Socialism vs Individualism? (RE: LibertarianSocialistRants)

hello comrades it's the Finnish Bolshevik today I'm gonna be looking at a video by libertarian socialist rants called Leninism vs. socialism the USSR firstly I think it's unfortunate that libertarian socialist rants video is not actually a serious constructive critique of Soviet style socialism but it's pretty much just a propagandistic attack that doesn't provide the historical context and it doesn't provide any kind of actual alternative to Soviet style socialism it's pretty much just saying the Bolsheviks were evil and that's pretty much it now in his defense I will say that he has not invented this argument himself he's getting it from his source which is a pamphlet that he links in the video description my purpose here is not to hate on anarchists or to hate on libertarian socialist rants or anything like that instead what I hope to accomplish is to provide some historical context and give the anarchists an understanding of why the Bolsheviks chose the kinds of policies that they did and what purpose they served in this video I want to outline how the Bolshevik Revolution failed because the institutions of workers control were undermined and dismantled and how the state undertook the role of the private despot so right from the get-go we started with a pretty propagandistic approach the typical definition of socialism is abolition of private property so it is collective ownership of the means of production now anarchists they like to focus on worker control of the means of production which is not exactly the same thing and it's also pretty difficult to define what exactly worker control means and this is going to become pretty evident in the course of this video but I just wanted to point out that the anarchists like to talk about worker control because then they can make their argument that Bolsheviks supposedly didn't have worker control because we all know that the Bolsheviks did abolish private property so in that sense they clearly did build socialism they did create collective ownership of the means of production he then goes on to claim that Soviet socialism supposedly failed because it didn't have worker control in my that's false it would be better to argue that Soviet socialism became revisionist and then failed because of a lack of democracy that would be a better argument and even in that case I wouldn't claim that that was the main reason and certainly not the only reason but that will certainly be a more valid reason than saying that they didn't have worker control now firstly let's talk about what does property look like in socialism and communism both Marxism and anarcho-communism want a similar type of end goal not necessarily an identical end goal but at least it's fairly similar in communism you should have all the means of production owned by society as a whole this is the only way you're actually entirely negating private property is if the means of production are owned by the society as a whole certainly for communism this is the case but I would argue that even for socialism they should predominantly be the case so in communism you should only have societal ownership however in the transitional phase which we call socialism you basically can have two types of ownership you can have societal ownership where the means of production are owned by the society as a whole and a collective or cooperative ownership where the means of production for instance a factory or some kind of workplace is owned by the workers who work in it but it's not owned by the society as a whole that's a cooperative workplace anarchists have always been big advocates of cooperatives Marxists have as well but Marxists have clearly also supported state-owned industry whereas anarchists obviously don't so anarchist and some other people they prefer cooperatives for them it is an attractive idea that you have a workplace which is owned and somehow controlled by the workers who work in it they like this idea because it doesn't involve the state and it's also very local and grassroots but what they fail to understand is that that's not actually compatible with communism it is compatible with a very low level of socialism but not communism for communism we need everything to be owned by the society as a whole not just by individual separate coops and for that you actually want the economy to merge into a bigger unit instead of splitting into smaller pieces you want more centralism instead of more d central is 'm workers took the opportunity to create their own organizations Factory and shop committees whose demands weren't limited to wages and hours but were beginning to challenge the premises of capitalism these popular organizations were a significant threat to the system the Bolsheviks took power on October the 25th and the dismantling of workers control began when libertarian socialist rants talks about this supposed contradiction between the states and the workers that's not actually what he's talking about in reality he should be talking about a contradiction between the narrow local interests of some local committees versus the interest of the whole country and the entire class the role of the workers government is to serve the interests of the entire class as a whole even if it goes against the wishes of some local groups that either want more local control more local power for themselves higher wages for themselves or whatever this is the real question these factory committees which arose spontaneously organically they simply took control of their own local workplace and this happened before the Revolution has happened under capitalism now when the Bolshevik Revolution happens the Bolsheviks actually begin trying to organize a workers government a worker state that would eventually become a socialist society and it shouldn't be too difficult to understand why