The philosophy of Karl Marx, was not by itself malignant, and wrong. The attitude of Karl Marx, and his folowers towards the philosophy of Communism, was wrong. I have the privilege of currently reading a book, written by notable scholars of the United States, called, "The Library of Congress, World War Two companion". I find nothing wrong in the basic presumption, that the world must be a more free, and a more equitable place to live in. The world, assumes, that freedom is needed for the poor and the dispossessed. I believe, that freedom is needed for the rich and privileged of the society, too. According to Karl Marx, perhaps, the rich did not want to belong to a society which encouraged freedom. The rich, in his view, perhaps, were prisoners of their own perception, which did not allow the rich to belong to a more free and equitable society. More importantly, he insinuated, that the poor could not break free because of the tyranny of the rich. The Communists, before the Second World War, alienated the society of Europe, from their thought, because of the way they saw, and presented their ideas to the people.
To come back to my earlier thought, the poor are as free not to be a part of the tyranny of the rich. The rich and the poor live together. It is impossible for society to function, unless everyone plays a part. Perhaps, it was possible for the rich and the poor, to different paths.
The basic idea of Facism, was of putting the identity of the nation above all, or at least, above the identity of self. If one had a pleasant demeanor, how would he put the identity of the nation, above the identity of the self? He would try to have a holistic view of all in his nation, and bring them together.
I have come to a very important conclusion, to myself, as to why conflicts happen. Conflicts happen, because sometimes groups, want to see only their point of view of the world, being affirmed by the world, and all other points of view, they see as wrong. The Allied Powers after the First World War, equally followed this policy. They wanted, or forced their enemies to accept, their point of view, which led to the unhappy manifestations of Facism, and Communism, mainly in those nations which did not follow the Western Liberal point of view.
I can agree with the Fascism part but what mistake did the west commit for Communism to take hold ?Originally Posted by AdityaMookerjee
From what i understand, communism started in Russia for internal reasons. The 1904 war with the Japanese is mentioned as a landmark event in lessening the prestige the Czar's held which then degenerated into the October revolution of 1917.
The feeling that western governments and industry treated its workers poorly, the resulting discontent that the wealthy in society were getting rich off the poor, resulted people lookng for alternatives. The idea of revoultion for equality of all became an attractive proposition. Ofcourse not all supported the idea of military revolution.west commit for Communism to take hold
While communism took hold of power in Russia, overthrowing an unpopular monarchy, there were large movements in most western european states at the time, due to the discontent in the working class.
In part, the success of fascism was a response to fear of communism, fascism was supported by the powerful and wealthy who feared the idea of a communist revolution and the introduction of godless communism. Commusim was less interested in national boundaries, its populace was all the working class despite nationality. Fascism was somewhat the opposite, it was all about nationalism.
It is important to distinguish that while we may call russia communist during stalin's time, it didnt work out so, more of a murderous dictatorship claiming to deliver equality.
And my contention remains that Russia went ahead with her own military revolution more for internal reasons than not.
But China went communist because it was facing a foreign invader. Course Mao had to defeat the Kuomintang first.
The other states were liberated by the Soviets during WW2 and remained in her sphere.
Last edited by Double Edge; 25 Oct 10, at 15:00.
.And my contention remains that Russia went ahead with her own military revolution more for internal reasons than not
Yes, sorry, I was merely pointing out that communism was popular in countries where it didnt take hold of power as well, because of failures in these societies. But the reason why communism took hold in Russia was because of internal failures, I agree.
The defeat to Japan in 1904 was sigificant but not as crucial as the state of affairs in world war 1, which with Russia losing badly and already unpopular in the working class, weakened the monarchy 's ability to maintain control.The 1904 war with the Japanese is mentioned as a landmark event in lessening the prestige the Czar's held which then degenerated into the October revolution of 1917.
Agree, and given Russia was part of the Entente it did not suffer adversely as a result of any victor's justice as the OP maintains.
Well, there was the whole Entente intervention in the Russian Civil War from 1918-1922. I think it's an understatement to say that caused some bad feelings down the road.
"Nature abhors a moron." - H.L. Mencken
Sure but was that enough to make them enemies ?
If Communism and Fascism had been benign towards each other, I would say that they would have complemented each other. If I am correct, Communism originated in France, and not in any other nation. France was a nation, which already had her French Revolution. The ideas of Communism, did not have much of an impact on French citizens, but they had an impact on people like Karl Marx, and Friedrich Engels, who were not French. Fascism as an idea originated, to counter what was seen as a militant ideology, one which brought about change, by force, or against the will of the ordinary citizen. This was not what was projected by Facism, but perhaps this was the case in Europe. The Japanese nation during or before the Second World War, were perhaps not Facist, but were given the identity. If I am right, Communism was introduced in China, after the German holdings of land in China, were transferred to the possession of Japan.
I feel that the worst type of exploitation took place in China, where many European nations took over holdings of land in China, purely for commercial purposes, and disregarded the ancient Chinese civilization. Japan, instead of improving relations with China, wanted land for her own purposes, in China, because of what was, I believe, not well planned economic and industrial policies.
The Czar could not manage his empire during and after the First World War. This caused the people of Russia to revolt. I believe, that Communism in Russia and China, was brought about because of the policies of the Allied powers after the First World War.
Lenin was in power before WWI ended.
And died shortly after the Soviet Union defeated the Entente, ending proper communism in Russia as Stalin came in.
Well, the Entente intervention provided a great propaganda tool for Lenin and Trotsky though; after all through the intervention White forces could be sold to the population as traitors helping invaders.
This is the point i'm not sure about.
I have to disagree here, particularly on the Russian revolution. As tantalus mentioned before, the defeat of Russia by Japan in the Russo-Japanese war 1904-1905, which saw the Russians humiliated in the battles of Port Arthur and Tsushima, contributed greatly to the undermining of the Russian Tsars rule, coupled with Witte's failed land reforms sowed the seeds for revolution against the Tsarist regime. Also thrown into this is Nicholas' personal nature, which put him at odds with the peasants on numerous occasions.
This, coupled with the rapid industrialization of Russia which saw urban centres like Moscow and St.Petersburg(later Leningrad) swell with peasants, creating a new industrial class, or proletariat, from which Lenin's Bolsheviks would garner most of their support from. The failure of Russia in ww1 particularly after Tannenberg only accelerated problems which would inevitably lead to revolution.
China went kommie because KMT was horribly corrupt and the peasants' lives weren't any better than under Qing. Mao sold his revolution on "hope and change."
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Share this thread with friends: