The Central District Military Court in Yekaterinburg has handed down a verdict to members of a Marxist group from Ufa. This was reported by an EAN correspondent from the courtroom.
The defendants in the case are Bashkir Communist Party deputy Dmitry Chuvilin* and his comrades: otolaryngologist Alexei Dmitriev*, pensioner Yuri Efimov*, and two volunteers who fought in Donbass in 2014-2015, fighters of the “Prizrak” battalion Pavel Matisov* and Rinat Burkeev*. Before his arrest, Matisov* was the chairman of the Ufa branch of the “Union of Donbass Volunteers.” The members of the group are accused of preparing for the violent seizure or retention of power (Article 278 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), creating a terrorist community (Article 205.4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), and preparing to steal weapons (Article 226 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). In the end, the judge announced the verdict:
o Dmitry Chuvilin* — 20 years imprisonment;
o Alexey Dmitriev* — 20 years imprisonment;
o Yuri Efimov* — 18 years imprisonment;
o Pavel Matisov* — 22 years imprisonment;
o Rinat Burkeev* — 16 years imprisonment.
At the same time, an investigation is underway into the case of Left Front leader Sergei Udaltsov***. He was arrested on January 12, 2024, after publishing several posts on his Telegram channel in defense of the Ufa Marxists, which the investigation considers to be justification for terrorism.
https://eanews.ru/ekaterinburg/20251216144423/chleny-marksistskogo-kruzhka-iz-ufy-poluchili-bolshie-sroki-v-voennom-sude-ekaterinburga>>2601439>reading the state and revolution is adventurismterminal libtardation hospice care warranted
>>2601444No Anon they were definitely going to do terrorism. The police informant said so! Do you really think the repressive agents of a bourgeois state would lie? What are you a liberal or something?
>>2601433Reflex is
>bah there's no way the second biggest party can be actually communist, they must be controlled opposition! REAL communists get thrown in prison piecemeal and never amount to anything, that's just the way it is! >>2601444This has already been debunked, if that were truly the case then the entirety of the KPRF would have been arrested and Lenin statues would be toppled across the country. So either the entire communist party, the second largest party in the entire country, is wrong…or more likely these five randos are just adventurist retards planning to overthrow an anti-imperialist state on NATO's behalf
>>2601460That wasn't a reflexive position but based on what I've heard from people in Russia and an application of Marxist theory, but it's a moot point anyway and I've already conceded on it. Now tell me, why should we automatically take the word of a police informant working for a bourgeois state at face value?
>>2601464Why should we distrust him?
Are we gonna get fedded
>>2601469Because he's a police informant for a bourgeois state. His job is to see to the repression of pro-worker and pro-socialist forces.
>>2601469Because RuZZian ORKS are all genetic untermensch who cant help but lie, except of course in the rare case where ones sponsored by the CIA try to destroy the country. Take it from me, a westoid who's never even visited Russia nor knows any Russian and still decries the Soviet Union as "authoritarian", I know who the real communists are!
>>2601476Maybe he is a double agent. How would you know?
>>2601478>and still decries the Soviet Union as "authoritarian"Actually I consider the Soviet Union to be humanity's greatest sociopolitical achievement, which is why I sympathize with those who want to see it returned over the people who destroyed it.
>>2601464Not my point is it? Your primary point was getting nicked is proof of them being real communists, then started seething about the KPRF because they’re the second largest party in Russia and that must mean they’re controlled opposition otherwise they’d all be nicked.
Like, you have to explain why getting nicked itself is the best proof of intentions beyond telling me you’re applying “Marxist theory” and what real Russians have supposedly told you.
>>2601496>Like, you have to explain why getting nicked itself is the best proof of intentionsBecause if the bourgeois police are treating you as an enemy of the bourgeoisie then that's an indication that you are one. If they aren't treating you as an enemy then that's an indication that you are not. Now tell me why we should take the words of an informant for a bourgeois police force at face value.
