Of all the things Kruschev would do after Stalins death that Stalin should’ve shot him for - running tanks into Hungary was absolutely correct
The Communists who sided with tanks going into Hungary was how Communists earned the moniker “Tankie”
Yet 50 years later it’s revealed that MI6 were training the rebels
“Tankie” should unironically be worn with pride. In the fact “tankies” were absolutely correct in characterising the uprising as a semi-fascist counter-revolution (doors of jews and Communists were marked for extermination) that needed to be put down
Some of the weapons used were American, and others almost certainly British. Mr Smith says MI6 and the CIA had buried arms caches in the woods around Prague and Budapest for use by “stay-behind” parties or fifth columnists in case of war. Additional: The Truth About Hungary is a brilliant and quite short book worth reading. Published in 1957 it basically set out the character of the protests as semi-fascist and supported by the imperialist powers. Basically everything that was dismissed as Communist propaganda but has now been confirmed by the Western press. People seem to forget that hungary only a 11 years previously was a fascist state allied with the Nazis and Left Anticommunists have continually tried to portray the uprising as a “socialist uprising but with a more human face”
Section from the book “The Truth about Hungary” by Herbert Aptheker; a prominent figure in U.S. scholarly discourse in the 1940’s, and Marxist Historian. Written in 1957 it outlined what later would be confirmed by the bourgeois Western press
"The special correspondent of the Yugoslav paper, Politika, (Nov. 13, 1956) describing the events of those days, said that the homes of Communists were marked with a white cross and those of Jews with a black cross, to serve as signs for the extermination squads. “There is no longer any room for doubt,” said the Yugoslav reporter, “it is an example of classic Hungarian fascism and of White Terror. The information,” continued this writer, "coming from the provinces tells how in certain places Communists were having their eyes put out, their ears cut off, and that they were being killed in the most terrible ways."
"But the forces of reaction were rapidly consolidating their power and pushing forward on the top levels, while in the streets the blood of scores of massacred Communists, Jews, and progressives was flowing."
"Some of the reports reaching Warsaw from Budapest today caused considerable concern. These reports told of massacres of Communists and Jews by what were described as 'Fascist elements' ...." (N.Y. Times, Nov. 1. 1956)
"The evidence is conclusive that the entry of Soviet troops into Budapest stopped the execution of scores, perhaps thousands of Jews, for by the end of October and early November, anti-Semtic pogroms - hallmark of unbridled fascistic terror - were making their appearance, after an absence of some ten years, within Hungary."
"A correspondent of the Israeli newspaper Maariv (Tel Aviv) reported:
During the uprising a number of former Nazis were released from prison and other former Nazis came to Hungary from Salzburg . . . I met them at the border . . . I saw anti-Semitic posters in Budapest . . . On the walls, street lights, streetcars, you saw inscriptions reading: “Down with Jew Gero!” “Down with Jew Rakosi!” or just simply “down with the Jews!”
Leading rabbinical circles in New York received a cable early in November from corresponding circles in Vienna that “Jewish blood is being shed by the rebels in Hungary.” Very much later-in February, 1957-the World Jewish Congress reported that “anti-Semitic excesses occurred in more than twenty villages and smaller provincial towns during the October-November revolt.” This occurred, according to this very conservative body, because “fascist and anti-Semitic groups had apparently seized the opportunity, presented by the absence of a central authority, to come to the surface.” Many among the Jewish refugees from Hungary, the report continued, had fled from this anti-Semitic pogrom-like atmosphere (N.Y. Times, Feb. 15, 1957). This confirmed the earlier report made by the British Rabbi, R. Pozner, who, after touring refugee camps, declared that “the majority of Jews who left Hungary did so for fear of the Hungarians and not the Russians.” The Paris Jewish newspaper, Naye Presse, asserted that Jewish refugees in France claimed quite generally that Soviet soldiers had saved their lives."
I don't have a lemmy account other than whatever is associated with the hexbear instance, and I honestly don't fully grasp how all the federation stuff and cross-posting stuff works on lemmy. Somebody who is more comfortable navigating the lemmy cross-posting stuff can copy my comment though, I dunno.
Krushev did one objectively right thing in his whole tenure, and western leftists still can't handle it. Its like western leftists only like to watch real leftists lose. I think that yellow guy wrote a book about it
I mean he also helped the Cubans, the Chinese, the Africans, and continued some of the Stalin-era plans. I feel like I'm also forgetting something else I'd say that was nice about him, but I'll probably remember later.