for the interest of strengthening the Revolutionary Government securing the revolution strengthening the economy and especially when the Civil War starts to strengthen the Red Army's war effort that the Bolsheviks would say we want to have a government body which determines broadly speaking what direction the economy is going to take and which would organize things like alright we will have material sent here here and here and investment put here here and here which will allow us to produce this this and this for the war effort instead of just having each of these factories just do their own thing with no regard so the country as a whole and don't get me wrong most of these factory committees were not anarchists most of these factory committees were not opposed to a workers government which would guide the nationwide economic policy the Bolshevik position which is also the position that I agree with on this issue is that the local workers should have some level of control over how they do things in their own workplace there should be some level of local control and some level of local autonomy but at the same time there has to be some kind of nationwide collaboration and nationwide plan of how to do things because it can't just be about how you want to run your own little workplace because you don't exist in isolation it's about how the entire class in the entire country does things so I think it is dishonest and not very useful when the anarchists simply claim that Marxism is against worker control or something just because we are against individualistic local control the Soviet Union had a worker government as I've already said in many times this is not some kind of disagreement between the workers and the capitalist government or something so let's actually look at the Soviet government how was the Soviet government actually organized in this period the local councils of the factories towns and villages the local Soviets they would select delegates which they would send to the all-russian Congress of Soviets which was the sole legislative body of the government that was the body that created all the laws that was the government so it was a couple thousand delegates selected by local worker councils they literally formed the Soviet government they formed the sole legislative body which was the all-russian Congress of Soviets the Congress of Soviets then from its own members selected an executive committee which was hundreds of people and would basically administrate the country when the Congress of Soviets was not in session this was the executive branch of the government once again created out of delegates sent by the local councils from factories towns and villages on top of that there were the 18 ministers the People's Commissar s representing various specialized branches of the government the military foreign affairs also economic policy so think about this in practice for a couple seconds so libertarian socialist rants says that these local factory committees are good so when the local factory committee then selects a delegate who gets sent to the Parliament to represent them then all of a sudden when he's in the Parliament he becomes an evil bureaucrats then he becomes an evil dictator or something but the deputies in the Parliament are literally chosen by the local committees and then these deputies choose an economic minister now this is hierarchical obviously it is a minister of some part of the economy clearly has more influence than an individual worker that's obvious but such is representative democracy now maybe libertarian socialist Rance is a big advocate of direct democracy instead of representative democracy which is a fair opinion to have if you watch for instance Paul shots videos he's a Marxist economist and he certainly is an advocate of direct democracy and I would also agree that you should have direct democracy whenever possible it's just that Marxists don't think that it's always possible if we're being realistic when it comes to really technical detailed economic planning then realistically you're gonna need some kind of experts to be taking part in that and what Paul shot was suggesting was he said that there should be an economic planning body together with some kind of auditing body selected from random citizens who would then oversee the economic plan and I think that makes sense because you do want to have checks and balances but at the same time you do need to have some level of hierarchy if it's a matter of economic planning then you really should ask an economist and I know that anarchists I think there's a bakunin quote about this where anarchism basically agrees with this at least in principle ok in Soviet Russia the nationwide economic policy was drawn up by experts by economists because that's obviously the smart thing to do especially if you are in a war and you really don't want to mess things up the libertarian socialist rant attacks this as some kind of betrayal of socialism or something but how would the anarchists themselves have done this well we actually know how the anarchists did this because we can just look at Spanish Catalonia when the anarcho-syndicalist had power in 1936 to 1938 and you know what they had an economic minister yes they had an economic minister now is that hierarchy is that representative democracy instead of direct democracy yes is that simply the smartest thing to do absolutely which is why they did it despite the fact that there were anarchists they did it because it was obviously the smart thing to do it was obviously the necessary thing to do so anarchists really shouldn't attack us for doing something that is just obviously the correct thing to do and they themselves do the exact same thing let's talk about worker control anarchy is like to claim that it was the goal of the Bolsheviks to just get in power and then stamp out all worker control