Howard Dickler Agree with all but show trial period. I find it doubtful that Bukharin was a counter- revolutionary. Counter-Stalinist, yes. In military, there were those who opposed the Hitler Stalin pact–note, Germany couldnt have taken on anyone before the Czech grab and then needed time to consolidate. Also, even when attack was imminent Stalin refused to respond to officers at border. He believed that mobilizing at the border would have sent the wrong message to Hitler. Note that Solzenitsyn (who fucked us by not paying attention to reality of west when he git here–compare w Alexander Zinoviev) went into Gulag for exchanging neg messages about leaders who got them surrounded and then dissed them for escaping to fight again but without getting killed dragging their artillery out…. But the shit from 92 on… And the outset. The French have yet to reveal how many they executed in the 1917 mutiny. Entire allied plan and US entry in wwi all guaged to prevent the history that would have saved us from 100 years of hellish abuse of planet and continuous warfare.


Luciana Bohne Dear Howard Dickler, the innocence of Bucharin and Trotsky in the Kirov assassination is supported by WaPost (link below), the NYT and the whole Western system of propaganda. That alone, puts matters in doubt. Stephen Cohen’s biography of Bucharin was a sort of Bible for Gorbacev, accordingly, he re-instated Bucharin. I think it’s safe to call Gorbacev a counter-revolutionary, unless one can characterize social democratic tendencies “revolutionary.” I don’t. US ambassador to USSR during the trial told FDR the trials were real and the accused were gulty of plotting regime-change. So, did the diplomats who attended the trials (with probable exception of the Nazi Germans). The post=war origin of “Stalin the Monster” was Kruscev’s 1956 “secret report”–which Mao lambasted, as you probably know, for calling Stalin an autocrat and worse when Khrushchev himself acted as an autocrat, deciding without consulting the fraternal communist parties, to attack Stalin, who had been the representative head of world communist parties, throwing them into confusion, disillusionment and dispersal. We owe it to Khrushchev the lie that Stalin trembled before the Nazis and couldn’t act. For that I refer you to Zhukov’s own memoirs–no such thing, Stalin was prepared (the katiushas, for example, were in action in July 1941, and the German generals knew by July that they had underestimated Soviet preparedness and the strength of the army and military materiel. By late August, they knew the war was either lost or would be eventually. Military historians–even bourgeois ones–acknowledge this. Ericson’s military history books, an English not-communist historian, dismissed and documented Khrushchev lie about Stalin’s “waging war on a globe”: The Road to Stalingrad, for example, among three he wrote. So we have to examine the orthodoxies of the West–or fall victim to its inhumanity for ever. Truth in history matters. It’s pursuit must be a scientific one. I don’t say I have it, but I can say I examine it, check it against other sources, consider the sources (Solzhenitsin was tries for collaborating with Nazis, and wasn’t executed). I thank you for your comments.


Luciana Bohne The WaPo blames Stalin for Kirov’s assassination based on Robert Conquest, MI5 agent. WaPo champions the innocence of Trotski and Bucharin and are eager to suggest Kruscev’s lie that Stalin killed his best friend and likely successor–WaPo’s voice is only an echo of the whole establishment’s voice. I question this source…/e8fbe2d0-064f-44f5…/…Manage
Howard Dickler Luciana Bohne A quick look at my profile would inform you that I do not get my info from the MSM or even intermediate MSM–I do look at counterpunch, dissident voice (a bit better), Z, etc. I am relatively well-read in Russian literature from back in the ’60’s and studied the Russian Revolution more in tune with John Reed, read all of Marx, Engels Lenin, much of Stalin; but have you read George Lukacs? (At least they didn’t kill him.) Area of specialty for PhD at Berkeley was Marxism and Marxist Literary Criticism–but as the sort of person who put in time with the Sandinistas–was not likely to get a job. I’m not a ‘Marxologist’. Owing to my age, I had a lot of face to face contact with people in my father’s generation who were in the Communist Party prior to the war. Also, I agreed with Marcuse in 1 Dimensional Man (still worth reading, if you haven’t) that it seemed that the USSR was more likely to have a revolution and fix its issues (Bureaucratic Collectivism is not exactly socialism) than the USA. I do wait to see if anyone can link our current Prison Industrial Complex to the Gulag–an interesting speculation, but not my area of specialty. And, like Marx suggested, I’m too busy trying to change the world…. In passing I do recommend Nikita’s autobiography–not written, in fact, to diss Stalin (Nikita’s survival was probably owing to his being school buddies with Stalin’s wife…), but to criticize the direction that Brezhnev took. I am still upset with Kennedy for not letting Nikita take open credit for the Jupiter C’s being removed from Turkey (obsolete in any event–as you probably know), since that gave the ‘hard-liners’ ammo for disposing him… Of course, like Lukacs, at least they didn’t take him off…. (Me, I’m still wondering by what miracle Fidel was sent packing to Mexico instead of shot running away…. And, thank whoever.) By the way, do you happen to know the pot laws there? Medical marijuana? Have they changed? Can’t imagine going and sitting out on the beach without getting high. Say hello to Gramsci for me–and if you pass through Campo Fiori (sp?) wave to the Bruno! Ciao





Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

Things to ponder

While our media prostitutes, many Hollywood celebs, and politicians and opinion shapers make so much noise about the still to be demonstrated damage done by the Russkies to our nonexistent democracy, this is what the sanctimonious US government has done overseas just since the close of World War 2. And this is what we know about. Many other misdeeds are yet to be revealed or documented.

Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” — acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump — a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report

[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]



Make sure many more people see this. It's literally a matter of life an death. Imperial lies kill! Share widely.
  • 362