Party”, that did not make them socialist. People should be judged by their actions, not their words. The Nazis signed the Agreement against the Communist International with Japan and Italy in 1937.

Due to the success and popularity of Soviet aesthetics, the Nazis did strategically borrow a lot from that – including a striking red flag, the marching goose step, and a unique hand gesture. However, once in power, instead of nationalizing more of Germany’s natural resources and major centers of its economy, the Nazis privatized large parts of Germany’s state sector to benefit private industrialists and bankers, coining the term “privatization”.

The Soviet Union dealt with the social ills of homelessness and unemployment by giving people homes and implementing universal employment to build up their economy and infrastructure, including homes. Nazi Germany dealt with those same problems by essentially handing one half of their population military uniforms and the other half prison jumpers.

The Soviet Union focused on building railroads and reliable forms of public transportation, including metros to make travel for ordinary people more convenient by connecting different regions. Nazi Germany focused on building a large network of highways for fast military mobilization to any part of the country or neighboring countries. They were also made for ordinary people to buy cars from private industrialists to make use of such a highway network to get around.

The conflation of communism and fascism is a useful trick by the ruling elites. It is public record that British bankers funded Hitler’s banker Hjalmar Schact to organize the Nazis to fight back the German Social Democratic Party, the communists, as they were the biggest communist party in the world before the October Revolution. Wall Street and the London Stock Exchange did not want to “lose” Germany as they already “lost” Russia, because if they “lost” Germany at that point, then there goes mainland Europe.

It is also public record that American capitalists, including the father of former US president and CIA director George H.W. Bush, US Senator Prescott Bush, Ford and General Motors, Standard Oil, IBM, and others profited off the Holocaust. This was partly covered in the Amazon Prime Video series Hunters.

It is important to have a good basic understanding of the definitions of communism and fascism. That will play a significant role in convincing the masses that their interests lie with the creation of a rationally planned economy and win-win cooperation around the world.

 

Kazakhstan: Popular unrest or Colour Revolution?

Kazakhstan, the Central Asian nation ravaged by massive rioting this month, rose to headlines even quicker than Joe Biden broke all his campaign promises.

The protests were sparked by a sharp rise in gas prices to almost $3/l and were the fault of the Kazakh government’s own actions. But within hours, peaceful protests turned into riots. Protestors took over and set fire to government buildings, looters ransacked malls, masked men with assault rifles in their hands could be seen on the streets.

As the rioting intensified, the country’s president announced that this was a “terrorist” attack on his country and these “terrorists” had foreign support. This prompted him to ask the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), the Central Asian equivalent of NATO (although not imperialist) for help. Thousands of CSTO troops from Belarus, Russia and Armenia were on the ground in Kazakhstan to guard critical infrastructure within hours. The CSTO made it clear that its presence in the country was strictly to guard infrastructure, so that the overwhelmed Kazakh security forces could focus on dealing with the rioters.

The Russian-led military alliance’s entrance sent Western media into a frenzy. Headlines lacking context, such as, “Russian troops enter Kazakhstan”, “Russian troops enter Kazakhstan as burnt cars and bodies seen everywhere,” dominated outlets like CNN.

How did such a country reach this point? A country that most of the world likely could not even point out on a map?

Every analyst had their own explanation, but most illustrated a colour revolution – an attempt to light a fire in Russia’s backyard and destabilise a country that will be playing a major role in China’s Belt and Road initiative (also announced in Kazakhstan at the Nazarbayev University).

Distracting Russia –

While the West and Russia are in loggerheads over Ukraine, some analysts point out that these protests were an attempt to distract Russia. The reasoning behind this is simple.

Russia won’t be able to give proper attention to two matters at the same and will be forced to give up something. However, such a scenario did not play out. CSTO troops were deployed and withdrawn quickly. No civilians were harmed at the hands of peacekeeping troops. It was a seamless process.

Moreover, heads of the military alliance’s member states were in regular communication to assure that everyone was on the same page.

Colour revolution –

Some have pointed to the fact that one main Kazakh opposition leader, labelled an extremist in his home country, was in Kiev during the political violence.

The President of Kazakhstan seems to think this was no coincidence. From the moment the protests turned violent, he labelled them as an attempt to overthrow his government – and who knows? he might have been correct. After the storm settled, a number of famous opposition leaders and oligarchs made explained that they will not stop until there is regime change in the country. They did, however, deny playing any role in the riots that had taken place.

This is also related to the Belt and Road initiative theory (BRI). China consumes more power than it produces and imports a major portion of its energy from Central Asia and Russia. Was the attempt to destabilize Kazakhstan indirectly aimed at China?

Kazakhstan also happens to be a major player in China’s BRI and will host major gas pipelines, along with other critical infrastructure. The establishment of a government friendly to the West would have had the potential to seriously negatively affect China’s energy imports.

For now, the situation seems to have deescalated, with terror alert levels being restored to normal across Kazakhstan. Will Kazakhstan and wider Central Asia play a role in the current geopolitical scene? Definitely yes. We will see some interesting developments take place in the region in the upcoming years.

Russian Communists move to Recognize Donetsk and Luhansk

With tensions between Moscow and Western imperialist countries rising over the conflict in Ukraine, Russia’s 2nd largest political party, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF), has drafted a proposal to the State Duma for official recognition of the former Eastern Ukrainian provinces of Lugansk (LNR) and Donetsk (DNR) as independent People’s Republics. Spearheaded by KPRF General Secretary Gennady Zyuganov, the proposal seeks to greenlight humanitarian aid and official recognition from Moscow in the hopes of preventing a “genocide” by the Ukrainian government.

The Center for Political Innovation’s Editor-in-Chief and expert in the geopolitics of the former Soviet Union, Donald Courter, has visited Donbass many times throughout the conflict, both to strengthen the ties of solidarity shared between America’s true progressives and the people’s republics struggling against fascism, as well as capture the contemporary state of the conflict in his upcoming documentary film. Courter shared the following insight:

“Gennady Zyuganov’s comparison of the Ukrainian authorities’ actions to ‘genocide of its people’ is something I can personally attest, based on what I witnessed on multiple documentary filming trips throughout the People’s Republics of Novorossiya. The people of Donbass, military and civilian alike, live under constant artillery shelling from Ukrainian conscripts and neo-fascist national guard units. Children sprint to and from school in fear of indiscriminate mortar fire, taking refuge in basements when the firing starts. Unarmed civilians living near the line of confrontation are shot at by Ukrainian snipers for entertainment. Because Kiev claims Donbass is occupied by the Russian Federation, everyone east of the frontline is considered either an occupier or a collaborator. But that could not be farther from the truth. Although the civil administrations of LNR and DNR, representing the wishes of many Donbass residents, are calling for integration with Russia as a means to end the conflict, Moscow has not recognized these regions as political entities separate from Ukraine. The passing of Zyuganov’s resolution would indeed be ‘reasonable and morally justified,’ as the draft decree states, considering how much Western-support is clearly allowing Ukraine to evade accountability for the horrific attacks it is carrying out on what most of the world considers to be its own civilian population.”

Should the State Duma decide to recognize Lugansk and Donetsk as independent people’s republics, we can be confident the United States and NATO will begin to whip up more and more hysteria, making this already very tense situation worse.

The Danger of a New World War Still Exists,
Revolution is the Main Trend in the World Today.

Liked it? Take a second to support donald on Patreon!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

0 Комментарий
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments