Hong Kong
- This topic has 637 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
An interesting essay by Christopher Wong
Imperialism in its modern form is a product of capitalism. Capitalism is a world system, not merely the product of the decisions of individual countries. Replacing one capitalist empire with another is futile. Any form of anti-imperialist politics that focuses on nations invariably arrives at pitting one of the faces of capitalism against another, which can only ever reproduce the very system it claims to fight. Only through a confrontation with the entire capitalist world system, no matter the color of its flag, can the nightmare of empire end.
Another interesting essay
The drive for international solidarity has been neutralized by the widespread disinformation campaign from so-called “anti-imperialists” to smear the entire protest movement as CIA-backed or fascist. This ignores how the movement has been resisting Beijing’s appropriation and perpetuation of colonial paradigms established under British rule. Standing in solidarity with Hong Kong is not about deciding which nation-state is worse; it’s about rejecting this false binary the ruling elites have crafted for us and resisting the spread and adoption of Western colonial frame-works by all states alike, especially China.
Another
We can’t let China apologists stop us from supporting Black Lives Matter
Letting pro-CCP nationalists on the Western left discredit other social movements—especially movements that are also fighting against police violence—is not the path forward.The Lausan website hosts many other interesting articles from a left wing perspective and worth a good long browse.
But no doubt it is a CIA front.
“The answer was no and ”Xu then refused to march.'”
So he disobeyed a direct order? As already stated, the original objective of the government was to clear the approaches to the Square with unarmed soldiers. Rioters (probably colour revolutionists) attacked the soldiers that were doing so. The resulting violence thus originated with the rioters. If all commanders had disobeyed their orders as Xu did, the colour revolutionists may well have won. If the story is true, Xu deserved his fate. And I say “if” because the article goes on…
“There has been no public corroboration of this account by Zhao or those close to him.”
The article then states…
“General (He Yanran) was also court-martialled because his armoured personnel carriers and trucks were burned down by angry onlookers and he refused to disperse them,” said the serving general, through the mutual acquaintance.”
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Many soldiers were burnt to death in those vehicles. Yanran was clearly negligent.
“Note the article refers to hundreds, not thousands killed and it states around the Square, not in it”
Both facts you were completely unaware of Alan. I have a friend like you, he can never admit when he is wrong either.
Furr’s positions are not supported whatsoever. No major historians of the Purges believe that the Moscow Trials were fair or accurate.
I read that JSTOR will reveal that Furr is neither published nor cited in any peer-reviewed Russian history journal in English, save for a single book review in the Russian History Review. So, not only do professional historians disagree with Furr, they almost universally ignore him as well.
Russian archives were studied and reported
When the USSR admit culpability for the Katyn massacre when NKVD files were researched, Furr insists it is not true and Gorbachev and Yelsin were smearing Stalin
As for Marx, he too expressed conspiracist ideas accusing Lord Palmerston of being Tsarist agent, writing anti-Russian propaganda on behalf of the Scottish aristocrat Urquhart
Possibly of interest:
Episode 24: Combating Tankie Denialism: Specialist in Soviet History Rebuts Grover Furr
I learn new things every day. I never cease to learn. Often I have yourself to thank when I google sources and links
I never realised how close China came to another civil war with armies facing down one another.
I never realised how many workers rather than only students were involved such as the Workers Autonomous Federation described here
https://www.sahistory.org.za/sites/default/files/DC/slfeb90.7/slfeb90.7.pdf
And another description of workers involvment
As military regiments marched toward Beijing from all sides, a huge number of workers and working-class residents spontaneously went to the streets in Beijing’s outskirts, trying to obstruct the military. Workers erected barricades and assembled human walls. They brought water and food to soldiers to fraternize with them and convince them to abandon their arms and stop their march. In other words, it was workers, not students, who directly confronted the most powerful, repressive apparatus of the state. And workers won temporarily: the military was prevented from entering Beijing’s inner core for two weeks.
https://internationalviewpoint.org/IMG/pdf/the-forgotten-socialists-of-tiananmen-square_a6673.pdf
But who trusts Trotskyists to tell the truth, eh?
I have read Roger Furr and he is not a reliable historian, it is like reading a historian about the History of the USA, and there are only two reliable historians in the USA, there are historians outside of the USA that are more reliable
I have read Stalin works, Lenin, Mao, and Hoxha and they are not reliable historians, even more the book titled; The History of the Communist Party of Russsia or the Soviet Union is not a reliable source either, as well Trotsky My Life is not reliable, and autobiography is never reliable.