Anyways point is, is that he did good things and bad things through out his life and that we shouldn't wholesale throw out his experience as one of the leaders of the Communist movement - unlike how he threw Stalin under the bus - and ultimately try to be objective in judging his professional career. By my judgement being that he was lightyears and galaxies ahead of any president we've had or will ever have under this government and in the sino-soviet split I would side with the Soviet as being on the right side of history. That said I would still have him and several other rightists as face trial as opportunists of the highest order and be liquidated.
To give him credit for "helping the Chinese" when he destroyed sino-soviet relations is, uh, not reasonable. He destroyed hundreds of arrangements made under Stalin for the cooperation between the two nations and the purchase of technology by China because China didn't want to host Soviet military basis (or denounce Stalin). China went on to pursue dreadful foreign policy, but Khrushchev is absolutely at fault for the initial split.
He did help Cuba though and gets full credit for that.
He followed through with the majority of the deal set by the Stalin-era presidium of significantly pouring Soviet resources, technology, expertise, etc. into China to help them get the first step towards modernization, in addition to trying to temper Mao's, almost Trotskyite, desire to assertively spread the Revolution in a post-nuke world.
And Khrushchev may be at fault for causing the split, but it's Mao's fault for exacerbating it to the point that the PRC - even after the ultra-left gang of four and well into the period of time the CPC is in the grasp of Rightists - conducts objective harm to the international communist movement by siding with America against the Soviet Union several times over the decades.
Like I said, Mao pursued bad foreign policy, but it was only the catastrophically bad US-collaboration (etc) after Khrushchev started the split, which he did for horseshit reasons.
And my, boiled down, point is that Mao's a splitter. Even if Khrushchev decided to be a piece of shit - which is understating it - that doesn't excuse Mao from being a little shit that grabbed his ball and went home.
We can point to the best Korea as having the most advanced and nuanced take on the whole situation and the period thereafter which is basically boiled down to continuing to cooperate even though you disagree because there's a whole imperialist world out there frothing at the mouth to enslave you or exterminate you.
Krushchev was the one who stopped cooperating first unless you believe that China not wanting Soviet military installations is a blow on the same level as Khrushchev's subsequent betrayal!
It's not lost on me how the whole ordeal fucked things over. Reading about poor Albania was very depressing, though in some respects it might be said Hoxha was also a splitter. I don't really know his policy but he correctly identified Khrushchevites as revisionists and wreckers and China as a turncoat, so it was a very difficult position, especially if Hoxha is to be believed about Khrushchev boasting to him about how he killed Stalin.
China not wanting Soviet bases makes about as much sense as the Soviets not wanting to fulfill China's request for a full restoration of pre-1859 Tsarist borders. The whole sino-soviet split was the result of pigheaddedness and arguing who had the bigger pighead is to aspire to be a pighead alongside them.
And frankly I don't know much about Albania outside of a story I either heard or read about some boomer hating his job so much he wrote to Enver to find him a better job and actually succeeding. Which is incredibly funny and an incredible testament of character for Hoxie as far as I'm concerned.
It's like making fun of Trotsky for being a little shit that didn't tip Waiters vs recognizing his successes and failures wholistically. Fun to do dunks but good to keep a realistic understanding.
I'm begging liberals to actually learn about the Hungarian uprising and how sending tanks was actually the correct move.
Come on. We're all leftists here. We know that the best way to start a workers revolution is to break nazis out of jail 🙄🙄🙄
Of all the things Kruschev would do after Stalins death that Stalin should’ve shot him for - running tanks into Hungary was absolutely correct
The Communists who sided with tanks going into Hungary was how Communists earned the moniker “Tankie”
Yet 50 years later it’s revealed that MI6 were training the rebels
“Tankie” should unironically be worn with pride. In the fact “tankies” were absolutely correct in characterising the uprising as a semi-fascist counter-revolution (doors of jews and Communists were marked for extermination) that needed to be put down
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/mi6-trained-rebels-to-fight-soviets-in-hungarian-revolt-1359599.html
Some of the weapons used were American, and others almost certainly British. Mr Smith says MI6 and the CIA had buried arms caches in the woods around Prague and Budapest for use by “stay-behind” parties or fifth columnists in case of war. Additional: The Truth About Hungary is a brilliant and quite short book worth reading. Published in 1957 it basically set out the character of the protests as semi-fascist and supported by the imperialist powers. Basically everything that was dismissed as Communist propaganda but has now been confirmed by the Western press. People seem to forget that hungary only a 11 years previously was a fascist state allied with the Nazis and Left Anticommunists have continually tried to portray the uprising as a “socialist uprising but with a more human face”
https://espressostalinist.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/the-truth-about-hungary.pdf
Section from the book “The Truth about Hungary” by Herbert Aptheker; a prominent figure in U.S. scholarly discourse in the 1940’s, and Marxist Historian. Written in 1957 it outlined what later would be confirmed by the bourgeois Western press
:gold-communist:
you oughta post this info in the comments over there
if you're a member of a different lemmy, you can get there like this:
https://
[lemmy you are in]/c/196@lemmy.worldthen scroll down to the post
I don't have a lemmy account other than whatever is associated with the hexbear instance, and I honestly don't fully grasp how all the federation stuff and cross-posting stuff works on lemmy. Somebody who is more comfortable navigating the lemmy cross-posting stuff can copy my comment though, I dunno.
