Hi HvM,
The regime was atheist, but the USSR did not abolish religion. As mentioned above, it suppressed non-Orthodox cults, but it co-opted a much weakened Russian Orthodox Church into the system. Just like China appoints its own Lamas in Tibet, the USSR supported its own tame candidates to head the Orthodox Church.
(Incidentally, Stalin initially trainee as an Orthodox priest!)
Cheers,
Sid.
Main Attraction
-
Laurent Daniel
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 546
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:29 am
- Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Hi Sid,
Another sign that whatever is left of Stalinian-Maoist dictatures is slowly dying (Decaying?).
China also has a "tamed" official Catholic Church that don't recognise the Authority of the Pope, plus an underground one who follows the Vatican. It's moving ahead a bit those days, The Vatican and China are talking to each other through the (untamed) Bishop of Hong Kong and, AFAIK, the latest appointments of new Bishops was more or less jointly agreed.sid guttridge wrote:Just like China appoints its own Lamas in Tibet
Another sign that whatever is left of Stalinian-Maoist dictatures is slowly dying (Decaying?).
Regards
Daniel Laurent
Daniel Laurent
-
Laurent Daniel
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 546
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:29 am
- Location: Bangkok, Thailand
Wrong!Rajin Cajun wrote: Of course who can blame them when the Bolsheviks took power from the corrupt Tzar they were invaded by the Entente.
Tsar abdicated March 15th 1917, and Bolsheviks took power six months later. And they were not choosen by Russians, but like gangsters took power with michine guns and bayonets.
Why Lenin took power? for hapiness and prosperity of Russia? People want him as a leader? And for that he terrorised whole nation?
Bolsheviks were like a horde of hungry wolves, then they get power. Just for pure power...
-
sid guttridge
- on "time out"
- Posts: 8055
- Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 4:54 am
Hi Pirx,
Nor, come to that, was the Tsar "choosen by Russians".
Imperial Russia was an Empire that was ruled in an authoritarian manner. The USSR consisted of most of the same mix of territories and was also therefore an empire. It too was ruled in an authoritarian manner like its predecessor. Empires can rarely be ruled in any other way, or they will dissolve.
Cheers,
Sid.
Nor, come to that, was the Tsar "choosen by Russians".
Imperial Russia was an Empire that was ruled in an authoritarian manner. The USSR consisted of most of the same mix of territories and was also therefore an empire. It too was ruled in an authoritarian manner like its predecessor. Empires can rarely be ruled in any other way, or they will dissolve.
Cheers,
Sid.
-
pzrmeyer2
Pirx wrote:Wrong!Rajin Cajun wrote: Of course who can blame them when the Bolsheviks took power from the corrupt Tzar they were invaded by the Entente.
Tsar abdicated March 15th 1917, and Bolsheviks took power six months later. And they were not choosen by Russians, but like gangsters took power with michine guns and bayonets.
Why Lenin took power? for hapiness and prosperity of Russia? People want him as a leader? And for that he terrorised whole nation?
Bolsheviks were like a horde of hungry wolves, then they get power. Just for pure power...
very well said
-
Rajin Cajun
- Banned
- Posts: 659
- Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:02 pm
- Location: Utah, United States
You need to study up on your systems Capitalism is economic system not poilitical you can have capitalism under a dictatorship. I have my misgivings on democracy and its failings of a monopolized power base but thats a whole different problem. Capitalism is too unorganized and is left to its own devices it becomes corrupt. I believe in major restrictions placed on companies and corporations and the market in general. I would suggest reading some Adam Smith to understand capitalism has nothing to do with democracy. I would then suggest reading some Thomas Jefferson for he too did not promote Capitalism. He said, "Banking institutions are more dangerous to the public then standing armies." Very similar to what Lenin said in his manuscript Imperialism: A higher Stage of Capitalism.sigh...yeah, i know what you mean. its hard to have to actually vote for your leaders instead having one forced on you. and being allowed to keep what you earn, and rise to your abilities. and entrepreneurship...I agree, tough going. much better when Comrade Stalin was in charge. of course, while you're waiting in line for shitpaper and grade 'D" meat, rationed of course, you would be left to wonder where many of your friends, family, neighbors suddenly dissapeared to...even those so dedicated to the cause....
I agree Sid. Lenin needed to instill an authoritarian system because thats what the peasents were used to and a major change would have dissolved the country. While I believe Lenin had good intentions it was quickly lost after his death since every thing he reminded his successors of doing was ignored about opening up the system and getting the people involved and reducing infighting was ignored by Trotsky and Stalin who proceeded to rip the nation apart.
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
-
phylo_roadking
- Patron
- Posts: 8459
- Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm
Sid, a long time ago I read a beautiful summing up of Russian domestic policy i.e. how it controlled its own citizens, in of all things a discounted sci-fi novel.......