now was this actually the case well it definitely wasn't the case like I already said previously the government that the Bolsheviks created consisted basically only of workers any honest anarchist can't legitimately attack the Soviet government or the Bolshevik Party for that matter for not being a working class organization of course the party and the state were purely working class organizations or working class and peasantry we know that that is not the anarchist critique the anarchy strategic is that they were hierarchical so let's look at worker control in concrete terms since anarchists always talk about worker control but what exactly is it and did the Bolsheviks just try to eliminate it well even the term workers control actually comes from the Soviet government itself so the idea that they try to somehow stamp it out actually kind of starts to fall apart as you look into this quote workers control was the slogan for the new Soviet government after the Revolution in Russia Lenin made this point in his speech on the first anniversary of the revolution workers control is a matter of Education and power as Lenin pointed out in his speech socialism can only take shape and be consolidated when the working class has learned how to run the economy and when the authority of the working people has been firmly established as he says this cannot occur quickly it will take them a long time to learn to run industry but we consider it most important and valuable that the workers have themselves tackled the job and that we have passed from workers control which in all the main branches of Industry was bound to be chaotic disorganized primitive and incomplete to workers industrial administration on a national scale Lenin considered key that the trade unions had taken up a responsibility in workers control the trade unions position has altered their main function now is to send their representatives to all management bodies and central bodies he said the key says Lenin is the workers consciousness by political consciousness we mean that they have tackled this formidable task with their hands and by their own efforts and they have committed thousands of blunders from each of which they have themselves suffered but every blunder trained and steeled them in organizing industrial administration which has now been established and put upon a firm foundation they saw their work through from now on the work will be different for now all workers not just the leaders and advanced workers but great sections of workers know that they themselves with their own hands are building socialism and have already laid its foundations and no force in the country can prevent them from seeing the job through end of quote now does this sound like he wants to abolish workers control and he wants to get workers out of running industry and running the economy no of course not and what we discover is that the Bolsheviks were not really struggling against worker control but they were trying to figure out what kinds of forms of worker control work let's discuss the creation of the first system of workers control in Soviet Russia what role the factory committee's played and what the Bolshevik attitude towards them was quote the formation of the committee's responded to a simple conception in the conflict with the employers the workers were ever ready to follow the committee's but as yet they followed with none of the labor discipline and class consciousness which are the real basis of the trade union movement the trade unions on the contrary being less concerned with petty local and private interests realized far more vividly than did the factory committees the necessity of improving economic conditions unquote now what was the problem with the factory committees why were they concerned with merely local interests and private interests and why did they lack class consciousness and discipline because compared to the trade unions they were much more divided split up isolated they were not under any kind of organized command structure the same way a nationwide trade union would be they were much more just individual committees doing their own thing they were not even necessarily collaborating with other committees of course you did see cooperation between committees and the Bolshevik government tried to facilitate this and tried to help this but you also saw competition between rival factory committees you even saw some local factory committees uniting with the capitalists of their Factory against another factories factory committee quote the first task assigned by the communists to the trade unions in 1917 was to collaborate actively in the organization of the economic life of the country the trade unions were requested to concentrate their attention first of all on the organization of workers control this question was the subject of a decree dated 14th November 1917 one of the earliest decrees of the new government the decree stated that control shall be exercised by the workers in each undertaking as a whole through the medium of their duly elected representatives the decree further provided for the setting up of one regional control Commission's attached the corresponding soviets and composed of the representatives from the trade unions factory committees and cooperative societies and to an all Russian workers Council for workers control composed of ten members from the Central Executive Committee of the Soviets which means the government five from the acct you meaning the trade union five from the central office of factory committees five from the agriculturalists union and one or two members from each of the central union offices etc unquote the Bolsheviks did not want to stamp out the control of the working class or anything like that what they were trying to do was to create a functioning socialist society they preferred the trade unions to the individual