Should have publically stoned every single counter-revolutionary after forcing them to apologize to the people for their betrayal.
It was based.
>Le BASED wholesome 100 chungus invasion to remove one type of marxism-leninism with another!
You are all out of touch wankers and why people dont like communists.
I think events like Prague Spring show a weakness of Soviet propaganda. Because the West has shown just how easily it can transform mostly anti-system liberals into loyalists just by demonizing the alternatives, but somehow the Soviets never managed to reach the sort of state where just the suggestion that "maybe the US/FDR/the west are doing something better" would get a response of "DON'T YOU KNOW ABOUT HOW MANY PEOPLE THEY KILLED OMG ILLITERATE IDEALIST PUNK KIDDO". Ironic how the West is more propagandized than the Totalitarian USSR and its block.
>elections, freedom of expression and freedom of press are counter-revolutionary
great mask-off moment, commies
really makes you think
I don't believe in freedom for the bourgeois
afaik the leadership were given clear red lines by soviets which they promptly ignored and then decided to give porkies as much as of a chance to take control as possible
retards deserved it
It's embarrassing how inept the USSR was at coopting and neutralizing dissent within its borders. Modern communists could learn a thing or two from the Democratic Party and liberal media they're always seething about.
the bourgeois = workers who disagree with me (me = ten 70 year old russian bureaucrats who spent their lives climbing their way to the top by denouncing other bureaucrats and getting them executed on false charges)
Sure they weren't Jewish Bolshevik bureaucrats?
No that was anti-Zionist and correct, Soviet Jews belonged to the USSR, not a colony of imperialism where most Jews don't even live. Antisemitic would've been shoving all the Jews there to remove them.
>It would be an excellent idea to call in respectable, accredited anti-Semites as liquidators of property. To the people they would vouch for the fact that we do not wish to bring about the impoverishment of the countries that we leave. At first they must not be given large fees for this; otherwise we shall spoil our instruments and make them despicable as “stooges of the Jews.” Later their fees will increase, and in the end we shall have only Gentile officials in the countries from which we have emigrated. The anti-Semites will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies. We want to emigrate as respected people.
Theodor Herzl, founder of Zionism openly courting antisemites.
>since Jew lobby in the USA was a major driving force against CCCP
No actually it was just Aryan Gentile Capitalists and Harvard WASPs in the CIA as well as some capitalist Jews.
<wahh it's the fucking jews, gas them!
If these movement was just bougeois counterrevolutionary scum going against the people, how is it that it was able to gain a legitimate degree of mass support? Surely if the system was already working well and if Czechslovak democracy was sufficient there would be no popular movement against the tanks. If not, surely that means that there were real issues that shouldve been reformed and that rolling in tanks and not coming to some concession with legitimate popular desires was a large mistake.
You can make the same disingenuous argument about Perestroika. The Czech revisionists had about the same support. As >>1024367
shows anticommunists always use socialist rhetoric as a mask, whether it's Hitler or Dubchek.
hitlerite scum should be nailed to planks of wood and beaten with rods
>>1024354>Was it a glorious pushback against a western-backed bourgeois counterrevolution
Which class are these "people"?
I'd like to shake your hand good man.
>>1024717>Modern communists could learn a thing or two from the Democratic Party and liberal media they're always seething about.
Be the party of billionaires who control the media? There was much dissent in the West when there were socialist states to fund anti-capitalist groups.
>>1024605>le FoE and FoP are both le good
just means free pass for media oligarchs to spread capitalist propaganda. ok demonrat
We stand for freedom for the working class and repression of the bourgeoisie.
Anticommunist revolts in the ComInform during the "Stalinist" period of 1945-March 1953: 0.
Anticommunist revolts in the Warsaw Pact during the Khrushchevite period of 1953-1968: 5.
socialists believe that epople are at their base ok and can see through bullshit
the truth is they're dumb and gullible and need to be tricked into doing something good because left to their own devices they'll start massacring
>>1025693>You can make the same disingenuous argument about Perestroika.
The same argument should be made about Perestroika. The fact that such liberalization movements were able to get positive support should be interpreted as a failure of the Soviet system to prevent the alienation of a considerable amount of its population. Perestroika obviously wasn't the solution, but changes needed to be made to build a more authentic proletarian democracy.
Is there merit to the accusations that the reformers were planning to restore capitalism?
>>1054704>Is there merit to the accusations that the reformers were planning to restore capitalism?
I mean, there definitely wasn't some "plan" or "secret conspiracy".
Some of them, like Ota Šik were then bragging how they've back in 1968 already seen how planned economy is inferior and how socialism always leads to totalitarian violence or some crap. But this is just pandering to the liberal crowd.
