Was Lenin "evil"?

[Czert]

Also both Virginia and plymoth colonies tried a sort of "communism" (long before the ideas of communism were codified and it was called communism), but it rapidly failed, and the governing system was quickly changed, as even in the small numbers of the colonies, collectivism ended in disaster, with much of the Virginia colony dying of starvation.

i think best description of how comunism is suposed to work is simple - in one american school profesor of sociologynegotiated with sutendt to try "real comunism", which meaned that instead of individual gardes , they all recive class grade. from begining it worked great, first grade from test was B (2) for everyone, so everyone was happy, same as next one, but after that, best students told themself, whats the point to work hardest and not fully enjoy students life with partyies and other things ? same as other good students decided to give some layid back. so result of next test was not surprisingly C, it caused some unrest in previous A and B, but since previous D and F holders didnt tried to improve themself (it was still better than they did have previously) , so next test results were unavidable D and in end F. so at end of school year whole class was forced to repeat it again.

 

[Kovax]

Well, I suppose that communism COULD theoretically work on a larger scale if you eliminate everyone significantly either above or below the norm, or anyone who gets overly ambitious or lazy, so everyone IS actually "equal". Problem is, that would likely mean exterminating more than half of the population....which sounds to me kind of like what Lenin was doing. He did, however, fail to do that "enforced equality" thing in one particularly important respect, by not taking himself out.

 

[Czert]

and that is how exactly comunist tried to do it, by eliminitating everone who didnt fited to the line. and it did have one unintended, but obvious, result. to eliminate best/top of ones you need muscles to do it, and since normal "grey" ppl have no reson to eliminate others, well you need to recuit lowest to do that job. and when criminals are in power hand, you know what they will form.
and if you start with elimininating of criminals, you will have no one which will force normals to keep in line.

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

and that is how exactly comunist tried to do it, by eliminitating everone who didnt fited to the line. and it did have one unintended, but obvious, result. to eliminate best/top of ones you need muscles to do it, and since normal "grey" ppl have no reson to eliminate others, well you need to recuit lowest to do that job. and when criminals are in power hand, you know what they will form.
and if you start with elimininating of criminals, you will have no one which will force normals to keep in line.

That is not isolated to Communism. Organized Crime in America, in partnership with governmental authorities, is a long term problem. It is a process of evolution to move from Tammany Hall and the Five Points to Lucky Luciano's Commission and its odd relationship with FBI/OSS/CIA, but corruption has a nose for straight cash regardless of the political climate.

 

[Czert]

That is not isolated to Communism. Organized Crime in America, in partnership with governmental authorities, is a long term problem. It is a process of evolution to move from Tammany Hall and the Five Points to Lucky Luciano's Commission and its odd relationship with FBI/OSS/CIA, but corruption has a nose for straight cash regardless of the political climate.

you mix two totaly different thing, yes politicks are corupt in every country, in some more, in some less, but i REALY fail to see jailing of people in america only because they have some property (totaly honestly and legaly gained - think about farm owners), or because they think differently than is official line.
america have own mafia, italy have of mafia, china have triads, japonese yakuza and so one. but you cant realy say that these criminal gangs run WHOLE goverment.
and generaly you can say that politican are moneyhungry and are abusing power to get them, but under comunism it was different, money was not goal for them (but they realy loved benefits which comed from high party membership status), thier goal was to enforce thier ideal on others, doesnt matter if they liked it or not. and used criminal metods to get it.
in my country during commies regime were VERY simple rules

1. dont think
2. if you think, then dont speak
3. if you think,speak, then dont write
4. if you think, speak and write, dont subscribe (sign ? - from signature no idea which one is better)
5. if you think, speak, write and subsribe, then dont wonder (what happened).

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

you mix two totaly different thing, yes politicks are corupt in every country, in some more, in some less, but i REALY fail to see jailing of people in america only because they have some property (totaly honestly and legaly gained - think about farm owners), or because they think differently than is official line.
america have own mafia, italy have of mafia, china have triads, japonese yakuza and so one. but you cant realy say that these criminal gangs run WHOLE goverment.
and generaly you can say that politican are moneyhungry and are abusing power to get them, but under comunism it was different, money was not goal for them (but they realy loved benefits which comed from high party membership status), thier goal was to enforce thier ideal on others, doesnt matter if they liked it or not. and used criminal metods to get it.
in my country during commies regime were VERY simple rules

1. dont think
2. if you think, then dont speak
3. if you think,speak, then dont write
4. if you think, speak and write, dont subscribe (sign ? - from signature no idea which one is better)
5. if you think, speak, write and subsribe, then dont wonder (what happened).

Your point is well taken.

 

[Cavalry]

or do you realy think it is just just coindicidence taht every state which adoptet comunisms/socialism were in time more and more technologicaly backwards ? with living standards behind capitalist states ?

Let's compare Cuba and Haiti. Don't forget we have Somalie, Bangladesh as capitalist states too!

 

[Fanstar1]

Let's compare Cuba and Haiti. Don't forget we have Somalie, Bangladesh as capitalist states too!

Somalia was communist until 1990, and then civil war. Bangladesh and Haiti started worse and are not "capitalist" in the way the west is. Just look at Venezuela, NK, Belarus, eastern Europe at fall of iron curtain, etc. and you will see how communism can very often be very regressive.

 

[Fanstar1]

Let's compare Cuba and Haiti. Don't forget we have Somalie, Bangladesh as capitalist states too!

and before you mention china china is capitalist now.

 

[Cavalry]

Just look at Venezuela, NK, Belarus, eastern Europe at fall of iron curtain, etc. and you will see how communism can very often be very regressive.

They all are capitalist to me now except NK. Venezuela is capitalist all the time. In the time of communist Eastern bloc is relative quite good compare to the rest of the world and may be compare to what they do now (especially Ukraine!)

The capitalist system need cheap labor and material elsewhere to get rich quick. If America has to make Iphone themselve they cannot get that high profit margin!

I know a hard rule of communist country to define who is a communist country is not what they talk but main production of the whole society belong to the state. Some countries in the world say that they are communist or socialist just for receive aids from USSR!

 

[Czert]

Let's compare Cuba and Haiti. Don't forget we have Somalie, Bangladesh as capitalist states too!

WHAAAAAAT ?
cuba ? capitalist state ? at which time preiod it was capitalist state ? ok, before castro, it can be viewed as capitalist state, but otoh one can argue that batistustats regime was oiligarchy and not capitalism.
rest allready explained by fanstar.

and if you are so stalinist lover, then just explain to me, how it is posible that citizens of north korea are living so badly. after all, after civil war ended in 53 booth states did have moreor less exactly same starting position, and today, in "evil" capitalist south korea ppl living standards are high and in "good and saint" commies north korea they are on bring of dying due to malnutrition.

 

[Czert]

They all are capitalist to me now except NK. Venezuela is capitalist all the time. In the time of communist Eastern bloc is relative quite good compare to the rest of the world and may be compare to what they do now (especially Ukraine!)

The capitalist system need cheap labor and material elsewhere to get rich quick. If America has to make Iphone themselve they cannot get that high profit margin!

I know a hard rule of communist country to define who is a communist country is not what they talk but main production of the whole society belong to the state. Some countries in the world say that they are communist or socialist just for receive aids from USSR!

omg, yeah, at time of commies commies europe did was ok compared to rest of world, but ONLY because they did have realy good starting position, under commies rule living standards and technology improvments/advancments were WORSE than in previous times.
just look at middle/eastern europe in 45 - and living standarts/technology there. they were WAAAAAAY better than it was in whole korea. but then look at 89 and living standards there ? in south korea technology/living standarts were BETER.
how it is posible that super commies regime failed so great compared to evil capitalism ?

and i dont get your hate against capitasts drive for profit, well if they are so evil in making iphone oustide of us, then why state(s) in which is iphone is produced, are producing it in first place ? for evil capitalists. if you cant trust communists party of china, then which communists you can trust ? why is communist party of china NOT acting for chinese laborers to get fair play for thier manufacturing of iphones ?

and that last line ...woooooooooooow, well, i dont want to sound nitpicking, but did you noticed that ussr dont exists anymore ?

 

[Haresus]

i think best description of how comunism is suposed to work is simple - in one american school profesor of sociologynegotiated with sutendt to try "real comunism", which meaned that instead of individual gardes , they all recive class grade. from begining it worked great, first grade from test was B (2) for everyone, so everyone was happy, same as next one, but after that, best students told themself, whats the point to work hardest and not fully enjoy students life with partyies and other things ? same as other good students decided to give some layid back. so result of next test was not surprisingly C, it caused some unrest in previous A and B, but since previous D and F holders didnt tried to improve themself (it was still better than they did have previously) , so next test results were unavidable D and in end F. so at end of school year whole class was forced to repeat it again.

