Stalin, etc.

Xxxzx Xyyxyz musides at
Sun Aug 8 02:45:19 MDT 1999

<excerpt>describes factory meetings were directors got terrible
roastings from the

workforce, who were quite sure that Stalin was on their side


 And this was key, yes? Not Socialism, not economic sense, but being on
<italic>Stalin's</italic> side. It happens, you point out, that Stalin
was right many times; and so in it had to be that way (because of
historical circumstances), and so Stalin is vindicated.

 What I am most interested to learn is why it was necessary for Stalin
to have absolute authority; how one person having absolute authority
can be Socialist, which if my understanding is correct, is defined as a
workers' state?

>they knew what was allowed and what was not;

>there was a kind of social contract here, and it worked.

 The workers are in a Contrat social: they can abuse their boses but
cannot dispute (so cannot vote on) legislature. Fearful bosses and
obidient workers. Wonderful system for a dictator.


More information about the Marxism mailing list