Well, I'm definitally not a Stalinist, but I would argue that socialism under Stalin was largely effective, if not steadily antilibertarian. However, the class shall note that Stalin did to a number of things to further democratize the Soviet Union, such as ammend the constitution to have elections by anonymous ballot.
I would like to also add that fascism and socialism are considered opposites. As I earlier noted, socialists have always called for democracy, while fascists have opposed democracry in rhetoric and in practice. Furster, they considered democracy to be another word for communism.
Actually, in his (limited) defence, the correct term would definitally be "socialism." There's a BIG difference between being a socialist nation and being a socialist nation with a ruling socialist party.
It's OPPONENTS of Marxist socialism that started calling socialist nations "Communist." A communist is a Marxist. Communism is a theoretical state that has never existed.
A communist nation (or dictatorship) has another method of arriving at decisions. In this case a single ruler (or single party) gets to make the decisions about what freedoms to limit.
Actually, all debates about reality aside, Marxists and other socialists have been calling for democracy as long as they've been around. In the case of Leninists, there are essentially two (maybe three) differences from capitalist democracy.
1) The top-level government is elected by direct, anonymous voting. Democracy then works from the top-down, hopefully with direct participation at every level. The idea is that it is more effective to have a central focus, but still vital to be democratic.
2) There is, of course, mass propaganda from the other side.
3) Depending on who you ask, the Soviet Union became widely undemocratic and authoritarian... after Lenin died, after Stalin died, around the time Gorbechav (sp?) came to power, or at the very beginning.
A final word of advice... don't knock something till you've studied from the point of view of its opponents and proponents.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I'm definitally not a Stalinist, but I would argue that socialism under Stalin was largely effective, if not steadily antilibertarian. However, the class shall note that Stalin did to a number of things to further democratize the Soviet Union, such as ammend the constitution to have elections by anonymous ballot.
Sorry, that's meant to read "There's a BIG difference between being a socialist nation and being a nation with a ruling socialist party."
Well put, HanzoSan.
I would like to also add that fascism and socialism are considered opposites. As I earlier noted, socialists have always called for democracy, while fascists have opposed democracry in rhetoric and in practice. Furster, they considered democracy to be another word for communism.
Actually, in his (limited) defence, the correct term would definitally be "socialism." There's a BIG difference between being a socialist nation and being a socialist nation with a ruling socialist party.
It's OPPONENTS of Marxist socialism that started calling socialist nations "Communist." A communist is a Marxist. Communism is a theoretical state that has never existed.
A communist nation (or dictatorship) has another method of arriving at decisions. In this case a single ruler (or single party) gets to make the decisions about what freedoms to limit.
Actually, all debates about reality aside, Marxists and other socialists have been calling for democracy as long as they've been around. In the case of Leninists, there are essentially two (maybe three) differences from capitalist democracy.
1) The top-level government is elected by direct, anonymous voting. Democracy then works from the top-down, hopefully with direct participation at every level. The idea is that it is more effective to have a central focus, but still vital to be democratic.
2) There is, of course, mass propaganda from the other side.
3) Depending on who you ask, the Soviet Union became widely undemocratic and authoritarian... after Lenin died, after Stalin died, around the time Gorbechav (sp?) came to power, or at the very beginning.
A final word of advice... don't knock something till you've studied from the point of view of its opponents and proponents.
A nation allows more "freedom" to its corporations than its dissenting individuals? It's called Capitalism.