factory committees because the trade unions were more organized and more United while at the same time they tried to unite the factory committees and make them work in an organized fashion quote these proposals were embodied in general instructions issued on 15th November 1917 for the enforcement of the decree on workers control whereby the government vested the entire management of workers control in the trade unions unquote now sure do know the syndicalists just be absolutely loving this they're getting the trade unions to manage all the workplaces if only there was a word to describe when the workers run their own work through their organizations hmm oh yeah worker control that's it this is worker control in action this is what one form of worker control looks like the government did criticize individual Factory committees because they often only serve their own selfish interests they didn't collaborate together they competed against each other now the libertarian socialist rants points out that some of these committees were actually anti-capitalist and actually had political demands instead of just economic demands which is true for some of them but definitely not all of them and if it's political demands you want well a political party the Bolshevik Party has just overthrown the capitalist government so there is political demands for you quote in the nonets basin the metal workers and miners while mutually refusing to make deliveries of coal and iron on credit are selling their output to the peasants without any regard to state interests and all of this is being done in the name of workers control so these committees are refusing to make deliveries of necessary materials to the Revolutionary Government because they would rather just sell to anybody who has money and they justify it by saying well hey we have workers control we can do whatever we want well I suppose you technically could but that kind of thing is gonna end up being the death of the revolution some committees even United with the capitalists of their factories against the workers of other factories in efforts to raise the prices of their products etc quote most of the committee's only considered the individual interest of their own undertaking working irrespective of how the others were faring they even went the length in conjunction with the employers of raising the price of the articles they manufactured unquote once again due to this chaos the Bolsheviks prefer the trade unions a government body is created called the supreme Economic Council and more responsibility is given to the trade unions quote the unions were called on to play an important and even decisive part in the different national commissariat the SEC and other executive bodies of the nation's economy this was an overwhelming task and yet these duties vast as they were were subsequently added to by the nationalization at first sporadic but afterwards methodical of the industrial undertakings unquote quote the composition of the ACC was revised 30 out of 69 members were appointed directly by the unions at the same time the unions were asked to direct the central organization's created and subordinated to the SEC this were the galovski or the central committees appointed to manage the affairs of various branches of Industry these organizations about 50 number were managed by boards chosen by the trade union of the corresponding branch of Industry and approved by the SEC the real importance of the duties entrusted to the unions will be seen in the following summary of the duties of the SEC the primary function of the Supreme Economic Council is to organize the economic activity of the country and the financial resources of the government with these aims in view the SEC will draw up a general plan and propose to necessary measures for the sound organization of national economy it will also coordinate in a general scheme the activities of various economic organizations the committee is dealing with the organization of the fuel metal and provision trades the commissariat of Commerce and Industry supplies agriculture finance the Army and Navy etc the all-russian Council of workers control and the various organizations of the working-classes unquote now let's look at systems of worker control in the Soviet Union after socialism was actually built and I may do a video later that discusses this topic in more detail but for now let's just briefly go over some of the more basic types as the trade unions proved very suitable for creating a stable system of worker control and industrial management the Bolsheviks gave them a very substantial amount of power both in terms of managing the affairs of the local workplaces electing officials to represent them replacing managers they didn't like etc quote the Soviet trade unions are massive organizations uniting over 107 million members or about 98 percent of the workforce unquote quote the trade unions have powers to draft bills for consideration by the Supreme Soviet the Parliament and to take part in the work of the parliamentary committees which process the bills trade-union bodies are elective all posts which carry with them policymaking responsibilities are elective unquote the trade unions were also given a significant amount of influence in economic planning on the local level the economists and planners in the State Planning Commission would create the big picture nationwide plan together with the help of the trade unions the union's operating from local workplaces would tell the planners this is the amount we can produce these are the production targets you should set these are the resources that we need to fulfill our plan etc quote unions are able to play a strategic part in the planned development of the socialist economy they in fact draw up the plans covering labor conditions and standards that are used by the State Planning Commission