A-Infos (en) anarkismo.net: Critical collection of Stalinist totalitarianism and the attempt to normalize the absurd by BrunoL (pt) [machine translation]

In this brief article, I compile remarks from the recent clashes I participated in this 
early October 2019. The division into topics may facilitate reading although I recognize 
that in the more "orthodox" tradition of leftist texts, it breaks the rhythm of the 
narrative. Between pros and cons, we follow. ---- October 07, 2019, Bruno Lima Rocha ---- 
Presentation ---- There is a new wave on the Brazilian internet, specifically the 
political use of the network, which is interesting and at the same time deserves a 
warning. There is a considerable and recognized effort to normalize Stalin's crimes, and 
beyond, to regain the full experience of Eastern Europe and symbolically link to China's 
presence today, such as the Mandarin Superpower. In this brief article, I compile remarks 
from the recent clashes I participated in this early October 2019. The division into 
topics may facilitate reading although I recognize that in the more "orthodox" tradition 
of leftist texts, it breaks the rhythm of the narrative. Between pros and cons, we follow.
The anti-Soviet NEP, capitalist China and the hallucination of the "left" widow of Eastern 
Europe
The "friends" who defend and support the NEP (New Political Economy, "new" in the paradigm 
of Russian Marxism) - the second great Bolshevik betrayal, with Lenin alive and Trotsky 
and Stalin working side by side - use an argument that sticks in post-Cold War delirium of 
mystification of historical processes. Between the falsification of the twentieth century 
and the illusions in the 21st century remains a conclusion. If you don't clean up the NEP 
and make a pitying criticism, hallucinations like these will "interpret" Gazprom (or 
Huawei, perhaps Cargill) as a necessary step, suddenly "intermediate" hoping that a 
capitalist autocratic state "self-dissolve" one day by magic with "dialectical reason" or 
any other meaningless wordplay.
Stalin, the Nomenklatura and Hobbesianism on the Left
I always ask in politics if the class would hypothetically accept to live in a society of 
full well being, with all the rights guaranteed, all the same (work, health, housing, 
culture, leisure, pregnancy, sport, etc.), but with absolute control and curtailment of 
political rights. That is, one-party dictatorship and party membership as the only way to 
access key positions in the state apparatus. The four formal elites in the former USSR, 
political, academic, military, and economic (in the management of state-owned 
enterprises), had membership of the PCURSS as their entry criterion. In general I do not 
say that this society existed and the example given is in the Soviet period of the 
Nomenklatura, specifically in the Kruschev and Brezhnev governments. That is, I reinforce 
the myth of "authoritarian temptation",
Surprisingly, the overwhelming majority say NO, they would NEVER ACCEPT, for in the 
absence of political rights they would not be sure of the guarantee or at least of the 
possibility of fighting for these rights. When I say that this world existed and its 
golden age lasted for almost forty years, there is much surprise. Poor Hobbes is very 
misunderstood and would be happy to see the right to full life in material terms applied 
in the former Soviet Union. But what about political law? Then, when the Nomenklatura 
elite turned aside (as of 1988) and dilapidated public assets, the state collapsed in less 
than four years. To paraphrase our greatest poet "And now Joseph, the party is over and 
your 'history bus' has fallen downhill." Not to look like scorched earth from all 
experience, though at least it leaves the example that a planned economy,
The structuring characteristics of this "left" form of political thinking
The crimes of Stalinism, their minions and clones around the world (such as Enver Hoxha in 
Albania, Nicolae Ceausescu in Romania, Kim IlSung in North Korea, are more than 
acknowledged) the historical and ideological perspective). Unfortunately, it seems that 
myth overcomes fact and understanding loses to interpretation. Let's look at some 
fundamental, structural problems.
What phenomena of internal politics lead to personality worship? How do huge political 
forces necessarily depend on a very small group of "leaders"? Isn't the cult of leadership 
also a compliment to individualism, the most petty struggles for power?
It's also worth asking. What is the biggest misconception of the left, not the ex-left, 
but the left left? Sociological determinism (in search of the promised class or fraction 
of class) or delusion with one's own analyzes leading to some kind of self-proclamation?!
On degeneration and political leadership this is a classic theme and here is just a start 
of debate. It is recognized that there is political leadership and some easily 
identifiable attributions such as: charisma, oratory, example, dedication, trajectory, 
resolving capacity. But when do these characteristics crystallize into a permanent power 
structure?! Getting worse. That's when it becomes personality cult and there is no turning 
back!
Worth the debate and even more the concern.

Related Link: 
https://estrategiaeanaliseblog.com/2019/10/06/coletanea-critica-ao-totalitarismo-stalinista-e-a-tentativa-de-normatizar-o-absurdo-artigo-de-pensamento-libertario/

https://www.anarkismo.net/article/31576
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en