Hakan, You wrote: "Lenin had western support, from industrial interests, this is documented."
Documented? Where? Perhaps it's filed under "L" just before the Leuchter report. Lenin and Trotsky were influential in the creation of the first labor movement in the US (IWW) by virtue of one of it's most influential leaders, Eugene Debs - a Socialist. The first labor leaders followed Trotsky ideology. Why would industrialists support an organization which brought power to the masses. More importantly, why on Earth would leaders of that movement embrace those who want to take it away? You have no direct response to anything I've posted so far. You suggest that a "corporacracy" (as if one can differentiate between that and capitalism) will replace communism when a communist state has yet to emerge, giving you nothing to replace. I stated that Communism was a response to elitism and the imbalance of a class society. I even challenged you to show me where Marx proposes elitism in the Manifesto (a document which led to Lenin's vision of revolution in Russia). I mention US military support of the Czar's White Army and still, you feel that US industrialists oppose both their government and their own ideology by supporting the Bolsheviks. Despite all that, you just keep going without missing a beat. Mike R Hakan Falk wrote: > Mike, > > Lenin had western support, from industrial interests, this is > documented. I even read about Lenins return to Russia, which was > arranged by western friends. Trotsky supported by competing western > interest, yes. Stalin, I do not know enough and have not seen any > records of that, he also had minimal western exposure, compared with > the others. It is however records of that the industrialist expected > that Russia would offer more opportunities after the revolution, > which never materialized. They flirted heavily with Stalin. The major > corporate players was the French, Germans and to much lesser extent > US. As with Vietnam, the Americans tried to jump in when the French > failed, they never learn. > > It was probably the backlash from the disappointment of the Russian > revolution, that made the Germans to support and bring AH to power. > AH was for a long time seen as the defender against communism and had > support from the industrialists and royalists during the 1930's, when > the west was afraid of communist revolutions. AH's invasion of > Austria was both supported and welcomed by Austria and the west. It > was not until the invasion of Poland that France and UK acted, with > the mutual defense treaty with Poland as the reason. France by a > lackluster attack on Germany, which led to WWII. AH was an Austrian > as you know, not German, he was also a corporal in the royal army > during WWI. I am convinced that there are many more revelations in > the pipe line in the coming decades. The real history take at least > 100 years to write, they say. > > By the way, it was similar naive expectations on that the Americans > would be welcomed by the people on the streets, as in Iraq and > Afghanistan. They never learn. > > Hakan > > > At 16:51 08/05/2006, you wrote: > >> Hakan, >> >> You said: "What I mean is that it could easily replace both >> communism and capitalism, since it is and has always been a question >> of which "elite" group that take the power." >> >> I respectfully disagree. >> >> Re: Replacing Communism >> >> 1.) You can't replace what hasn't existed. If you mean Stalinism, then say >> it. >> 2.) Show me where Marx proposes elitism in the manifesto. Communism >> was A RESPONSE TO elitism and the imbalance of a class society. >> >> Re: Replacing Capitalism - Corporatism and capitalism must coexist. >> One represents the logical progression of the other and (IMO) can >> only be quantified since it's existence is a forgone conclusion. >> >> I don't even feel comfortable making a direct comparison between >> capitalism and any model of government since elements of it exists >> everywhere. Both capitalism and libertarianism exist in democracies >> as well as anarchist states (for example). They are elements of a >> larger scheme. >> >> If Lenin and the Bolsheviks were supported by corporations, it >> certainly wasn't welcome (unless of course they were willing to >> redistribute their wealth). Early in the revolution, Trotsky and the >> Mensheviks may have welcomed that kind of support (although I doubt >> it) until he joined Lenin and fought together on the same side. >> >> You need to back up your statement with some more information. To my >> knowledge, there were many events that led to the Russian >> revolution, like the February 1917 bread riot during a woman's day >> celebration. The counterinsurgency was fought by the Czar's White >> Army with troop support from the US. I know of no serious >> contribution to the Bolsheviks by US corporations. If anything, >> corporations may have assisted in putting down the revolution by >> supporting Stalin. >> >> >> Mike >> >> >> Hakan Falk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Mike, >> >> Since I think I introduced corporacracy (in greek, corporation power >> as opposite to democracy that is people power) on this list and think >> it describes well this phenomena. A logical definition of capitalism >> is today is better described as corporatism. What I mean is that it >> could easily replace both communism and capitalism, since it is and >> has always been a question of which "elite" group that take the >> power. Interesting that you brought in Stalin in this, maybe he and >> Bush are only the two sides of the same coin, in representing a >> relatively small groups interests. Lenin by the way, was heavily >> supported by the emerging American corporations, who instigated the >> Russian revolution. >> >> Hakan >> >> >> At 14:25 08/05/2006, you wrote: >> >>> Hakan, >>> >>> "...so also the fight against an illusive communism." >>> >>> "Illusive" is a good word to describe it, although I prefer to call >>> it non-existant? >>> >>> The confrontation was between the US and an expanding fascist empire >>> in Russia. However, calling it "communist" is as deceptive as the so >>> called "war on terror", "war on drugs" or "war on...", etc. Either >>> way, I think we're on the same page and in my opinion, your >>> observation is an important one. >>> >>> "When the Stalinist bureaucracy arose beginning in the early 1920s, >>> Trotsky, who had been the key organizer of the 1917 insurrection and >>> who had led the Red Army to victory in the Civil War, became the >>> champion of the fight against Stalin. Before his death in 1924, >>> Lenin had begun to challenge the rising bureaucracy, which included >>> a proposal (suppressed by the central committee after his death) to >>> remove Stalin from his position as General Secretary of the party." >>> >>> http://www.socialistworker.org/2005-1/543/543_09_Intenationalism.shtml >>> >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> [snip] _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
