So why did he kill Bukharin?

Posting mode: Reply [Return]
Name
Options
Subject	Spoiler Image
Comment
Verification
Flag
File
Embed
Password	(For file deletion.)

File: 1775606254228.jpg (425.44 KB, 960x1296, 1770969674768935.jpg)

So why did he kill Bukharin? Anonymous 07-04-26 23:57:34 No.2772364

Bukharin was one of the best bolsheviks who played a major role during the October revolution and was admired by Lenin. He was also a friend of Stalin.

Anonymous 08-04-26 00:03:48 No.2772403

>>2772364
>He was also a friend of Stalin.
Bukharin was a fake friend. Humbert Droz memoir confirmed Bukharin was part of a real conspiratorial bloc to kill Stalin.

Anonymous 08-04-26 00:22:51 No.2772507

>>2772364
Don't bother, Bukharin is a topic that is impossible to discuss here. People will just throw retarded memoirs and doctored evidence at you and pretend like they are making an actual argument. Any discussion on Bukharin on leftypol always devolves into circular logic and brandolini's law.

Anonymous 08-04-26 01:03:56 No.2772699

File: 1775610235846.png (216.03 KB, 480x480, GPgy6xnWgAAuQ0a.png)

If you would please consult the graph:

Anonymous 08-04-26 01:14:37 No.2772744

>and was admired by Lenin
Why are you lying
>>2772364
>>2772507
Is this a Trot circle-jerk attempt?

Anonymous 08-04-26 01:23:12 No.2772786

>>2772744
>Speaking of the young C.C. members, I wish to say a few words about Bukharin and Pyatakov. They are, in my opinion, the most outstanding figures (among the youngest ones), and the following must be borne in mind about them: Bukharin is not only a most valuable and major theorist of the Party; he is also rightly considered the favourite of the whole Party, but his theoretical views can be classified as fully Marxist only with great reserve, for there is something scholastic about him (he has never made a study of the dialectics, and, I think, never fully understood it).

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/dec/testamnt/congress.htm

Anonymous 08-04-26 01:34:42 No.2772813

>>2772786
>but his theoretical views can be classified as fully Marxist only with great reserve, for there is something scholastic about him (he has never made a study of the dialectics, and, I think, never fully understood it).
>but his theoretical views can be classified as fully Marxist only with great reserve […] (he has never made a study of the dialectics, and, I think, never fully understood it).
Damn that's crazy. Wait 'til he hears about his love for kulaks during the rise of expansionist fascism where the revolution was supposed to secure our gains– oh wait Lenin died and it was Stalin that had to bear that bullshit
No Stalinist centrism, no post-war USSR.
No Stalinist centrism, no red 1/3rd of the globe by the '50s.
You are a capitulationist to petty bourgeois and bureaucrat-monopoly capitalist infiltration. You hate proletarian power.

Unique IPs: 5