seems like a waste of time, i doubt they can read
Krushev did one objectively right thing in his whole tenure, and western leftists still can't handle it. Its like western leftists only like to watch real leftists lose. I think that yellow guy wrote a book about it
I mean he also helped the Cubans, the Chinese, the Africans, and continued some of the Stalin-era plans. I feel like I'm also forgetting something else I'd say that was nice about him, but I'll probably remember later.
Anyways point is, is that he did good things and bad things through out his life and that we shouldn't wholesale throw out his experience as one of the leaders of the Communist movement - unlike how he threw Stalin under the bus - and ultimately try to be objective in judging his professional career. By my judgement being that he was lightyears and galaxies ahead of any president we've had or will ever have under this government and in the sino-soviet split I would side with the Soviet as being on the right side of history. That said I would still have him and several other rightists as face trial as opportunists of the highest order and be liquidated.
To give him credit for "helping the Chinese" when he destroyed sino-soviet relations is, uh, not reasonable. He destroyed hundreds of arrangements made under Stalin for the cooperation between the two nations and the purchase of technology by China because China didn't want to host Soviet military basis (or denounce Stalin). China went on to pursue dreadful foreign policy, but Khrushchev is absolutely at fault for the initial split.
He did help Cuba though and gets full credit for that.
He followed through with the majority of the deal set by the Stalin-era presidium of significantly pouring Soviet resources, technology, expertise, etc. into China to help them get the first step towards modernization, in addition to trying to temper Mao's, almost Trotskyite, desire to assertively spread the Revolution in a post-nuke world.
And Khrushchev may be at fault for causing the split, but it's Mao's fault for exacerbating it to the point that the PRC - even after the ultra-left gang of four and well into the period of time the CPC is in the grasp of Rightists - conducts objective harm to the international communist movement by siding with America against the Soviet Union several times over the decades.
Like I said, Mao pursued bad foreign policy, but it was only the catastrophically bad US-collaboration (etc) after Khrushchev started the split, which he did for horseshit reasons.
And my, boiled down, point is that Mao's a splitter. Even if Khrushchev decided to be a piece of shit - which is understating it - that doesn't excuse Mao from being a little shit that grabbed his ball and went home.
We can point to the best Korea as having the most advanced and nuanced take on the whole situation and the period thereafter which is basically boiled down to continuing to cooperate even though you disagree because there's a whole imperialist world out there frothing at the mouth to enslave you or exterminate you.
Krushchev was the one who stopped cooperating first unless you believe that China not wanting Soviet military installations is a blow on the same level as Khrushchev's subsequent betrayal!
It's not lost on me how the whole ordeal fucked things over. Reading about poor Albania was very depressing, though in some respects it might be said Hoxha was also a splitter. I don't really know his policy but he correctly identified Khrushchevites as revisionists and wreckers and China as a turncoat, so it was a very difficult position, especially if Hoxha is to be believed about Khrushchev boasting to him about how he killed Stalin.
China not wanting Soviet bases makes about as much sense as the Soviets not wanting to fulfill China's request for a full restoration of pre-1859 Tsarist borders. The whole sino-soviet split was the result of pigheaddedness and arguing who had the bigger pighead is to aspire to be a pighead alongside them.
And frankly I don't know much about Albania outside of a story I either heard or read about some boomer hating his job so much he wrote to Enver to find him a better job and actually succeeding. Which is incredibly funny and an incredible testament of character for Hoxie as far as I'm concerned.
Fair. I was mostly joking, but thats really good to keep in mind.
It's like making fun of Trotsky for being a little shit that didn't tip Waiters vs recognizing his successes and failures wholistically. Fun to do dunks but good to keep a realistic understanding.
:corn-man-khrush:
it isnt even about that shit anymore, theyre just saying its anything they dont like at this point
My mom is a fucking red fash tankie cause she made me eat my vegetables