The best Historian on the Moscow Trial, Trotsky and Stalin is Isaac Deutscher, he was a Trotskyist and he recognized that Trotsky himself provoked the ascent to power of Stalin because he was a despot when he was the commander of the Red Army, and the killing of workers did not Stalin during Stalin time, it was started during the time of Lenin and Trotsky, and Stalin was not an amateur like the Trotskyist want to present time, he was an old Bolsheviks, and he knew what socialism really is, probably, much better than Trotsky, but nobody is more reliable than Julius Martov
The myth between Stalin and Trotsky of the good and evil, is totally false, between both there not any essential differences, it was just a struggle for power and control, either one would have conducted the Soviet Union thru the same path because it was basically a capitalist society which would have entered in hegemonic conflicts with the Western Powers .
As well the best source to understand imperialism is Rosa Luxembourg and Nikolai Bukharin who was the aptest of the Bolsheviks, he was more reliable than Lenin
Most historian based their recount on two books written by Stalin: On the Opposition and On Leninism. I don’t think that Lenin would have created a concept known as Marxism-Leninism and he did not want to be mummified either, he wanted to be burry next to his mother
The defender of the Soviet Union and China are like the defender of the USA, they always cover true and they support false historical passage, and both sides are fanatic, they are like evangelical defending a god or the Bible, and most of them have not read what they are defending. they just play by ear.
TS left USA capitalism in order to defend Chinese capitalism, like the RCPUSA or CPUSA, and he does not have any political knowledge, he does not even know the works of Mao Tse Tung, there are thousands of Maoists or ex-Maoists around the world who do not support the actual government of China, and the division started since the first time that Mao made agreements with the USA, the capitalist character of China is so obvious that they will not defend it , only political ignorants will defend the government of China or the government of USA, and both are the same
All the organizations that I have studied in my whole life ( I have known several ) who have made a proper analytical study of the Soviet Union and its leader, and Leninism is the SPGB, it is a reliable source of information, that is reason why I call the SPGB/WSM an university on socialism.
During the 60-70 there were more fanatics peoples supporting China than nowadays, and they attracted many young peoples and the main attraction was their so call fight agains revisionism, it was like an Evangelical revival, like coming back to restore true socialism/communism, but you can never restore what have never existed.
The main problem has been to understand that socialism has never been established, and it takes time and study and investigation to understand that, it is like a political exorcism, and the SPGB knew that since the very beginning, even more, the SLP in certain moment had problems to understand that too, and it is one of the few organizations closer to the SPGB principles.
We do not have too many members because we have failed, we have done a good job with the few resources that we have, the problem is that workers prefer reformism, they have been political oriented by the right and the leftists and we do not support Leninism and leadership and we do not get involve in interclass disputes. I have been dealing with leftists for many years and I know them like the palms of my hands, and they will continue supporting reformism and Leninism unless there is a social commotion,
The leftists have an obsession with the CIA, for them the whole world is controlled by the CIA, it is not controlled by capitalism, it is something that was inherited from Stalinism, but they do not mention anything about the KGB which was a consequence of the Gestapo and they did the same things that were done by the CIA. The other obsesion is zionism, the whole world is controlled by the zionists and thousands of false theories have been created, but they do not focus the problems on capitalism. The new kids on the blocks are Soros and Bill Gates they also control the whole world instead of being controlled by the Market system
The best source which described China and its future projection and Maoism was Enver Hoxha, but as a Stalinist he never described properly the history of the Soviet Union and Leninism
The best source who has described Leninism and the Soviet Union in all its aspects is the SPGB/WSM.
Raya Dunakeskaya described the capitalist character of the Soviet Union but she did not break away from Leninism,( Like CLR James ) in some aspect she broke away from Trotsky ( she was her personal secretary ) but she did not break away from him completely and continued believing that capitalism was restored in the Soviet Union in 1930 which is not true because socialism never existed in the Soviet Union, and soviet state capitalism started in 1917, it was not in 1930
alanjjohnstone
Participant
So the Palestinian struggle is an internal affair of Israel and that is the reason to not support the BDS campaign. And if a Palestinian is throwing rocks, the IDF are entitled to shoot them as in the Zambian case I referred to (proportionate response?)What he does not mention is that conflict is an inter class disputes between the rulers of Israel and the rulers of Palestine, we must take sides with the workers of both sides instead of one side, the right takes side with Israel and the leftist take side with the Palestine rulers, for them the Jews they are not members of the working class, they are all bankers. China is taking side with Israel because it can produce more financial benefits for them
“In the past, China and the CPC financed most of the Maoist parties and guerrillas movements”
Are you saying there is a moral equivalency between socialist support for revolutionary groups and CIA support for reactionary groups? You are a joke MS.
——————————————————-
Are you saying that you support leftist terrorism, but you do reject the right wing terrorism of the CIA ? If Kevin Anderson wrote a book on Lenin saying that he was ambivalent, someone should write an article about your ambiguity. Socialist do not deal with morality, and the actual morality in our society is capitalist, and every type of morality has a class, and social economic origin. There is a new book writing from the archives of the KGB which shows all the type of terrorism and terrorist supported by them which shows that there is not differentiation between the KGB and the CIA, both were agencies of two capitalist states. China is in friendship with the ex-head of that organization who was Vladimir Putin, if you go to bed with dogs you get fleas
“No major historians of the Purges believe that the Moscow Trials were fair or accurate.”
Because they are careerists. The simple truth is that you cannot tell the truth about Stalin. To do so touches the third rail and is career destroying. Which is why Furr can do so. He is not tenured in a history department. At any rate your argument is an appeal to authority fallacy.
“When the USSR admit culpability for the Katyn massacre”
Not the USSR, Gorbachev who was a neo-liberal, traitor and is now one of the most despised people in Russia. He lied as Furr convincingly argues.
“when NKVD files were researched, Furr insists it is not true and Gorbachev and Yelsin were smearing Stalin”
He does indeed. Alan, friend of the CIA, who hasn’t read a word of Furr’s research, has no authority to comment on it.
“As for Marx, he too expressed conspiracist ideas accusing Lord Palmerston of being Tsarist agent, writing anti-Russian propaganda on behalf of the Scottish aristocrat Urquhart”
Irrelevant.
Combatting Tankie Denialism.
The episode is a joke. If the podcasters were serious about the history they could have invited Furr on their show to defend his positions. They were too gutless to do so. And “tankie” is not an insult, it is a compliment. The tanks rolled in to put down counterrevolution.
TrueScotsman
Participant
Combatting Tankie Denialism.The episode is a joke. If the podcasters were serious about the history they could have invited Furr on their show to defend his positions. They were too gutless to do so. And “tankie” is not an insult, it is a compliment. The tanks rolled in to put down counterrevolution.
—————————————————————————————————I bet you have not read any book written by Lesley Rimmel and Andrew Killman.
In order to have a counterrevolution a revolution is needed, and there was not a revolution in Russia or Eastern Europe. Until now in the world we have only had bourgeois revolution. In order to comeback from socialism/communism to capitalism ( which is very difficult process and a myth created by Lenin ) a capitalist class is needed, and a ruling capitalist class already existed in Russia and in Eastern Europe.
In a socialist society we are going to have workers who might oppose the society and they must respected, but they will not be able to establish a new society because the majority of the workers will not have the desire to comeback to capitalism. Like Kaustky wrote: Democracy is the power of the majority and the respect for the minority
Changes from Feudalism or Asiatic Mode of production to new a class mode of production is only a bourgeois revolution, ( Georgi Plekhanov is a good read ) a socialist revolution is a workers movement to establish a post capitalist society, and the first requirement is to have a world conscious proletariat class, and the desire to establish a post capitalist society, and that phenomenon has not existed yet, also in a world socialist society the proletariat class will negate itself, the proletariat class will no exist any longer, it was a revolt of wage slaves
The Stalinists never invited any groups of opposition to have a discussion about any topics, the only thing that they used to do was destroy or interrupt meetings, literature tables, insult participants in meeting, and shouting. The SPGB had invited all kind of opposition groups including Fascists and Nazis, and Andrew Killman.
Gorbachev was not a liberal, that type of phenomenon only existed in France and England, from state capitalism to corporate capitalism is not liberalism, most of the rulers of Russia wanted that process to take places that is the reason why there was not too resistance from the rulers
Furr has produced no actual evidence despite the extensive access being available to Nazi archives and Stalin-era archives.
Let him produced the actual documents revealing the irrefutable traitorous dealings with Nazi Germany (and Japan) of the Bolshevik Old Guard and Trotsky.
Furr doesn’t and Furr can’t. If he did then those careerist historians would have to amend and adjust their interpretations.
His whole “scholarly” contribution is based upon the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
He suggests that all the incriminating evidence has been deliberately culled and destroyed.
DJP’s link is insightful but no doubt according to TS they are faux-Marxists with the audacity to interview a historian, a careerist because she held a professorship at a university although she is now retired. At one point she is pressed to offer her own evidence to back up her claim and also being a historian of women’s rights refers to the abortion debate under Stalin as an example where there was no democratisation policy by him.
The Directive 00447 is actually more evidence than exists that Hitler authorised the “Final Solution”
The Katyn Forest Massacre
It would be like the Christians, the only evidence that they have about the existence of Jesus is the Bible, the only evidence that they have are the writings of Joseph Stalin, and the only book with merit is the one written about Socialism and Anarchism. The archives of the KGB has proven that Stalin also made alliance with the Orthodox Church of Russia during the WW2 period. Many Stalinist groups have rejected Stalin and they are not Krushevites
#222722 REPLY
TrueScotsman
Participant
“No major historians of the Purges believe that the Moscow Trials were fair or accurate.”Similar to the trial for the members of the Communist Party of USA, later it was proven that most of them were innocents. A son of one of them wrote a book and he also had a foster homes for some of their children
- The topic ‘Hong Kong’ is closed to new replies.