Tag Archives: Khrushchev

Socialism Betrayed: Behind the Collapse of the Soviet Union

Lenin and Stalin, the architects of socialism in the USSR before the revisionist turn following Stalin's death

Lenin and Stalin, the architects of socialism in the USSR prior to the revisionist turn following Stalin's death.

The following interview with authors Roger Keeran and Thomas Kenny is from Marxism-Leninism Today and is a very interesting interview on the causes of the collapse of the Soviet Union. I have not yet read the book that this interview is discussing, but from the interview it seems that the authors ignore the ideological basis for capitalist restoration. In my opinion the authors miss a very important issue by not specifically addressing Khrushchev’s revisionist program of the two wholes (party of the whole people and state of the whole people) and three peacefuls (peaceful co-existence, peaceful competition, and peaceful transition), which forms the firm ideological basis for the total collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The interview nonetheless does well to discuss the two-line struggles that have characterized the entire history of the USSR. I would suggest that people see also the videos from Harpal Brar’s talks on Khrushevite revisionism and my article, Some Points on Stalin (and Mao).

Continue reading

Harpal Brar on Khrushchevite Revisionism and the Collapse of the Soviet Union

It is important to learn the lessons of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Harpal Brar, Chairman of the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist), in this series of 11 videos, gives a talk on the destructive role of Khrushchevite Revisionism at a party Study School held in Leeds. These videos are an excellent contribution to the summation of these experiences. Basically an outline and overview of the Polemic on the General Line of the International Communist Movement, but with the view from today, these videos serve well the purpose helping to popularize that seminal work of the anti-revisionist movement. The CPGB-ML has also released these videos on China.

Continue reading

Some points on Stalin (and Mao)

Stalin and Mao

Stalin and Mao

More and more these days, particularly among those calling themselves ‘Maoists’ and ‘post-Maoists’ it is becoming fashionable to go after Stalin and his legacy, to critique ‘Stalinism’ and to talk of ‘going beyond Stalinism’. There seems to go along with this a summation of Stalin that completely negates his successes, or that at least says that his errors were primary and successes were secondary, and that, overall Stalin should be thrown out. I want to seriously engage this trend, from my personal point of view. I’m not an expert, but I’ve read a few books and I’ve had a few discussions with people who have varying summations of Stalin and his contributions to the experience of proletarian revolution. This article, I hope, will only be the beginning of a series of discussions regarding this and related questions.

To begin with, lets get a few things out of the way. First, I do not believe that the question of Stalin is the cardinal question before Marxist-Leninists today. It is not the basis of rebuilding the unity of the Marxist-Leninist movement following the series of splits that occurred after his death and then the death of Mao Zedong. It is an important issue, but the basis of rebuilding unity among Marxist-Leninists should be based on agreement on Marxist-Leninist principles (rather than personalities) and anti-imperialist practice, i.e., proletarian internationalism. A summation of the experiences of the international communist movement is, of course, an integral part of building unity on the basis of principles. The 1999 declaration of the International Communist Seminar goes into this as well: “When parties have different ideological opinions concerning various questions, they can gradually surmount them in a process of common practical struggle against the international bourgeoisie, that strengthens confidence in the noblest ideals of humanity and eliminates all forms of opportunism, liberalism and dogmatism.” Continue reading