Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Having Fun! / Re: I got a new cat: Tatiana!
« Last post by Galactic_Misfit on Today at 12:21:04 AM »
Your dogs look like they're having fun.

Yeah, Phoenix turned 10 in Jan, but she is still really playful and full of energy. I adopted Shadow (German Shepherd and Husky mix) a month ago, so she’s a little hesitant to play with the boys, but is getting along really well with OJ (my cat) and Phoenix.
2
The Final Chapter / Re: One Hundred Years On
« Last post by JamesAPrattIII on Yesterday at 06:35:02 PM »
An old Soviet joke: Stalin and Hitler are in Hell. Hitler is up to his neck in blood while Stalin is up to his waist in blood. Hitler asks" why are you only up to your waist in blood not up to your neck like me even though you killed more people?"
Stalin: "I am standing on Lenin's shoulders."

Having read both the above mentioned books by Payne and Pipes and others. I can safely say that if Lenin had lived longer his body count would have been much higher.
see "The Black Book of Communism"
3
Having Fun! / Re: I got a new cat: Tatiana!
« Last post by TimM on Yesterday at 05:16:36 PM »
Your dogs look like they're having fun.
4
Yeah, imagine if this was happening now.

Anna would probably have her own Facebook page, where all her loyal ciphers could post their support of her rubbish claim to be Anastasia.
5
The Final Chapter / Re: One Hundred Years On
« Last post by TimM on Yesterday at 02:51:18 PM »
Lenin was much as monster as Stalin was. 

The only thing that stopped him from racking up a high body count is that he died only a few years into his rule.
6
The Final Chapter / Re: One Hundred Years On
« Last post by Nictionary on July 19, 2018, 11:59:57 PM »
Here is Lenin again:"We'll ask the man, where do you stand on the question of the revolution?  Are you for it or against it?  If he's against it, we'll stand him up against a wall."  Shortly after he came to power he asked, "Is it impossible to find among us a Fouquier-Tinville to tame our wild counterrevolutionaries?"  The number of times Lenin, as head of the government, began to use such expressions as "shoot them," "firing squad," "against the wall," suggests a growing temperamental appetite for extreme methods.  He writes in The State and Revolution:"We set ourselves the ultimate aim of abolishing the state, i.e., all organized and systematic violence, all use of violence against people in general."
7
The Final Chapter / Re: One Hundred Years On
« Last post by Nictionary on July 19, 2018, 11:59:22 PM »
And unfortunately, the Romanovs were just a fraction of the tens of thousands, if not millions, butchered by the Bolshevik government.  Here is a passage from Robert Payne'sThe Life and Death of Lenin:

"The ordinary human sins had no appeal for Lenin; his sin was pride, which devours all those who suffer from it. His pride led him to believe that he alone was in possession of an infallible dogma which had been handed down from Marx; he saw himself as the vehicle of a new social order, a new dispensation of time, a new era of destruction. Those who opposed him must be struck down immediately, mercilessly, at whatever the cost, absolutely and irrevocably. So he wrote in a letter to Grigory Sokolnikov in May 1919. It was not enough that they should be killed once; they must be killed over and over again, as the interminable adverbs swoop down on their prey.

Sitting quietly in his warm study, with his books around him and a litter of state documents on his desk, he would give way to sudden rages. He had been slighted; something had gone wrong; his orders were not being carried out promptly; immediately there is the flash of lightning followed by the rumbling of thunder. A workman called Bulatov complained to him about the actions of the Soviet government in Novgorod. Some days later Lenin learned that Bulatov had been arrested. Lenin regarded the arrest as an intolerable abuse of power. It was clear to him that Bulatov was in prison because he had dared to approach the President of the Soviet of People’s Commissars. Without a further thought, he wrote off a telegram to the Executive Committee of the Novgorod guberniya:

Apparently Bulatov has been arrested for complaining to me. I warn you that I shall have the chairmen of the guberniya executive committees, the Cheka and members of the executive committee arrested for this and see that they are shot. Why did you not answer my question immediately?

In his rage Lenin was sentencing the government of Novgorod guberniya to be shot for having arrested one man. In her memoirs Krupskaya refers to this telegram. “It was,” she wrote, “a very characteristic one.”

Why did he write this telegram? Did he seriously believe that the executive committee, to whom it was addressed, would turn themselves in and arrange to be shot by the Cheka, which would then turn the weapons on itself? It is much more likely that he sent the telegram merely to inspire them with terror, to frighten them out of their wits. But there is very little difference between frightening men out of their wits and killing them, especially when you have the power to kill them.

