Lenin himself wasn’t the problem and the Statures for him are usually for being a Revolutionary and removing the Tzar.
Stalin was the actual problem.
Lenin was a counterrevolutionary that brutally suppressed any dissent and directly placed Stalin (being well aware of what a person he was) in a position that would make his later takeover possible.
Lenin did not place Stalin, stalin took over. Other than that, yes.
Lenin placed Stalin as an enforcer to do the dirty stuff for him. It would be very naive to assume Lenin didn’t know the risk involved of putting a former mob gangster in such a position.
deleted by creator
France never experienced communism?
Ackshully…
The photo of the USA Lenin statue isn’t accurate. It resides in the Fremont neighborhood in Seattle, where it frequently has its hands and body splashed with red paint to represent the blood on Lenin’s hands.
Just do an image search for it or check it out on google maps streetview.
You’re showing statues of Lenin in countries in which the Dictatorship of the Proletariat failed to cede power to the working class and establish a socialist economic structure.
When Lenin took power, Russia had nothing. It was in the middle of WW1, there were regular famines, almost everyone was illiterate, and it was in no condition to establish a socialist economic plan. So, Lenin created a temporary economic model called The Dictatorship of the Proletariat. This is a centrally planned economy designed to rapidly develop infrastructure and industry in a country that has none. Lenin was already ceding power to the worker’s councils when he died. Stalin decided he liked The Dictatorship of the Proletariat and did not cede power back to the worker’s councils.
Those countries never experienced Communism. They never even experienced socialism. They destroyed those statues because they hated The Dictatorship of the Proletariat. Living in a system designed for a short temporary economic boom for decades is no fun.
countries in which the Dictatorship of the Proletariat failed to cede power to the working class and establish a socialist economic structure
Oh, so like every single other place that tried to implement that deranged system? Thank you for this very important distinction.
What about all these capitalist places that fell into fascism? What about the successful capitalist states that are currently falling into fascism?
What about them? The choices here are not “what we have now” vs “trust the people that want to try communism again”
My point is about the flawed argument : “communism is bad because the attempts have failed”. Well, there are more capitalist attempts that failed than communist ones, so the argument doesn’t hold.
My argument is not “look how many attempts have failed” but “look, of all of these many attempts, every single one has turned into a kafkaesque nightmare”. At this point it is not even clear that “successful communism” is something that can exist in our world
On the other hand, while many (depending on your perspective you might even say most) capitalist systems fail, there are absolutely some that work ok. Of course nothing is perfect in the real world. But the life of say a danish person is not only materially well off, but also free and full of dignity, which was true of none of the experiments in communism
I’m pretty sure many Chinese are well off, free and full of dignity.
It’s also easier to be a successful country when you’re not under ambargo just because you’re not sold to capitalist companies. Did the US left even one communist country live normally?
But more importantly, how many successful capitalist countries, today, aren’t going fascist at full speed?
Wtf I love capitalism now
Hmm, why do these fascist anti-communist regimes that the US propped up hate Lenin?
Yup, countries run by fascists hate communism.
Russia seems fine with it though
But I’m sure it’s because it’s aCkhUaLly fAscIsT
So are we discussing countries were fascists live in or run by fascists? Because Russia is 100% the latter
Russia is a partially neoliberal bourgeois democracy(aka dictatorship of the bourgeoisie) they do stuff like invade Ukraine/Iraq/Afghanistan while being distinct enough from fascism that it is more accurate to just call them neolibs
None of the lower countries had communism.
You can argue if they had sunshine scenario communism all day, but they certainly was under the oppressive thumb of USSR.
Technically correct. They were under Stalins Marxism-Leninism, which was supposed to be a placeholder until true communism could be implemented.
But it’s a bit disingenuous to split that hair in this thread. The irony being that the latter are all countries that got to experience the kind of gouvernemental structure that Lenin facilitated.