>>2601508That’s not how it works
>they got nicked, that’s proof an indication they’re honest to god communists and more importantly that the KPRF aren’tI’m not saying the Russian state is to be trusted, I’m challenging the idea that getting nicked or not getting nicked is proof of anything in of itself.
The reason being is that I know that “anti-campists” above all want to make the point
for some reason that Russia/China/Syria/Iran and other jungle states arrest communists for being communists, fact. Meanwhile as western socialists/communists,
they’ve never been imprisoned for their political beliefs thus it oh just ever so slightly more preferable if the Garden still wins, but keeping it anti-campist I shall tut at the methods used.
>inb4 I’m not an anti-campistI’ve seen you in a lot of threads and that is very clearly what you believe to some degree
>>2601551All those guys are elected. Communism is unpopular.
>>2600911>There's absolutely no reason why a bourgeois government would select, much less maintain, a communist party as their major opposition.well that's what France was doing in order to do dirigisme back in the 50s (the bourgeoisie mostly wanted to suck US cocks),you put someone that's "worse" than you as a sucessor,to guarantee your place in power by default.
it's mostly state capitalism opposed to liberal capitalism,an inter-class fight.
>>2601551They switched to electronic voting recently to marginalize the KPRF even more. Not to mention United Russia (Putin's party) recently voted down legislative amendments made by the KPRF to raise the minimum wage and pensions. Putin hates the KPRF and desperately wants the Liberal Democratic Party to be the 2nd place party instead. If things continue to deteriorate then the remnants of the KPRF will have to flee to Belarus.
>>2601549>That’s not how it works<I hold that it is bad as far as we are concerned if a person, a political party, an army or a school is not attacked by the enemy, for in that case it would definitely mean that we have sunk to the level of the enemy. It is good if we are attacked by the enemy, since it proves that we have drawn a clear line of demarcation between the enemy and ourselves. It is still better if the enemy attacks us wildly and paints us as utterly black and without a single virtue; it demonstrates that we have not only drawn a clear line of demarcation between the enemy and ourselves but achieved a great deal in our work.t. Mao
<And everybody wants to talk about…the pork chops will tell you in a minute “The pigs don’t want you to get black. They don’t want you to get no black studies programs. They don’t want you to wear dashikis. They don’t want you to learn about the motherland and what roots to eat of the ground. They don’t want that—because as soon as you get that, as soon as you go back 11th century culture, you’ll be alright.”<Check the people who went back to 11th century culture. Check the people that are wearing dashikis and bubus and think that that’s going to free them. Check all of these people, find out where they’re located, find out the addresses of their office, write them a letter and ask them if in the last year how many times their office been attacked. And then write any Black Panther Party, anywhere in the United States of America, anywhere in Babylon, and ask them how many times the pigs have attacked them. Then when you get your estimation of both of them, then you figure out what the pigs don’t like. That’s when you figure out what the pigs don’t like.t. Fred Hampton
>I’m challenging the idea that getting nicked or not getting nicked is proof of anything in of itself.So you don't agree with the notion that if a bourgeois state perceives you as a threat to bourgeois interests they will repress you?
>Meanwhile as western socialists/communists, they’ve never been imprisoned for their political beliefs thus it oh just ever so slightly more preferable if the Garden still winsWell some of those states do arrest communists for being communists, especially Iran. And broadly speaking all bourgeois states holds communists in contempt. This definitely includes Western states as well as anybody with a knowledge of COINTELPRO, Gladio, etc can tell you. Certainly I wouldn't call the West less repressive against communists. Quite the contrary actually, on a global scale they're objectively much worse.
>I’ve seen you in a lot of threads and that is very clearly what you believe to some degreeI believe that in the confrontation between BRICS and the West its preferable for BRICS to come out on top. However I don't think we should lose sight of the fact that the ruling class of all countries are ultimately our enemies and the best we can say about those in BRICS is that they are inadvertently setting the stage for their own eventual overthrow. However incidents like this and how we react to them are indicative of who holds a principled communist stance on multipolarity and the national bourgeois forces driving it (i.e. that the splintering of the global bourgeoisie makes them easier to destroy) and who has simply been absorbed into the orbit of the bourgeoisie and is willing to sacrifice the independent power of the workers.