The letters written in that quiet room sometimes reek with terror — with terror wielded as a weapon and with terror felt on the nerves and sinews. There were times when he was mortally frightened, when all his dreams seemed about to collapse, when he was alone in his cell, waiting, like the doctor in Chekhov’s story “Ward No. 6”, for the blow to fall, knowing that only by a desperate expedient would he be able to survive it. Engels had once described terror as “the domination of men who are themselves terrorized”. Lenin may never have known what Engels thought of terror, but his eagerness to employ the weapon hints that he was himself its victim rather than its master. It was always terror “at saturation point”. It was never a question of shooting one man in ten, as a warning to the remaining nine. He must shoot five, or six, or seven, and go on until there are only the shreds of a man left. He practiced terror like the Romans. When the Emperor Gallienus cried out, “Tear, kill, exterminate! — Lacera, occide, concide!” he was saying no more than Lenin, who spoke of destroying “immediately, mercilessly, at whatever the cost, absolutely and irrevocably”.

Lenin to Zinoviev: June 1918

Comrade Zinoviev, only today did we in the Central Committee learn that the Petrograd workers want to react to the assassination of Volodarsky by mass terror and that you — I am not talking about you personally, but about the Petrograd members of the CC and CP — have restrained them. I most emphatically protest … This is in-admissible … It is necessary to cultivate the mass nature of the terror against counterrevolutionaries and push it forward with even greater energy, especially in Petrograd, whose example is decisive. Greetings! LENIN.

Lenin to Yevgeniya Bosh: August 1918

Your telegram received. It is necessary to organize an intensive guard of picked reliable men to conduct a merciless mass terror against kulaks, priests and White Guards; suspects to be held in a concentration camp outside the city. Punitive expedition to set out at once. Telegraph re mission accomplished. Sovnarkom LENIN.

Lenin to the Soviet of Nizhni Novgorod: August 1918

An open uprising of White Guards is clearly in preparation in Nizhni Novgorod. You must mobilize all forces, establish a triumvirate of dictators, introduce immediately mass terror, shoot and deport hundreds of prostitutes who ply soldiers and officers with vodka. Do not hesitate for a moment. You must act promptly: mass searches for hidden arms; mass deportations of Mensheviks and security risks. Sovnarkom LENIN.

Such messages were continually being sent from the quiet room in the Kremlin. It had become a habit to write the word shoot, so that in the end it became almost meaningless; it was like brushing off flies. He had such a horror of the processes of death that he refused to have flowers in the room, knowing that they decayed, but death in the abstract and at some remote telegraphic distance pleased him. He would write, “Shoot and deport,” without pausing to wonder whether anyone could be deported after being shot. What is chiefly remarkable about these murderous telegrams is their vulgarity.

In all wars and revolutions excesses are committed; and the most hideous barbarities are excused on the grounds of expediency. Lenin, however, made no excuses. For him mass terror was the most useful and therefore the most desirable of weapons. Single acts of terror had little appeal for him: it was only when the terror was being waged on a massive scale that he rejoiced, the pulse of the sentences demonstrating his excitement, his urgency, and his barbarity. Marx praised the Paris Commune for being innocent of the violence common in revolutions. Lenin gloried in violence: it was the drug which stimulated him to further action, the whip which goaded him, the solace of his studious temperament.

At various times in the past Lenin had claimed that terror was “not the right road,” but in fact he always accepted terror gratefully. “In principle we have never renounced, and cannot renounce terrorism,” he wrote in Iskra in 1901; and he added, “It is an act of war, indispensable at a certain point in the struggle.” But these “certain points” were being continually prolonged until it seemed that Lenin was encouraging the permanent reign of terror with no end in sight. A new and entirely un-Marxist theory of the state was emerging. Terror was to become the chief instrument of state power; and Lenin discovered to his surprise that terror was so formidable an instrument that no others were necessary."

8
The Final Chapter / Re: One Hundred Years On
« Last post by Nictionary on July 19, 2018, 11:57:08 PM »
Quote
Quote
The Bolsheviks were violent, bloodthirsty criminals, and murdering innocent young women, and sickly boy, who probably would not have lived to see his 25th birthday, hammers that home.
You can certainly apply that description to the Urals Bolshevik committee, but it is too sweeping a statement to apply to the Russian Bolshevik Government.

