anti-nucleaRist bloG #206/ o3 Feb 2014 ©
In Defence of Lenin & Threat of Nuclear War Grows
The question remains, would Lenin have been contained for the we-People’s venue instead of one-sided one party but voices of “rhetoric” so that rhetorical methods of non-educational backgrounds might be adjusted for integrative method, not Behavioralist Conditionalism, by listening to Trotsky to aver killing those who were for change and revolution, but not one-minded Socialism? There was no worldwide point-of-View in 1908 but in 1918, our planet ‘world’ was broader, altho narrower in scope. Therefore, the question automatically arose, “what is the horizon” as the nuclear theory of ‘energy had changed and challenged the obduracy of state, as well as the concomitant futility of gas, trenches, masse` armies into slaughter chattels w.o. freedom being give a breath-of-Air for Justice. Peace was not a challenge until his turning point, when apparatus of state-Sovereignty was “the rest of the world”. “R”
“But on 7th March 1923, Lenin suffered a stroke that rendered him completely incapacitated. He would remain in this state until his death on 21st January 1924. Lenin’s removal from political life gave increased power to Stalin, which he used to full advantage, not least in suppressing Lenin’s Testament.
It was left to Trotsky to defend Lenin’s heritage, which was being betrayed by Stalin. The victory of Stalinism was due fundamentally to objective reasons, above all the terrible economic and social backwardness of Russia and its isolation.
The subsequent defeat of the international revolution in Britain and especially China, served to further demoralise the Russian workers, exhausted by years of struggle. On the basis of this terrible weariness, the bureaucracy, headed by Stalin, consolidated its stranglehold. Lenin’s body, against the protests of his widow, was then placed in a mausoleum.
It is a monstrous lie to suggest that Stalinism is the continuation of the democratic regime of Lenin, as the apologists of capitalism claim. In reality, a river of blood separates the two. Lenin was the initiator of the October Revolution; Stalin was its grave-digger. They had nothing in common.
We end this tribute with the fitting words of Rosa Luxemburg:
“Whatever a party could offer of courage, revolutionary far-sightedness and consistency in a historic hour, Lenin, Trotsky and the other comrades have given in good measure. All the revolutionary honour and capacity which Western social democracy lacked was represented by the Bolsheviks. Their October uprising was not only the actual salvation of the Russian Revolution; it was also the salvation of the honour of international socialism.”…”
- In Defence of Lenin
Written by Rob Sewell Tuesday, 21 January 2014
My askance since childhood, and the overview of Medicare 1961, resonated 18 months later with this specific question, diurnal sociological functionality of the new Rome society, was the portrayals of how deadly nuclear-molecular in the form of NSDU-238 Thermo nuclear weapons. How those were so this functionally proponent of non-defense mechanism–known as the cold-war–the purveyance of power war mongering. That had no purpose but had a negation effect on society, pluralistically. Period temperance seemed more than a colloquy of impermeable reticence. Then the overture of “pertaining to a society of anti-normatives” maintained that the US Republic had never demilitarized from 1945 starting in May with the end of the war against Germany. History than became less elemental and more acute to understudy and of correct fact pertaining to not only chronology but the involvements of state and sociological functionality known as “dysfunctionalism”.
Personally, one can see correctly the continuance of militarism is the actual, factual, dysfunctionalism of the new Rome. Why, because plutocracy? While I do not UN-necessarily relate the “devaluation of culture” enhanced by the new-Rome plutocrats, I do find Prof Herman’s recognition of deteriorating moral environment an intricate manner of phraseology which parallels moralism. “R”
“What the public thinks on this is less clear—the public usually drags it feet in the war-making process, often preferring diplomacy and reliance on the UN, and has to be managed into a proper frame of mind, although once the bombs start falling patriotic zeal takes over… This was notorious in the case of the 2003 attack on Iraq, and is equally obvious in the case of the ongoing threats to attack Iran. Pugnacity and a willingness—even eagerness—to use force is a political necessity, at least for satisfying the establishment media and major election funders.
Writing during World War I, Thorstein Veblen pointed out, that “once a warlike enterprise has been entered upon, it will have the cordial support of popular sentiment even if it is patently an aggressive war.” Furthermore, “The higher the pitch of patriotic fervor, the more tenuous and more thread-bare may be the requisite moral sanction. By cumulative excitation some very remarkable results have latterly been attained along this line” (in his chapter “On the Nature and Uses of Patriotism,” in An Inquiry into the Nature of Peace .
Another important reason for the growing probability of nuclear warfare is the deteriorating moral environment. This has resulted in good part from militarization and war itself, both of which get people habituated to the resort to force and a steady diet of killing, which are normalized. Militarization and war also contribute to justifying the development and use of outlandish weapons, allegedly needed to “defend” the home country and clients from the threat of demonized enemies. Enlightenment values erode and disappear quickly in such a moral environment; mass killing becomes acceptable and even laudable–the large-scale killing of civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was the basis of celebration in the United States.”
The Threat of Nuclear War Grows
By Edward S. Herman November, 2008
history of the new-Rome’s control of the United Nation’s other than the 1946 clause to not sign if US IMpunity against that law was not statute allowed
a voice from the VOId, the peace-Warrior
–notes: bLog #270 peace-Remnant
Tags/ 1923, Lenin suffered stroke, gave increased power to Stalin,Trotsky, betrayed by Stalin, Militarization and war, Thorstein Veblen, a moral environment,