After his first wife's funereal he said "I don't think I'll love again." One week later he had the whole wife's family killed at gun point. AND After his son was captured in a Nazi prison, Stalin was offered a prisoner exchange, he declined and his son died in a Nazi prison.
Simply for the fact that I admire his effort and dedication during the revolution and the Russian civil war. Under Lenin's (albeit, rather short) rule, the Russian people were granted rights not available to them under the Czar. They could work, received benefits, gained the right to vote and anti-semitism was squashed and repugnant. Things started going to hell when Stalin took over.
Once Stalin was in, he solidified this belief and instead of using the fruits of the peoples' labor for their own good, secretly shipped their resources overseas for capitalist gain.
I object, he acted in such terms because he believed it would be necessary to achieve progression to the communistic system. In it's actuality, he did this because he believed that this would be acceptable because the end would be of more importance than it's disliked path. He also, led a state with a capitalistic basis, where capital was still used through the interests of the state but this itself, would not make Vladimir Lenin less of a communist. He had his own theory on how humanity would progress to communism, communism is by definition - an ideology, how you achieve communism is based on which perspective you hold to, by this premise, his perspective was Marxism-leninism.
Joseph Stalin was not a "monster" by any means, he was a product of the culture he was introduced to, which through his actions, made the Soviet Union's orginal ideals be forgotten, for his gain, rather then the needs of the people.
Irrelevant to the current subject, this is entirely based on your subjective perspective of the world, as for an example holding to this notions of "human nature". Karl Marx did not try to suceed, he made an idea - one which was to be in the future, developed. History does not prove the premise that communism, cannot be achieved. These nations did not suceed, because of the factors relevant to their perspective of, the current nature of society - the ideology itself is irrelevant.
There was a motive behind these actions, what I stated was that he did these actions not because he was a "monster", but because he believed them to be correct.
@MarcN95 Just thought I'd show you some support- I've debated with this guy before now and he's closed minded enough to block you from concluding your arguments when its apparent he's lost. He is of the caliber to slate us for something we oppose greater than he himself does, and tars us with the same brush when we try to show differences with the past. He doesn't even look within his own system to see its flaws, whereas that is something we have, hence our commitment to change. The only thing that's going to change with him is age- quite frankly he is that stagnant.
Good luck comrade and from what I've read you've done well in supporting our cause.
"Communist state, in popular usage, is a state with a form of government characterized by single-party rule or dominant-party rule of a communist party and a professed allegiance to a Leninist or Marxist–Leninist communist ideology as the guiding principle of the state. Theoretically, "communist state" is a contradictio in terminis as a communist society as defined by both Marxists and anarcho-communists is in principle stateless. From this perspective, the term communist society is more appropriate." - Wikipedia, [link]
Because the communist party was the only party, and they consider him a "communist" leader, a leader which is in the motive of communism, not one which is controlling a communist society, which would additionally be contradictionary as stated above.
It was "lead" as you state, note that the Soviet Union was "The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics".
There isn't anything here to persuade the other to believe, I linked you to this objective source and I cannot understand how one could state that communism was introduced in the Soviet Union, if they do understand what communism is.
Hey!this is present and communist change! In the past yes may all disagree even I. But everything is change comrade! After the collape of soviet union(which their are so many gulags and deads), communism revise it self by people who what live equally and peace like me. Gulags is meet for the traitors and enemies of our countries.But now we have humanrights to care every person.And yet no one even any government and countries had of this.No equal justice any who of us......
Most modern day communists don't understand unity or the movements ideals. Indeed they are squabbling groups with no unity. Try speaking with someone who has been a communist their entire life, not someone that picked it up as a trend.
I'm not bashing communism. Yes i read the stamp. My comment was a pun. Get it? Stalin/stalling Russian/rushing because Russia was a communist country. I guess i should have said "Don't be Stalin" rather than "Why are you Stalin?" because I can see you were offended by that. Sorry
Beutiful, wish more of our comrades were as upfrot about their beleifs. the American communist party has been reduced to a bunch of passive idiots who think they can beat americas government through its own "demcratic" system. if you ever get some time please read my manuscript, it outlines what needs to be done! [link]