I feel like a factor of this that is getting overlooked is that even if you buy into the prosecution's claim that these guys were terrorists, the court explicitly labeled Lenin's State and Revolution as a "terrorism manual". I dont really see how you can look at that and not come to the conclusion that Russia actively represses communists
>>2601640Not communists, marxists.
>>2601660Marxists are communists though?????
>>2601679Not always. Some of the most ruthless and efficient bourgeois are Marxists.
>>2601684Okay but what does that have to do with any of this? Is the implication that the people arrested weren't communists?
>>2601590That's not how it works because you're demanding I prove a negative,
prove they weren't arrested for being communists. I can't, all can be said is the sentence was five guys got arrested for plotting some kind of an attack and if that's true, then I'd still not support that as adventurism, and if they weren't doing anything at all and it was fake then what are they doing, that the "legal" communists, weren't to gain such attention?
>>2601733I'm not asking you to prove anything. I'm simply saying your first instinct as a communist should be to distrust a bourgeois government's claims when it engages in repression against communists.
>and if they weren't doing anything at all and it was fake then what are they doing, that the "legal" communists, weren't to gain such attention?They do get such attention and examples have been posted ITT. My point in bringing up the status of the KPRF as token opposition was just to point out that the toleration of their existence doesn't mean the Russian state isn't anti-communist.
>>2599706>>2599855>>2599828 >>2601741I think going with your first instinct is what being a reactionary is, even if you think it's justified. Because
what if out of proceeding it turns out the people arrested for terrorism do end up having makeshift bombs and a whole plan sketched out for an act that wouldn't achieve anything, worse still, what if their interpretation of Marxist thought is completely different to your own?
It's such an obviously flawed position to have that instinctually you have to throw your hat in support for whomever claims to be communist or called a communist, simply because of that. It only really works if your primary desire is exactly as demonstrated in this thread, you want to make a point that some such country is especially anti-communist and your examples are
>Government tries to break up an oppositional protest that claims elections weren't fair>Court attempting to try people for terrorism, claims their possession of a book discussing revolution as evidence for terrorist intentand a demand I prove the secret charge isn't that they're communists specifically.
We sadly live in an era where there are countries in Europe specifically banning Communism as a political movement, but the tragedy is they're NATO nations and thus the outrage is little on leftypol. But of course the non-NATO country with Lenin statues and a sizable communist party is the one that needs particular scrutiny.
All this proves is that the Russian repressive apparatus is shitty and aimless, and not nearly as omnipresent and omnipotent as it is portrayed. They still can't block VK pages openly endorsing Azov or navalnite regime change, but they will zero in if you report some random five guys having a plan to overthrow the government. They did the same to tiny liberal, nazi anarchist and trotskyite wrecker groups before, while much more significant actual threats are still at large. They're not really targeting communists, they're just reflexively reacting to shit without any overarching strategy.
This is a lesson to practice opsec and avoid open larping (if the charges are actually remotely true, which they probably aren't)
>>2601841>I think going with your first instinct is what being a reactionary isNo, being a reactionary I'd when you support reactionary institutions, class interests, and policies. Such ask, idk, a bourgeois state arresting communists on terrorism charges without any hard evidence. Besides, I don't see you criticizing the people whose first instinct was to justify these arrests and assume that these guys are guilty.
>Because what if out of proceeding it turns out the people arrested for terrorism do end up having makeshift bombs and a whole plan sketched outIf such evidence came out then that would change things, which is why I said that such charges should be assumed to be false unless hard evidence for them is given (incidentally, presumption of innocence is also a basic principle of justice). However its a moot point in this case because the proceedings are closed and sentences have been handed down. The only evidence presented was the testimony of an informant.