The Moscow Bolshevik government had wanted to put Nicholas II on trial for his crimes against the Russian people, but that turned out to be impossible because of the military situation, as the White Russian armies approached Yekaterinburg. So they sanctioned the Tsar's  execution. Just that. They announced his death in a press release as soon as they received confirmation from the Urals Soviet.

But they discovered that the Urals lot had gone ahead and massacred the whole family, so the coverup began. No more official information was released beyond the message that the rest of the family was in a safe place. Moscow was forced to approve the assassinations retrospectively, as, after all, what else could they do? The Urals Bolsheviks were a loose cannon and Russia has paid a price for that ever since.

I agree with Tim and Page.  The execution of the Romanov Family was the signature act of a regime that would go on to brutalize its citizens for the next 70 years.  And while there are still some who argue that Lenin didn't necessarily sanction the execution of the whole family, I will say one thing: the late Richard Pipes pointed out in his chapter on the murders in The Russian Revolution that Goloschyokin had been able to get in and out of Yekaterinburg 5 days earlier, so they could have still evacuated the IF to Moscow if they had really wanted to.  One has only to look at a whole series of factors that make it clear Lenin had good reason to want the whole family dead.  Sergey Nechayev was one of Lenin's greatest influences.  Here is Vladimir Bonch-Bruyevich, Lenin's lifelong friend and secretary of Sovnarkom, remembering Lenin as he talked shortly after he came to power:

"Vladimir Ilyich often mentioned the cunning trick the reactionaries play with Nechayev through the light-fingered hands of Dostoyevsky. He thought The Possessed a work of genius, but sickening, for as a consequence people in revolutionary circles have started to treat Nechayev negatively, completely forgetting that this titanic revolutionary possessed such strength of will and enthusiasm that even when he was in the Peter and Paul Fortress, submitting to terrible conditions, even then he was able to influence the soldiers around him in such a Way that they came wholly under his influence.

People completely forget that Nechayev possessed a talent for organization, an ability to establish the special technique of conspiratorial work everywhere, and an ability to give thoughts such startling formulations that they were forever printed on the memory. It is enough to recall his words in one of his pamphlets, where he replies to the question “Which member of the reigning house must be destroyed?” He gives the neat answer: “The whole responsory.” And this is so simply and clearly formulated that it could be understood by everyone living in Russia at a time when the Orthodox Church was a powerful force and the majority of the people, in one way or another, went to church, and everyone knew that “the responsory” meant all the members of the Romanov dynasty. “Which of them are to be destroyed?” the most simple reader would ask himself, and there at a glance is the answer: “The whole Romanov dynasty.” It is simple to the point of genius. All of Nechayev should be published. It is necessary to learn and seek out everything he wrote, and where he wrote, and we must decipher all his pseudonyms, and collect and print everything he wrote.

And Vladimir Ilyich said these words many times."


Lenin's entire career as a revolutionary was launched after his brother was hanged for plotting to kill Alexander III.  He wanted revenge for his brother.  Lenin viewed class the way Hitler viewed race.  He wrote in The Slogans and Organisation of Social-Democratic Work Inside and Outside the Duma in 1911: "The liberal innocents prattle about the example of a constitutional monarchy like that of England. But if in a civilized country like England, a country which has never known anything like the Mongolian yoke or the tyranny of a bureaucracy, or a military clique riding roughshod over it, if it was necessary in that country to chop off the head of one crowned robber in order to impress upon the kings that they must be 'constitutional' monarchs, in a country like Russia we should have to chop off the heads of at least a hundred Romanovs in order to wean their successors from the habit of organizing Black-Hundred murders and anti-Jewish pogroms."
9
The Final Chapter / Re: One Hundred Years On
« Last post by PAGE on July 19, 2018, 01:51:10 AM »
I wanted to add for your second post, that in a French article on the imperial family there were the results of a poll.

The question was (to the Russians, of course): "What is for you the most important Russian personality of the twentieth century?"

Nicholas II was far ahead of Stalin and Lenin.
10
The Final Chapter / Re: One Hundred Years On
« Last post by PAGE on July 19, 2018, 01:43:14 AM »
Reply to DNAgenie

The imperial family is the symbol of a much greater horror.

Even Vladimir Bourtsev, even Maxim Gorky, found the Bolsheviks disgusting.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10