Even in emigration, Šik still supported some sort of "democratic socialism", he has gone full left wing neoliberal only in the 1990s when he published that infamous article saying that democracy is incompatible with socialism.
As for the others, like Dubček or Smrkovský, they definitely weren't some secret anticommunists. You can say that by following their statements from the beggining of the spring 1968 to the july 1968. At the beggining there was a lot of enthusiasm with "democratisation process", so you would see minister of internal affairs Josef Pavel allowing K 231 (the club of former political prisoners) to exist but in May/June even radical reformers like Kriegel were saying that activities of these organizations are harmful to the country and that Party should show to the people that most of the political prisoners were arrested and tried rightfully and make some exhibitions with all the weapons and illegal radiotransmitters of the 1950s anti-communist illegal groups.
What I am trying to say, is that even the reform wing in the Party was shocked how fast the things were getting out of hand and how open anti-communists started to be more and more vocal in the media. It is very probable that if there was no military intervention, they would have curbed the reforms themselves or there would be an inter party coup by "conservative" communists led by Vasil Bilak and co.
tl,dr Their actions weren't led by some hatred of socialism but by absolute naivity.
>What I am trying to say, is that even the reform wing in the Party was shocked how fast the things were getting out of hand and how open anti-communists started to be more and more vocal in the media.
I was always under the impression that the Prague Spring was considerably different from Hungary in that it was far less chaotic and that fewer reactionaries had come out of the woodwork to push for greater shifts to the right. Seems like I was mistaken, although it also seems like the government had some modicum of control of the situation, whereas in Hungary state power collapsed completely. It seems like in these situations, there is always the danger that a would-be reformer becomes "Kerensky in reverse" to borrow Aptheker's description of Nagy, ie initial modest reforms encourage reactionaries to organize and push more aggressively, and each concession only emboldens them to push harder. I wonder if there is a solution to this problem, and a way for a bureaucratized state like the CSSR to democratize without emboldening counterrevolution.
I have these at home. But 2 of them are translated from russian
I can't give you some bibliography, because personally I don't know many such books.
Usually, they can be bought in second hand bookshops. You won't find them in libraries, because most of them have thrown them in trash after 1989
>>1025693>Tfw the masses support literal liberalism and the only response you can muster is to slaughter them into submission
Shit like this is why people despise stalinoids, including most other leftists
Glad you're banned tbh, frustrating to interact with someone who can only reply with violent fantasies to all disagreements
I mean, we can think whatever we want about the brezhnevite geronts, but the term "a crawling couter-revolution" coined by Vasil Bilak was very apt here.
The anti-communists in the media or among the intelligentsia at the time were usually also nominally supporting socialism, I don't know about anyone who would openly reject it. It was often hard to tell who is who.
But the archival materials show that the Státní Bezpečnost (The State Security - our intelligence and counter-intelligence and basically the secret police) was informed very well what was happening.
For example there is a recording of a conversation between professor Václav Černý and some newspaper redactor, that reflects the ideology of the milieu very well.
Černý literally says:>if the situation comes to the gallows, then we can "wash our hands", that won't be our fault
And people who "weren't satisfied with the regime", let's say, understood very well what the intellectuals mean.
Some of them even decided to "do something against the communists". Of course, these actions weren't well prepared and often totally retarded.
For instance, there was a case of two morons who scattered metal parts of bearing on a railroad and then when police uncovered them, they explained that they "wanted to do a sabotage against the communists"
Do you have any thoughts on how a socialist state might be able to democratize without empowering these types of people?
Thanks so much for the reply, are there any noteable Theorists, Economists or Philosophers from Czechoslovakia? The only one I know of is Ota Sik.
tbh, I don't know. There should probably some equilibrium between "soft" and "hard" power. But I don't understand these questions much.>>1055236
czechs and slovaks lack theorists of global importance. Bohumír Šmeral was probably well-known in his day, from trotskyites it would be Václav Salus. Journalists like Julius Fučík or E.E. Kisch are also famous.
"Dissidents" like Petr Uhl, Zdeněk Mlynář or Karel Kaplan are renowned in the west (for obvious reasons)
We had many writers, poets, journalists or directors involved in the communist movement, but far less economists or actual marxist theoriticians.