>worse still, what if their interpretation of Marxist thought is completely different to your own?Frankly that wouldn't make much of a difference to me. Anti-communists typically don't bother to differentiate between tendencies outside of very specific situations where doing so is useful to them. If they arrest one kind they won't have a problem arresting others.
>you want to make a point that some such country is especially anti-communist I already said I don't consider Russia to be more anti-communist than any other bourgeois state, and that on a global scale the West is much worse. But its still an anti-communist state and so we shouldn't be surprised when it behaves as such. Most importantly we shouldn't make excuses for it when it does.
>We sadly live in an era where there are countries in Europe specifically banning Communism as a political movement, but the tragedy is they're NATO nations and thus the outrage is little on leftypol. That's because when NATO countries repress communists nobody shows up to tell us that it's a good thing actually and we should support it.
Damn, props to these comrades for appearing to be enough of a threat to get arrested.
>>2601946Also like, repression of communists in NATO countries kinda goes without saying? We're talking a "fork found in kitchen" kind of deal, you're not breaking new ground or overturning the zeitgeist by pointing out that countries like Poland are banning communist parties entirely.
>>2601946>No, being a reactionary I'd when you support reactionary institutions>Most importantly we shouldn't make excuses for it when it does.>That's because when NATO countries repress communists nobody shows up to tell us that it's a good thing actually and we should support it.>(incidentally, presumption of innocence is also a basic principle of justice)Astoundingly disingenuous, you wanted me to prove a negative and now that has been called out you're just pretending my point is that anti-communism is good or excusable, which I assume is the point you were trying to make anyway in demanding I prove a negative.
>>2602004This too is incredibly disingenuous, an entire thread was warranted over a court case where the supposed crime wasn't being a communist but being a communist was presented as evidence, but countries like Poland and the Czech Republic ACTUALLY making being a communist explicitly a crime is just, yawn man, why are you even bringing that up it goes with out saying geez
>>2602052Again, I never asked you to prove anything positive or negative. I'm saying that presuming the innocence of communists arrested by bourgeois cops is just common sense.
>you're just pretending my point is that anti-communism is good or excusableNo, I'm simply criticizing the people who leaped to defend the Russian state and bash these guys as CIA dupes or whatever.
>>2602070>I never asked you to prove anything positive or negative.If the charge isn't explicitly that they were communists, but you still claim that must be the charge for them to be arrested at all and all your debating revolves around
>erm explain to me why the bourgeois state WOULDN'T arrest them for being communists? then that is asking me to prove a negative, and pointing that out being followed up with
>erm I just don't make excuses for anti-communist states unlike youis where I know it's time to walk away.
I don't know who has been telling you that the Russian state (or indeed any jungle state) is flawless/communist/anti-imperialist, all I can say is that they're wrong but also that doesn't warrant you being in
every thread relating to the jungle states shadowboxing some supposed board-wide movement presenting these states as such, as I've come to suspect you use said shadowboxing as a pretence to just generally keep the conversation away from the west, NATO, the US, etc as much as possible.
>>2602105>then that is asking me to prove a negativeAgain, I'm not asking you to prove a negative. If anything I'm asking for proof that these guys are guilty with what they were charged with, and which is something even the Russian police have been unable to provide. What I'm really asking is why you think we should trust the Russian police when they make these allegations without evidence. Or more specifically, why we shouldn't give communists the benefit of the doubt or presume their innocence.
>I don't know who has been telling you that the Russian state (or indeed any jungle state) is flawless/communist/anti-imperialistThere were people in this very thread celebrating their arrest and calling them dupes of the West, luckily it seems that their posts were scrapped. Whether it was because mods banned them or because they deleted them out of embarrassment I can't say. But you can still see posts at the top of the thread replying to their deleted nonsense.
>relating to the jungle states shadowboxing some supposed board-wide movement presenting these states as suchSorry Anon but I only ever respond to things people actually say. I'm not shadowboxing anybody, I'm responding to actual nonsense being posted.