If you look at the way the Cheka, and the OGPU and the NKVD and finally the KGB worked, its internal processes were EXACTLY the same as the Tsarist secret police - can't remember the name off the top of me head - and if you look at the names of middle-ranking officers of the Cheka....they were all still the Tsarist officers! The whole policy of citizens restricted to their farms or villages, needing permission to travel etc. was EXACTLY how things were done outside the major towns and cities of Tsaraist Russia. Just an outgrowth of the Serf regime, when everyone was "Owned". Population movement in the big cities ONLY grew up because an entirely separate class - the Middle Class or Bourgeoise of Marx - that was separate to this regime....and it occured hundreds of years later than in other European countries, in the last thirty years of the nineteenth century.
In fact the author postulated that this construction of the various Secret Police organisations around Tarist methods and staff was THEIR unltimate victory for Counter Revolution....by encouraging the Bolsheviks and then Stalin to use them to manage the people the way they had ALWAYS been, they in effect turned Stalin into The Red Tsar we all know. The best puppet is the one whoi doesn't know he's a puppet......
And why did the Russians do things THIS way....? Because THIS way of doing things and controlling population movement, the Serf economy etc., is what was imposed on the Russ native population by the Mongols in the 12th century when they conquered Russia, when a small militaristic group had to dominate, control and terorise a much larger conquered race. Which in turn EARLIER Westward-moving races/tribes had done in Europe- the Vandals in Spain, the Visigoths in post-Roman Italy, eventually the Normans in England, many centuries after the Viking population had mixed with the Franks to produce the distinct Normans.
So what you DIDNT have in Russia in 1917 was a Revolution - you had a regime-change that had to work thru whatever methods it had to hand. It was the ultimate victory of the counter-revolution that within ONE generation the Marxist Communism of Lenin had been put in place and got rid of in favour of one-man rule, Stalin in charge of a Politburo of supposedly-terrorised Party leaders constantly in fear of purges and the NKVD.
If you look at the way the Cheka, and the OGPU and the NKVD and finally the KGB worked, its internal processes were EXACTLY the same as the Tsarist secret police - can't remember the name off the top of me head - and if you look at the names of middle-ranking officers of the Cheka....they were all still the Tsarist officers! The whole policy of citizens restricted to their farms or villages, needing permission to travel etc. was EXACTLY how things were done outside the major towns and cities of Tsaraist Russia. Just an outgrowth of the Serf regime, when everyone was "Owned". Population movement in the big cities ONLY grew up because an entirely separate class - the Middle Class or Bourgeoise of Marx - that was separate to this regime....and it occured hundreds of years later than in other European countries, in the last thirty years of the nineteenth century.
In fact the author postulated that this construction of the various Secret Police organisations around Tarist methods and staff was THEIR unltimate victory for Counter Revolution....by encouraging the Bolsheviks and then Stalin to use them to manage the people the way they had ALWAYS been, they in effect turned Stalin into The Red Tsar we all know. The best puppet is the one whoi doesn't know he's a puppet......
And why did the Russians do things THIS way....? Because THIS way of doing things and controlling population movement, the Serf economy etc., is what was imposed on the Russ native population by the Mongols in the 12th century when they conquered Russia, when a small militaristic group had to dominate, control and terorise a much larger conquered race. Which in turn EARLIER Westward-moving races/tribes had done in Europe- the Vandals in Spain, the Visigoths in post-Roman Italy, eventually the Normans in England, many centuries after the Viking population had mixed with the Franks to produce the distinct Normans.
So what you DIDNT have in Russia in 1917 was a Revolution - you had a regime-change that had to work thru whatever methods it had to hand. It was the ultimate victory of the counter-revolution that within ONE generation the Marxist Communism of Lenin had been put in place and got rid of in favour of one-man rule, Stalin in charge of a Politburo of supposedly-terrorised Party leaders constantly in fear of purges and the NKVD.
-
sid guttridge
- on "time out"
- Posts: 8055
- Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 4:54 am
Hi Phylo,
I would suggest that all multi-national empires are ungovernable unless authority is imposed from the centre. As Czarist Russia and the USSR had almost the same components, they necessarily had to administer the state in a similar authoritarian manner or it would break up (as it eventually did).
Russia and the other 14 successor states now have a chance to develop participatory liberal democracy in a way that was impossible before.
Cheers,
Sid.
I would suggest that all multi-national empires are ungovernable unless authority is imposed from the centre. As Czarist Russia and the USSR had almost the same components, they necessarily had to administer the state in a similar authoritarian manner or it would break up (as it eventually did).
Russia and the other 14 successor states now have a chance to develop participatory liberal democracy in a way that was impossible before.
Cheers,
Sid.
-
phylo_roadking
- Patron
- Posts: 8459
- Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm
As well as Queen Elisabeth II or Juan Carlos.sid guttridge wrote:Hi Pirx,
Nor, come to that, was the Tsar "choosen by Russians".
Sid.
