[Marxism] China and Stalin

D OC donaloc at hotmail.com
Wed Nov 22 06:20:35 MST 2006

>Stalin's crime in selling the lives of the Chinese
Communists in Shanghai to the KMT in 1927 contributed directly to the 
derailment  of
revolution in China to 1949. Any other assertion is an attempt to distort

JD, where did you learn your history? The Trotskyist school of fabrications?

Stalin didn't sell anyone's lives. What for? The situation in Shanghai 
wasn't as simple as you present. Mao wrote that the repression was 
aggravated by an overly lax attitude to relations with the Nationalists and 
demilitarisation. When he got there it was already too late. The subsequent 
attempts to overturn the situation led to further defeats. The critical 
thing is to visit it from the lens of the party leadership not from outside 
and using categories of analysis alien to the concrete situation. I believe 
Lenin's single most telling quote is 'truth is never abstract, all truth is 
concrete'. That's where we must base an assessment of what they did right 
and wrong on the ground. From their perceptions of reality.

If Stalin contributed 'directly' to the derailment of the Chinese revolution 
from 1927 to 1949. I suppose it happened to succeed despite him and the 
Soviet aid he provided.

Of far more interest to those who really want to know what was happening in 
China in this period are the writings of people like Mao himself or those 
others who led the *successful* revolution there whilst Trotsky was being 
lauded by imperialists 'society' and calling for the overthrow of the Soviet 
Union as the only way to save the revolution! I just remember he said that 
the Soviet Union wouldn't win unless it had a revolution and overthrew 
Stalin. Strangely, his tendency for idealised overgeneralisation got that 
one wrong too.

I think that Trotsky is worthy reading in the period up to 1928 - when he 
still had a grasp of what was happening in Russia - even if you don't have 
to agree with him entirely. His writings after this period fall down I think 
though. More critically, his writings as a Menshevic are much more dangerous 
as they are objectively wrong in many cases e.g his underestimation of 
imperialism. In virtually every case where he clashed with Lenin he was 
wrong - in particular about permanent revolution.

But I don't expect people to exhibit perfect judgement all the time, he did 
very well much better than maybe 99% of others. Not everything he wrote 
about Stalinism was wrong - in fact much justified indeed. He was not 
innocent of the same charges himself though, not entirely. His reputation as 
a theoretician is deserved although those that followed him were pigmies in 
comparison. My problem is the oversimplification of one side, White, the 
other, Black.

Incidentally, Mao who was quite critical of Stalin at times, was far less 
positive towards the Trotskyists who appear to have been arguing strategy 
from economic categories inherited from marx developed in Western Europe and 
trying to apply them to a colony of great backwardness. Mao treated them as 
potentially counter-revolutionary.

For his 'selling to death of the communists', Stalin was lauded in China 
under Mao. Even after 1957, Mao still quoted him and adjudged him, was it, 
70% right and 30% wrong.

In the grand scale of things that's not too bad. I think. Obviously Trotsky 
was 100% by your assessment. I don't think so.

Your lies about China are chronic revisionism and massive 
oversimplification. You have clearly never made a point of reading all sides 
to the dispute.

However, I'll steer away as we're not meant to be revisiting 
Trotsky-vs-Stalin/Mao for the nth time. I haven't the time to educate you or 
the inclination.

What is important is action. It is precisely that content of my emails that 
you studiously avoid. Does that say anything about you?

Le meas,

Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters! 

More information about the Marxism mailing list