Any source for this little story? Sounds a bit like one of those "and his name was Albert Einstein" stories.

 

[Czert]

Any source for this little story? Sounds a bit like one of those "and his name was Albert Einstein" stories.

i have to admit, taht i jut readed it some time ago, have absolutely no proof that it ever happened, but i writed "best way to describe comunism" and that dont automaticaly mean it must happened.
nd if you REALY look how countris under communism rule perforemed, you will realy discover that they reached thier declared goal "that everyone will be equal to others" in terms of property/living standards by making everyone have miserable living standards, and not good ones.

 

[VineFynn]

5. if you think, speak, write and subsribe, then dont wonder (what happened).

Sign is the word you're looking for, meaning "to put your signature on". To subscribe to something means to agree with it or request regular copies of new content, in the case of media.

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

Sign is the word you're looking for, meaning "to put your signature on". To subscribe to something means to agree with it or request regular copies of new content, in the case of media.

I thought he meant subscribe to the newsletter of the opposition. That little trick showed up frequently during the McCarthy Communist Witch Hunt, and got a lot of people in hot water.

 

[Czert]

I thought he meant subscribe to the newsletter of the opposition. That little trick showed up frequently during the McCarthy Communist Witch Hunt, and got a lot of people in hot water.

no, sign was word i was looking for, not subsribe since under comunism oposition haave no way of printing (legal) newpaperst at all. every printed document critizing communism , informing of his crimes or anything else "antisocialisticks" must be printed in forgein country (west) and then smugled to czechoslovakia. and then distributed by underground ways.
and this not only uncluded anti comunists literature, but literature of authors banned by communist bloc (george orwell, solzenitsin and others)

 

[Dysydent]

Communism, as a system that established not only universal legal plunder (to use Bastiat's terminology), but also slavery to the state is evil. When you judge the rights of the individual in this system, whether Leninist, Stalinist or Maoist incarnation there are essentially none - no real right to choose where you wish to work and negotiate your salary, no right to choose which system of education you prefer (there is one, owned and controlled by the state), you cannot speak freely, you cannot attend religious services of your choice, if you wish to be an artist, your works must comply with official ideology and regulations, you can be drafted into the military and essentially become a slave, doing what you're told at all times, without any ability to disagree or protest. This is a system that attempts to steal every last right from you and make you a drone.

I understand that some people truly believed that such a system would result in a better world, but this does not excuse murder, plunder, and hatred based on class, inherent to it. Any champion of the system, in my opinion, had evil intentions, regardless of how he felt about them. Ergo, Lenin had to be evil.

 

[wingo]

Goal was equality for all. Of course, it didn`t take long to realize that is impossible with the techonology and scale of 1920s Russia. So, next best step, creating an enlightened elite that will oversee everyone else is equal, until a time comes when everyone can be equal without any elite overseeing them. I think consequences are clearly apparent to realistically thinking people, but not to people blinded by ideals, as I witnessed myself several times when people tried to persuade me about their "foolproof" utopian idea, which would totally work if only they could somehow overcome current ruling elite.

 

[Dysydent]

The goal does not seem very noble to me either - sure, equality would be good and in the truly free market system the gaps between the rich and the poor diminish significantly - compare the aristocrat of the 1700s to a middle-class doctor of a lawyer of the 1800s and the 1930s worker to a 1800s worker or a serf from the 1700s. Enforced equality must be introduced through brutal means and will hamper economic growth so significanty that the situation will not improve as well as it could have. Politically it had to result in tyranny - either an oligarchy like in the USSR or a democratic tyranny in the utopian visions - where it is the majority of the workers who steal all the rights of an individual and force him into submission by their collective force. Even if Lenin did everything he claimed and created his "utopia", it would have still been a brutal tyranny. Not to mention that no economy can work without prices for goods and services which regulate supply and demand - without that you simply can't know what to produce.

Capitalism, on the other hand, has a much more noble goal - to provide freedom and let people improve their lot through diligence and creativity, increasing social mobility, and constantly improving living conditions over time. The freer the economy, the faster it economic growth - just look at the golden age of the Dutch Republic, United Kingdom, USA, Sweden in the 19th century when Gripenstedt adopted Bastiat's ideas etc. etc. History of communism and socialism is, in the meantime, a history of failures.