in working out its plans for the year and covering every phase of economic life in the country the so called counter planning in each industrial unit and Factory is conducted through the Union Committee it works out the proposed production rate for the factory as well as the work requirements for each job consistent with the plans for the whole industry the unions are clearly one of the most vital agencies in the Soviet Union unquote something along these lines is the type of compromise that you would want in socialism because the workers should be able to manage their own workplaces also the workers in the local workplace are the ones who have the accurate information about their own workplace and therefore they should be involved in economic planning but in socialism you need nationwide cooperation so you do need a compromise between the local and the nationwide interests that's why you also have to send worker delegates to the Parliament which then appoints the Planning Commission there were also the so called production conferences quote Workers conferences on production have a long history in the USSR starting from 1921 they are part of a systematic national drive for participation of workers in production management and planning the important characteristics of the SPC s which concern us here are that they bring together representatives of all sections of an enterprise to resolve current production problems and like so many other forms of worker participation in management in the Soviet Union are inconceivable outside a socialist society they are a demonstration of the sense of community within Soviet workforces where a problem facing any part of an enterprise is increasingly seen by workers as a concern to all the SPC's are one of the basic forms of mass involvement of workers and employees in managing production and are concerned with economic management of enterprises the SPC's are an important form of socialist democracy of public control of practical involvement of the working masses in management the membership of the SPC's is composed of workers and staff representatives of the factory office local and sharp trade union committees the management party and young Communist League organizations branches of the scientific and technical societies and the all-union Society of inventors and innovators these are all elected at general meetings in shops and departments remembering that virtually every eligible Soviet worker is a member of his appropriate trade union and the corresponding public organ at smaller enterprises there is no SBC and questions of production are usually dealt with at general meetings of the whole workforce the SPC meets as required but not less than quarterly its work is prepared by a committee it LX responsible for daily checking on decisions taken it should be noted in connection with the importance of workers participation that this representative gathering the SPC can take decisions on matters of production within the plan and accordance with the law which are binding on the management when one considers that such a system of control operates in a situation where the trade union district committees have power to demand the sacking of any member of management including the general management and that it is common practice that an insistent demand results in dismissal it will be a foolhardy manager who tried for too long to ignore the wishes of the SPC unquote then libertarian socialist rants talks about the different kinds of laws and labor discipline of the government so the Soviet government which consists of delegates sent by local worker councils to represent them this government then enacts various laws because remember the Congress of Soviets which consists entirely of worker representatives selected by local Soviets is the sole legislative body of Russia at this time they enact laws such as you can't steal you can't loot now the anarchists they then turn around and say see the Bolsheviks are protecting private property but it should be fairly obvious why this is just ridiculous because in order to avoid total economic ruin total chaos and total societal breakdown you really can't just have people taking things even when you're going to nationalize the industry and even when you're going to take their workplaces and the factories into the hands of the workers it should be done in some kind of orderly manner and if your country is in massive turmoil terrible economic problems civil war and whatnot you really don't need the additional destabilization caused by people just randomly deciding but they're gonna take this or that factory over and a halting production there this is not a betrayal of socialism to have some basic level of rule of law ask yourself this do you really think that the Bolsheviks wanted to protect private property obviously not they literally got rid of private property themselves they literally got rid of private property the Bolsheviks abolished private property much more than Mac noted Mac no didn't do anything to abolish private property now the government also did impose labor discipline basically rules like you must show up at work at the time that has been agreed in your work contract you must show up at the correct time you can't be late you can't be absent without a valid reason or otherwise you will face some kind of penalties now libertarian socialist rants makes this seem like some kind of crazy totalitarian idea but it's literally the most sensible thing ever what do you think is gonna happen after the Revolution people are just gonna not show up at work ever no even after the Revolution people still need to show up at work they still need to perform their work they can't be absent without a valid reason but the word labor discipline might sound scary to anarchists they might think labor discipline that's spooky but it's really not once again I will