Kirov and the fantasy-prone
Maoist Internationalist Movement
mim3 at nyxfer.blythe.org
Fri Oct 27 18:48:40 MDT 1995
On Fri, 27 Oct 1995, Chegitz Guevara wrote:
> > I hope that our readers will notice that the anybody-but-Stalin
> > fantasy-opportunist line didn't find it necessary to say that
> > Kirov STOOD for ANYTHING different than Stalin did. Though
> > defending Trotsky in this same post, C.G. didn't find it necessary
> > to point out that Kirov opposed Trotsky just as Stalin did.
> I omitted the fact that Kirov didn't stand for anything different from
> Stalin *BECAUSE IT IS IRRELEVENT!* I does not matter that they had the
> same agenda. The point remains, which you have attepted to evade, that
> the Soviet bureaucracy tried to get rid of Stalin, and that he only
> remained in power because of his war of terror.
Pat for MIM replies: As you admitted in this post, your
only source for this assertion is a vaguely recalled
television program. Other accounts show Stalin with a majority
of the votes. Meanwhile from 1924 to 1934--even if your
account for Kirov were true--it would still remain
that far from getting rid of Stalin a majority voted for
Stalin again and again despite and against his attempts to resign.
As for what you consider irrelevant, this reveals more
of your purpose for argument. The differences between
Pepsi and Coca-Cola deserve more commentary than those
between Kirov and Stalin. As we already said in the post
you responded to, we wouldn't care if it turned out
Kirov had indeed been elected. There was no line difference.
Individualists are obsessed with individual differences;
we are addressing those interested in Marxism.
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism