USSR and PRC had really had checks and balances since they let dictators consolidate power and form cults of personality. You really think those are good examples of your point? Have you read entirely different histories than I have? Which books do you recommend then?
The USSR and PRC did not have dictatorships, this is a misunderstanding of the Soviet structure and the concept of the Mass Line. Not even the CIA believed the USSR to be a dictatorship. The USSR had a more democratic structure than the US:
Hey. I’m the creator of ComLib, I haven’t been making any EPUBs for some time, but I want to get back into it. Do you have anything you want made into an EPUB? If you don’t, do you have any recommendation for what I should work on next?
Elementary Principles of Philosophy, by Georges Politzer! Extremely straightforward and fantastic introduction to Dialectical and Historical Materialism, in a manner that builds from the beginnings of Idealism, Materialism, and Dialectics, and how over time these changed and built off each other alongside science, technology, and Mode of Production.
Soviet Russia and China were nominally a democracies, but both were controlled by individuals without checks. Stallin and Mau respectively. Again, what history books are you reading that is saying otherwise?
Soviet Russia and China were nominally a democracies, but both were controlled by individuals without checks.
Do you have any proof of this? Historical evidence is much the opposite, as the sources I have linked show you.
Stallin and Mau respectively.
Stalin was not without checks, nor did he control the entire USSR, according to historical evidence including internal CIA memos. Mao was forced out of power due to his failures with the Cultural Revolution, directly proving that checks not only existed, but were used.
Again, what history books are you reading that is saying otherwise?
Wikipedia has a capitalism supporting bias and says this
Like Lenin, Stalin acted modestly and unassumingly in public. John Gunther in 1940 described the politeness and good manners to visitors of “the most powerful single human being in the world”.[6] In the 1930s Stalin made several speeches that diminished the importance of individual leaders and disparaged the cult forming around him, painting such a cult as un-Bolshevik; instead, he emphasized the importance of broader social forces, such as the working class.[33][34] Stalin’s public actions seemed to support his professed disdain of the cult: Stalin often edited reports of Kremlin receptions, cutting applause and praise aimed at him and adding applause for other Soviet leaders.[33] Walter Duranty stated that Stalin edited a phrase in a draft of an interview by him of the dictator from “inheritor of the mantle of Lenin” to “faithful servant of Lenin”.[6]
A banner in 1934 was to feature Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, but Stalin had his name removed from it, yet by 1938 he was more than comfortable with the banner featuring his name.[35] Still, in 1936, Stalin banned renaming places after him.[36] In some memoirs Molotov claimed that Stalin had resisted the cult of personality, but soon came to be comfortable with it.[37]
The Finnish communist Arvo Tuominen reported a sarcastic toast proposed by Stalin himself at a New Year’s Party in 1935, in which he said: “Comrades! I want to propose a toast to our patriarch, life and sun, liberator of nations, architect of socialism [he rattled off all the appellations applied to him in those days] – Josef Vissarionovich Stalin, and I hope this is the first and last speech made to that genius this evening.”[38] In the beginning of 1938, Nikolai Yezhov proposed renaming Moscow to “Stalinodar”.[39] The question was raised at a session of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet. Stalin, however, reacted entirely negatively to this idea and, for this reason, the city retained the name Moscow.[39]
I was going to say something like This Soviet World or Russian Justice, but they are not actually history books. They are written from a contemporary standpoint. Pat Sloans Soviet Democracy is another contemporary book.
I’m sure cowbee will link you to Blackshirts and reds, that is a history book.
USSR and PRC had really had checks and balances since they let dictators consolidate power and form cults of personality. You really think those are good examples of your point? Have you read entirely different histories than I have? Which books do you recommend then?
The USSR and PRC did not have dictatorships, this is a misunderstanding of the Soviet structure and the concept of the Mass Line. Not even the CIA believed the USSR to be a dictatorship. The USSR had a more democratic structure than the US:
I recommend reading, among the other books linked, Blackshirts and Reds.
Hey. I’m the creator of ComLib, I haven’t been making any EPUBs for some time, but I want to get back into it. Do you have anything you want made into an EPUB? If you don’t, do you have any recommendation for what I should work on next?
Elementary Principles of Philosophy, by Georges Politzer! Extremely straightforward and fantastic introduction to Dialectical and Historical Materialism, in a manner that builds from the beginnings of Idealism, Materialism, and Dialectics, and how over time these changed and built off each other alongside science, technology, and Mode of Production.
Great work, by the way!
There was a pretty decent EPUB at https://annas-archive.org/md5/5212d271f108a89b4dbd54b658b4fbda so I modified it very slightly, https://comlib.encryptionin.space/epubs/elementary-principles-of-philosophy/
Ayyyy LET’SSS GOOOO! GREAT JOB!
Soviet Russia and China were nominally a democracies, but both were controlled by individuals without checks. Stallin and Mau respectively. Again, what history books are you reading that is saying otherwise?
Other than the sources Cowbee linked, @[email protected] and @[email protected] also compiled a list of transcripts of times Stalin tried to resign from his post.
Do you have any proof of this? Historical evidence is much the opposite, as the sources I have linked show you.
Stalin was not without checks, nor did he control the entire USSR, according to historical evidence including internal CIA memos. Mao was forced out of power due to his failures with the Cultural Revolution, directly proving that checks not only existed, but were used.
The ones I have linked.
The book you linked seemed to be a explicitly Communist reexamining. I wouldn’t really go to that for unbiased history. But anyway.
Do you agree that Stalin and Mau created cults of personality?
There is no such thing as unbiased
Do you agree that Stalin and Mau created cults of personality?
Wikipedia has a capitalism supporting bias and says this
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin’s_cult_of_personality#:~:text=Stalin’s opinion of his cult,-Like Lenin%2C Stalin&text=In the 1930s Stalin made,such as the working class.
Those are all Stalin’s public statements. It looks good to downplay your cult. But he still undoubtedly had one.
Lennan for example seemed to pretty strongly oppose a cult of personality forming around him. But Stallin didn’t, just some humble public statements.
Do you agree that Mau and Stallin extensively purged political opponent?
I was going to say something like This Soviet World or Russian Justice, but they are not actually history books. They are written from a contemporary standpoint. Pat Sloans Soviet Democracy is another contemporary book.
I’m sure cowbee will link you to Blackshirts and reds, that is a history book.