>>2599783>Putin is a Soviet person who did not draw lessons from the collapse of Russia. That is to say, he did learn lessons, but very pragmatic ones. He understood the coming of capitalism in a Soviet way. We were all taught that capitalism is a kingdom of demagogues, behind whom stands big money, and behind that, a military machine which aspires to control the whole world. It’s a very clear, simple picture which I think Putin had in his head—not as an official ideology, but as a form of common sense. His thinking was that in the Soviet Union, we were idiots; we had tried to build a fair society when we should have been making money. If we had made more money than the western capitalists, we could have just bought them up, or we could have created a weapon which they didn’t have. That’s all there is to it. It was a game and we lost, because we didn’t do several simple things: we didn’t create our own class of capitalists, we didn’t give the capitalist predators on our side a chance to develop and devour the capitalist predators on theirs.
>I don’t think Putin’s thinking has changed significantly since then. He sees them as common sense. That’s why he feels comfortable and assured in his position; he’s not afraid of arguing his corner. He thinks: look at those people in the West, here’s what they say, and here’s what they do in reality. There is a wonderful system with two parties, one passes power to the other, and behind them stands one and the same thing: capital. Now it’s one fraction of capital, now another. And with this money they’ve bought up all the intelligentsia and they organize whatever politics they need. Let’s do the same! Putin is a Soviet person who set himself the task of revanche, not in a stupid, military sense, but in a historical sense. He set it for himself in Soviet language, in the language of geopolitics, that of a harsh pragmatism that was close to cynicism, but was not ultimately cynical. Putin is not a cynic. He thinks that man is a sinful being, that it is pointless to try to improve him. He believes the Bolsheviks who tried to create fair, right-thinking people were simply idiots, and we should not have done that. We wasted a lot of money and energy on it, and at the same time tried to free other nations. Why do that? We don’t need to.
>Putin’s model is completely different from that of Zyuganov, the head of the rump Communist Party of the Russian Federation. Putin’s idea is that we should be bigger and better capitalists than the capitalists, and be more consolidated as a state: there should be maximum oneness of state and business. A two-party system like in the us? Wonderful, we’ll have that too. Putin worked for many years to make that happen. Although he admits he has not been successful, I think that’s still what he wants, although he realizes it’s a much greater task than he imagined. But politics should be in parties. The current set-up is not a one-party system, there is no analogy with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The governing party, United Russia, is not the state. It’s just a sack full of people hanging on to the Kremlin—a telephone system, transmitting signals from the Kremlin to the bottom through the regional apparatus. It has absolutely no independence and cannot act on its own, in contrast to the old cpsu. It cannot fulfil political directives. It needs full instructions, one, two, three, four and five. If three and four are missing, it stops and waits to be told what to do. United Russia has nothing in common with the cpsu. It has been useful as a component of the system. This was one of the conclusions that Putin drew—that one needs a vote, one needs legitimacy from the people and not from the fact that in 1917 you seized the Winter Palace.
>Putin doesn’t believe that there is real competition between the political parties in the West. He thinks of it as a game, like a round of golf in a private club: one player is slightly stronger, another is slightly weaker, but in fact there is no real competition. He imagines it as it was in the Federal Republic of Germany after the war, under the leadership of Konrad Adenauer. There are two parties, one of which has power, and the second waits, perhaps for a long time. The Social Democrats waited, I think, from 1945 to 1970. It’s a sort of one-and-a-half party system. Putin always said that at some point in the future the opposition will gain power, and we must be ready for that moment. By being ready, he meant that we must be both here and there, that is, controlling both parties. The second party hasn’t really worked out yet in Russia; but Putin wasn’t against the Communists turning into social democrats. The parties were all supposed to be controlled by the President, of course. The idea of a presidential power that stands higher than the other three powers is in our constitution. The President has a special kind of power which does not relate to executive power: executive power ends with the Prime Minister. The President is above them all, like a tsar. For Putin that is dogma. He thinks that in old societies and states there is a sense of order—people don’t aspire to destroy their opponent when they are victorious at the elections—and we don’t have that sense of order. He also thinks that all forms of power in Russia so far have been unperfected: he wants to build a strong, durable form of government.https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii88/articles/gleb-pavlovsky-putin-s-world-outlook >>2602137>If anything I'm asking for proof that these guys are guilty with what they were charged withYeah because your point is
they must have actually been arrested for being communists, so asking me to prove the official charges are real is still demanding I prove a negative.