Bolsheviks main slogans was: "Down with Tsars regime , people want justice, peace and freedom". Words, words, words... And then what? Domestic war, capativity, tears... Tsar abdicated, then next step was choose new "Duma" so in 1917 were choosen "Konstituanta". That was large succes of new Russian states. Temporary goverment waited what "konstituanta" decide. Delegates arrived to St. Petersburg, and what Bolsheviks done? They shoot them! (maybe not all but still...).
I suggest that there is no excuse to non-democratic system.
-
phylo_roadking
- Patron
- Posts: 8459
- Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm
The period from the "abdication" of the Tsar and the founding of the Dumas up to the November Revolution is remarkably interesting. The so-called "government" of Kerensky couldn't govern anythting because it was a terrible mishmash of arguing coalitionists. The Dumas itself was a bit like the late Wiemar Reichstag, there were dozens of parties and flavours of politics and noone had a majority or any hope of getting one on the voting floor. It didnt even matter very much because although the Tsar had "abdicated" he hadn't devolved many powers and areas of responsibility to the Dumas. The reason for the Bolsheviks popping up at the very end of long months of chaos and indecision was of course they'd been banned after the failed revolution in the spring, and scattered - some like stalin arrested escaped and on the run, others like Lenin etc had to escape abroad.
Meanwhile the dozens of different flavours of Communist revolutionary politics were at work at the front and the Army was falling apart, but not organised by any one singular party.Individual communist "facing" Soviets of like-minded revolutionaries were popping up everywhere, making links with each other and starting to push generally together in the same direction, like the Sailors Soviet of Kronstadt. Most of the Revolutionary Communism of those days was actually being driven by Trotsky and the Mensheviks, who were still in the Dumas, rather than the running Bolsheviks, sho as I said were abroad, on the run, or had hidden in the Amry ranks and were fomenting revolution.
HOWEVER - the one thing the Dumas definitely couldnt decide on was what to do about the war. It supposedly had taken control of the econony, but with no real working government ht eeconomy and war production was rapidly falling apart - but yet there was no decision to seek terms with the Germans, and quite simply the Russian Army was dissolving and going home, or going armed to the big cities under new revolutionary leaders.
This is the point where the Germans come in. It'll never be known now if there actually was an agreement in place IN ADVANCE with Lenin that if he got into power he'd negotiate a settlement and armistice, but the Kaiser's government transported Lenin and his entourage back through Germany in a sealed train and on into Russia, where the Bolsheviks on the run came back into public affairs, and they "organised" the November Revolution in the sense that probably everyone knew it was coming, but either wasnt in a position to do anything or were busy trying to orgaise their own! Moscow and St.Petersburg were a mess, with spontaneously-self-organising Soviets taking control of major utilities or areas of the cities in the name of Communism - of whatever flavour.
In effect the November Revolution was just taking control of the bits that noone else had, or taking them away from too-independently-thinking groups lol In other words......Marx's idea that Communism would be self-creating out of the economic and social collapse was totally right - it was the BOLSHEVIKS who started the transition AWAY from Marxism by trying to control it!
phylo
Meanwhile the dozens of different flavours of Communist revolutionary politics were at work at the front and the Army was falling apart, but not organised by any one singular party.Individual communist "facing" Soviets of like-minded revolutionaries were popping up everywhere, making links with each other and starting to push generally together in the same direction, like the Sailors Soviet of Kronstadt. Most of the Revolutionary Communism of those days was actually being driven by Trotsky and the Mensheviks, who were still in the Dumas, rather than the running Bolsheviks, sho as I said were abroad, on the run, or had hidden in the Amry ranks and were fomenting revolution.
HOWEVER - the one thing the Dumas definitely couldnt decide on was what to do about the war. It supposedly had taken control of the econony, but with no real working government ht eeconomy and war production was rapidly falling apart - but yet there was no decision to seek terms with the Germans, and quite simply the Russian Army was dissolving and going home, or going armed to the big cities under new revolutionary leaders.
This is the point where the Germans come in. It'll never be known now if there actually was an agreement in place IN ADVANCE with Lenin that if he got into power he'd negotiate a settlement and armistice, but the Kaiser's government transported Lenin and his entourage back through Germany in a sealed train and on into Russia, where the Bolsheviks on the run came back into public affairs, and they "organised" the November Revolution in the sense that probably everyone knew it was coming, but either wasnt in a position to do anything or were busy trying to orgaise their own! Moscow and St.Petersburg were a mess, with spontaneously-self-organising Soviets taking control of major utilities or areas of the cities in the name of Communism - of whatever flavour.
In effect the November Revolution was just taking control of the bits that noone else had, or taking them away from too-independently-thinking groups lol In other words......Marx's idea that Communism would be self-creating out of the economic and social collapse was totally right - it was the BOLSHEVIKS who started the transition AWAY from Marxism by trying to control it!
phylo