point to anarchist Catalonia they had exactly similar labor discipline and labor laws they even called it the same thing labor discipline quote another resolution by the CNT was that which was entitled general labor norms and in fact dealt with the problem of labor discipline in its explanation of this resolution the CNT National Committee observed the CNT has the responsibility of indicating labor norms a regulation which indicates to everyone his rights and duties clearly in establishing rights and duties one cannot eliminate sanctions since all and everyone is obliged to give the most possible in collaboration in the great work in which we are engaged maintaining a war and overcoming an economy broken as a result of the conflict each enterprise would have an official responsible to the technical administrative committee these were the officials to administer labor discipline unquote now does this sound like Anarchy or does it sound like Bolshevism both cases in anarchist Catalonia and in Marxist Russia they both had the same kinds of good reasons to be concerned about this because they both faced economic difficulties so they really wanted to make sure that people still keep working and producing so that the country doesn't run into any worse difficulties and so that labor productivity doesn't fall and that production doesn't fall and they both had a civil war to deal with I know the idea that even after the Revolution you have to work as hard as before or maybe even harder for some time to secure that the revolution wins I know that that's not the most attractive idea but we better start getting used to that the revolution is not a dinner party as Maya pointed out even after the Revolution you still need to work and as a communist I think it's fair to say that you should be prepared to work harder than before to make sure that the communist revolution succeeds this is literally why we call anarchist individualist because they make complaints like this why do I have to work why do I have to keep working hard to support the socialist revolution why are they forcing me to work hard to support the socialist revolution well if the revolution happens are you gonna stay home and not work are you gonna complain if they force you to work like everybody else is literally dying out there but you're gonna complain if they make you work libertarian socialist rants goes on and on about how Bolsheviks were terrible because they supported Taylorism which was a method invented by this one industrialist to try to make production more effective lastly work or opposition so libertarian socialist rats an anarchist in general they paint opposition to the Bolshevik government as some kind of great heroic thing but what did this opposition in actual concrete terms what did the opposition to the Bolshevik regime mean at least in the economic sphere I'm not talking about the political opposition of the right wing I'm talking about in the economic sphere he was peasants who were opposed to grain requisitions because the government was basically requisitioning food produced by the peasants at a fixed price so that they could give it to the cities and to the military and continue the war effort now the peasants they really would have liked to get more money for their product this was easily the most substantial most serious kind of opposition was the peasants and this policy was part of what was called war communism and one of the reasons that the new economic policy was implemented after the Civil War and why war communism was ended was because the peasants were not very happy about war communism they wanted to get more money for their products so was this some kind of heroic thing well obviously not I mean it's understandable why they would want more money for their work but it's also understandable why the government literally needed the food for the cities and for the army it was absolutely necessary to win the war the less significant type of opposition was by workers in industry and by bourgeois experts in industry and basically this meant that certain people would strike demanding more money more food more material comforts or more political power more autonomy from the government and obviously the government couldn't have this because they were literally fighting a war to the death with the class enemy so they can't just have people saying no we're not gonna work anymore and they also really didn't want to give people any extra money because they didn't have any extra money they also understood that it would set a dangerous precedent if they start saying that okay because you guys are striking or demonstrating then that means that we're just gonna let you do whatever you want laws decided by the Congress of so which don't apply to you regulations decided by the Congress of Soviets don't apply to you you can just do whatever the economic policy drawn up but the Congress of the Soviets doesn't apply to you obviously they couldn't do that most of the time things would be settled peacefully sometimes the government would have to crack down and stop the opposition so that things would return to normal production would return to normal because as I said this is not a dinner party this was civil war but even so most disagreements and strikes were settled peacefully and most of them were not even against the government and didn't have political motivations of any kind they were simply demanding higher wages or bigger food rations after all it was a time of civil war and extreme hardship quote 86.3% of strikes had economic motives and only 13.7% political the overwhelming majority of strikes seventy-three point nine percent were classed as having been settled completely or partially in the workers favor unquote quote many of the strikes in 1920 followed traditional patterns and initially represented reaction to harsh material circumstances rather