For all I know they've won a bidding war on eBay for some Soviet memorabilia and the local police chief is the one they outbid, taking it badly he trumps up some terrorism charges against them knowing that Marxists literature works as evidence of conspiracy to seize power and/or commit terrorist acts. If we dare to believe the charges are complete fabrications, then I don't know why it's terrorism charges and not just planting a load of CP on them to utterly discredit them long after their sentences are up, presuming they live that long in prison.
Frankly, I don't even really care about this part of the conversation, I think it's flawed to jump to conclusions and support anyone or anything claimed to be communist but on your reputation so be it. My main gripe was the assertion that the KPRF are controlled opposition, essentially because they're *not* getting themselves arrested on terrorism charges. Perhaps they are controlled, but that won't be proof of it if you can't explain what they ought to be doing right now given the conditions and to what end, you couldn't and so the conversation ends.
>>2601873> repressive apparatus is shitty and aimless, and not nearly as omnipresent and omnipotent as it is portrayedtbh it might be easier to name apparatuses of state repression that aren't aimless and incompetent and just looking for more funding. I think NATO libs like to hype up the RF and le putler due to there per-exisitng issues with analyzing an actual war with literal pop culture tropes.
>>2602196>so asking me to prove the official charges are real is still demanding I prove a negativeIsn't the burden usually on the state to prove that charges are real?
>>2602232The burden of proof is on anyone making an accusation, the problem isn’t in sabo not trusting the charges are real, the problem is in him making a counter-accusation that he expects others to disprove on pain of proving themselves to be in favour of the original charges.
Whereas it’s completely possible to both believe the case was unfair in accepting possession of Marxist literature as actual evidence of terrorist intent, but also that this isn’t necessarily indicative of the Russian courts considering being a communist or possessing communist literature in of itself to be a crime, as is accusation being made.
Because that’s why there needs to be the concurrent accusation that the KPRF is controlled opposition, right? Their legality and representation in the Duma contradicts the accusation that Russia criminalised communism and the case in the OP is supposed to be proof of that.
Meanwhile actual open, unironic, no fooling criminalisation of communism is becoming a thing in the west
To be proof of that criminalisation*
But anyway, I’ve said my piece and I have to refer back to my prior post where I suggested that in my opinion, it’s just sour grapes that in the west communism is being criminalised unopposed, decommunisation progresses unopposed, support for fascists is on the rise unopposed and yet Russia is not doing this and in fact is voicing opposition to these things, even if for entirely self-serving reasons.
A no u would therefore be lovely to avoid confronting the fact that decommunisation is an exclusively western policy and the case in the OP could have, no, should have been that no u.
Maybe they should've not tried to overthrow the government?
>>2602196>My main gripe was the assertion that the KPRF are controlled oppositionOkay well, I already conceded on that point hours ago and clarified that a more accurate description would be token or symbolic opposition. The issue isn't that they aren't real communists, but that they've been forced into a niche where they can do no harm and are either unwilling or unable (likely both depending on the politician) to break out of it. We've also seen what happens if they try.
>>2602351Trying to overthrow the only country fighting against imperialism isn't very communist of them
>>2601192>he compared the Russian president to Hitler and the country's political system to Nazi GermanyStupid liberast
>>2602619we get it lil bro you like Burgfriedenspolitik
Unique IPs: 24