Some texts of czech and slovak authors can be found herehttps://kominternet.cz/subdom/teorie/dila_01.htmlhttps://kominternet.cz/subdom/teorie/dila_02.html
Were they really the masses? Come on
I thought this would be interesting for this thread
Results of a sociological survey from July 1968:https://ct24.ceskatelevize.cz/domaci/2571877-pruzkum-z-leta-1968-ukazal-ze-lide-si-neprali-vznik-strany-ktera-konkurovala-ksc
>Recently, the National Assembly passed a law abolishing the censorship. Do you think it was a good or bad decision?
good decision- whole ČSSR - 86%, Czech lands - 91%, Slovakia - 74%
bad decision - whole ČSSR - 5%, Czech lands - 3%, Slovakia - 8%
>Name public and political personalities who you trust the most
Czech lands: 1. Ludvík Svoboda, 2. Alexander Dubček, 3. Ota Šik
Slovakia: 1. Alexander Dubček, 2. Ludvík Svoboda, 3. Gustáv Husák
>Do you think it would be benificial if we had a non-socialist party, that wouldn't be a member of the National Front?
it would be beneficial: whole ČSSR - 26%, Czech lands - 28%, Slovakia - 22%
it would not be beneficial: whole ČSSR - 53%, Czech lands - 54%, Slovakia - 51%
>Recently, the command and staff military exercises of the allied armies (CSSR, USSR, Poland, Hungary)ended on the territory of our republic.>Do you think the members of the allied armies should leave our territory as soon as possible after the end of the exercises?
yes - whole ČSSR - 91%, Czech lands - 93%, Slovakia - 83%
no - whole ČSSR - 2%, Czech lands - 2%, Slovakia - 3%
>>1046309>Anticommunist revolts in the ComInform during the "Stalinist" period of 1945-March 1953: 0.
that time wasn't calm at all
not only that you had anti-communist organizations existing on a legal basis, there also was the fascist underground still existing - various banderites, "cursed soldiers" and werwolfs were running around central-eastern europe. not counting the kulak "resistance" to the collectivization, or various spies and terrorist crossing the "iron curtain"
also, it's not a very good argument in favor of the soviet system under Stalin because it makes it look like everything depended on Stalin being alive
I hope you don't think that the most of the czechoslovak population were burgeois, right?
They were consumed with petty-bourgeois ideology through western deception.
Don't try to dodge the point. There was nothing like Hungary 1956 in that period. Yes, there were anticommunists, but the security forces and workers armies were given full power to liquidate them. That's how the Banderaites were crushed by the MGB/MVD.
It's the Khrushchevites who deliberately weakened security forces, which led to fascist revolts, in their campaign against "Stalinists", starting with Beria.
Which was at the time cloaked in socialist terminologies. People wouldn’t have gone for explicitly bourgeois shit. Keep that in mind
Difference is American ruling class is forced to use propaganda methods to contain their armed masses. Soviets didnt have this problem and could use military if things didnt go as party elites planned.
>>1058702>Do you think it would be benificial if we had a non-socialist party, that wouldn't be a member of the National Front?<it would not be beneficial: whole ČSSR - 53%, Czech lands - 54%, Slovakia - 51%
Very interesting. It seems like the majority of CSSR citizens genuinely did want a less repressive and more democratic form of socialism, which is also consistent with the UN investigation in Hungary. In this case it really seems like the issue was not the Soviet intervention as such, but their failure to incorporate the positive elements of the unrest and separate them from the negative ones.
>>1082762>he majority of CSSR citizens genuinely did want a less repressive and more democratic form of socialism
like what ?, change the elective system to have less explicit total domination of the communist party, cool with the hard repression and have more straight foward connection to the wants of the people ?.
Either lift the ban on party factions or eliminate the one party state altogether. Allow criticism of the government and party leadership (within the confines of socialism ofc, ie no advocating for capitalist restoration), implement the direct accountability of party officials to average citizens instead of the Byzantine layer-cake system most ML parties had, etc. These are just a few ideas that at least deserved experimentation.
ehh these are fair wants that should had been implemented, but the "lift the ban on factions" or the "eliminate the one party state altogether" seens iffy, it could go gorbachev in a second and have communists loose power over the state, so it should have let minor parties that can't do shit and had several communist parties that actually have power, just like how the US or China goes, but with more ways for the masses reign them in.
There was a recent thread where somebody mentioned that during Galsnost they did a lot more than just allow socialist criticism of the government, but that they essentially gave state media platforms to basically anybody. They compared it with the US government providing guaranteed air time to communists, which obviously would never happen. Of course this would need to be more limited than that. At the very least there would need to he room for open criticism and debate during legislative and executive elections.
>>1065245>There was nothing like Hungary 1956 in that period.
There was Yugoslavia 1948
but even without that happening, the point still stands if everything relied on Stalin being alive then the system was shit
Yes, the question is how to make sure Counter-revolutionary forces getting prominent voices to fuck us over, soft censorship and propaganda against liberalism was needed, tbh socialist countries needed to invest more in that, if we had our own 1984 and animal farm and shit like that to create a passive notion of socialism good capitalism and their defenders bad as well as more direct ways to get their needs and popular interaction in the government.
free press is good
correct press is better
Unique IPs: 41