than a protest against communist party labor policies but food shortages could easily lead to attacks on the government trade monopolies or abuses in December 1919 a representative of the Moscow Department of the middle workers trade union reported that the catastrophic sharpening of the food supply crisis has led to a spontaneous halt to work by workers and the calling of General Meetings February and March when food supplies were particularly tight constituted one peak of unrest even though the food supply apparatus worked more effectively than in previous winters Moscow experienced drastic problems with shortages and as the situation deteriorated discontent amongst workers escalated at the end of March the Moscow communist party newspaper published an editorial which noted that in the past days in Moscow here and there from time to time strikes have broken out in individual enterprises these strikes are connected with the severe food supply situation of the workers unquote this is what Lenin had to say at the time and from reading this you can really see just how dire the situation truly was quote the principal mistake we have all been making up to now is too much optimism as a result we succumbed to bureaucratic utopias only a very small part of our plans has been realized life everyone in fact has laughed at our plans this must be radically altered anticipate the worst we already have some experience it is slight but practical food supplies from Ken says the ideal is 150 million poets from the tax plus 50 million poets by means of exchange plus 40 million birds from the Ukraine equals 240 million puts we must base our calculations on a total of 200 million poets for the year what are we to do with this paltry starvation figure alpha take a minimum for the army that is calculate the ratios for a minimum army beta include in the plan the economic work of the army on a modest extremely modest scale gamma for office employees drastic reduction immediately draw up a list of the best enterprises close down one half to one quarter of those now running only those which have enough fuel and bread even if the minimum quantity of grain is collected 200 million puts and fuel question mark for the whole year put 70 percent of the members of the State Planning Commission to work 14 hours a day let science sweat a bit we have given them good rations now we must make them work unquote so at a time like that who is honestly going to criticize the Bolshevik government for wanting more organization more planning more order more control about what happens to their resources and where they're being allocated lastly there were the bourgeois experts engineers technical specialists as well as workers in certain key industries and key sectors like the railway workers who were basically so crucial to the government that they could blackmail the government for more money so when these bourgeois experts railway workers engineers etc when they would go on strike the Bolsheviks were actually forced to grant them certain privileges because if those people went on strike the entire economy and the entire war effort would collapse and these people such as the bourgeois experts could not be replaced because those were the only experts they had it was imperative that the Bolshevik government got these people to collaborate with them and the only way to make it happen was to grant their demands but these people who were striking were not some kind of heroic opposition they were literally just exploiting the situation and blackmailing the government for more money so the Bolsheviks gave them more money and they were talking about the concept of a labor aristocracy because these certain industries like the railways for instance they were getting more money because they were blackmailing the government so the Bolsheviks called them a labor aristocracy quote naturally in a developed socialist society it would appear quite unfair and incorrect for members of the bourgeois intelligentsia tourists considerably higher pay than that received by the best sections of the working class stated Lenin under the conditions of practical reality however we must solve this pressing problem by means of this unfair remuneration for bourgeois specialists at much higher rates unquote quote the specialists to whom the new regime felt compelled to make concessions were paid a wage fifty percent higher than that received by the members of the government unquote now anarchists put yourself in that same position imagine that you have an anarchist territory where an anarchist militia army is fighting against the capitalist army and then you have people who are saying okay we know that the revolution is going on but we're gonna exploit this situation and we are not gonna work tirelessly and selflessly for the goals of the revolution and we're not going to sacrifice our comfort instead we're gonna stab the revolution in the back by demanding more things for ourselves now are you gonna call these people a heroic work or opposition probably not you're gonna look at them and you're gonna say this is a small group of individual ists and when everybody else is literally dying out there working their ass off working overtime doing volunteer work for free so that the Revolutionary Government is gonna win and these people are demanding more money and they're actually striking they're willing to go on strike against a socialist government so that they can get more money or so that they can pursue their own political interests yeah you're just gonna call them individualist meanwhile this is what the Communists did and what everybody should do quote Saratov June 5th in response to the appeal of their Moscow comrades the Communist railway workers here at the general party meeting resolved to work five hours overtime on Saturdays without pay in order to support the national economy unquote

  1. At 18:43 it says SOVNARKOM when it should say VTsIK (Executive committee of the council of soviets = USSR government)

  2. How do you stop the revisionists? Maybe term limits on all government positions so that there can't be a separate class of government officials?

    I need M-L's to raise the right questions to this.
    Until then i'am on the fence and will not embrace Marxism-Leninism.

  4. Thank you for these videos, Comrade! So many smears against Socialism. I don't agree with you on Stalin as much, however, on everything else, perfect!

  5. I think that the problem with many of the leftist I've seen is with what they would distance themselves from; Discipline.
    I know that seems scary to anyone, but it's something necessary to keep a revolution going.

  6. BTW if worker control exists, won't the workers become the ruling elite? What if they decide to horde resources and keep others from becoming workers, like homeless people or peasants?

  7. truth be told. mass land collectivisation worsened pre-existent famine in historical socialist nations. china for example, during kuomintang rule, 12 milions died of famine, during maoist rule, more or less 30 million after mass land collectivisation. russian empire before revolution, 800 thousand died of famines , after land collectivisation 7 million died of famines. this also happened in other nations that implemented mass fast land collectivisation such as ethiopia and cambodia, famines also got worse after collectivisation . collectivisation thereby should be gradual.

  8. Reading one article and regurgitating should not be considered reading. To read into research involves digging deep, going through countless sources over a long period of time and not letting someone else tell you what to think. Anarchists can't read

  9. Anarchism is nonsense. They have no idea how capitalism works, they are just fetishizing self-governmance.

  10. Hi comrade. I had made my first video in english abour Rosa Luxemburg. I had mentioned you…

  11. Comred Pavlôv's-dog-Шidh-pipe gαt airbrušhed aut ov YT (“whitey”)'s offišial histori ;(
    Comred Pavlôv's-dog-Шidh-pipe nεver egzisted ;(

  12. Could you debunk this:

  13. Could you make a video on why and how the Sovjet union ended? I don't know why and how it all happened and would really like to hear your perspective in full!

  14. Hey finbol, i was just wondering on your views on Ataturk? He promoted secularism, industrialised, abolished illiteracy, gave equality for women. He reminds of Stalin

  15. Good to know. It's interesting that one finnish guy demonstrates better knowledge of the subject than most of our "communists".
    Thank you much, comrade! Greetings from Russia!

  16. Communism in economical terms means the collective ownership of the means of production and the products themselves — that is the products will not be distributed in a market economy but are freely available to the producers.

  17. Great work comrade on this complex subject. So important to learn from the history of the Soviet Union as to the actual reality of building socialism as opposed to the idealism of anarchists, trots, etc.

  18. One opinion I feel holds true is that any ideology goes more authoritarian when under threat, capitalism or communism. When there are rebel groups in your country, whether your capitalist or communist or something in between, you're gonna crack down on free speech so those rebels can't recruit more soldiers. When nearly every capitalist country is trying to bring you down, of course you will introduce the KGB or GRU. When communists are gaining support, of course the capitalist government is going to adopt McCarthyism. For this reason I really don't see why there are splits other than those that want true communism right after revolution and those that want graduality after the revolution.

  19. Totally unrelated to the video, but did Stalin really send a shit ton of assassins at Tito. To which Tito replied that the next time Stalin sent an assassin, he would only need to send one in response?

  20. In the USSR they had the issue of not enough education. In the USA, we have the issue of too much education .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *