Thanks to cold war propaganda I used to believe that Stalin was a brute simpleminded anti-intellectual on the same level as Hitler and other reactionairies. But when I actually read Stalin's writings I was incredibly surprised how well versed Stalin was on topics of philosophy, economics and politics. Comparing Stalin's writings to that of our contemporary political leaders and heads of state really display how our current political system promotes anti-intellectualism and is pure spectacle.
In reality he was actually a pretty well meaning individual. Especially when he socialized with his fellow comrades. Would even give a fellow proletarian a ride back home.
This was my first real look into Stalin’s writing and I must say I’m pleasantly surprised, I suppose I still have a great deal of propaganda to overcome.
hang in there, it is worth it. and yes, Stalin was a fantastic writer and educator. kind of elementary in terms of understandability which totally surprised me when i first started reading Stalins works. really opened the doors fast let me tell you. i mean Stalin technically is whim stitched together “Marxism-Leninism” formally, which is the core of everything at this point.
Holy moly. Stalin is funny! Love how much shade he is throwing. Serious smart ass. You have to work on your titles. Should be called "Stalin DESTROYS Anarchists."
Never thought much of Stalin as a writer (having only read Foundations of Leninism and excerpts of his textbook), but Ol’ Koba had a sharp wit in this one.
As an American it is such an interesting feeling , waking up to the fact that Stalin was not some evil dictator. I watched some footage of Stalin and he seems to be a rather quiet, shy person. To me it makes sense if Stalin was resolute or somewhat strict as a leader- they were building their society from the ground up and they were up against counter revolutionaries and capitalists from other countries. Please correct me if I'm wrong but that is how I am perceiving the situation.
@KozelPraiseGOELRO "as it emerges from Tzarist times" I mean, yes, that's the historical context it's emerging from, but of course, there was no socialism then, so it's still "from the ground up" in terms of inventing what building socialism means in reality
Still listening to this as I type... great stuff to listen to. Been trying to read more of Comrade Stalin but, as always the ADD/ADHD gets in the way. A great commentary on the liberalism of anarchism in general. As I often say this guy was by far the most maligned political leader of the 20th century! Even more than Mao! Like any human being, flawed and made many mistakes but he also achieved amazing things, along with the movement he led and contrary to popular myth, was far from a paranoid dictator but a genuine debater and reasonable person to be around. This coming from people who knew him well and not the ones like Khrushchev who kissed his arse and then demonised him after he died. Great upload and many thanks for it! :)
It's great to listen and read about Stalin's writings. It shows his commitment to the struggle and what would be best described as a true communist revolutionary. One who believed in the cause of building a future for humanity and worked diligently to achieve it.
Oh and killed everyone who disagreed with him due to his paranoid psychosis. Comments like yours are so off base its insane. There is no defending this man, one of the biggest mass murderers in history, who only achieved ensuring his country would be run by tyrants to this present day. The problem with socialism is someone always has to run things, they are always held above everyone else. Socialism is theory and one that is ignorant of human nature.
@@SamtheIrishexan if haven't already, I'd recommend checking out Stephen Kotkin's biography on Stalin as it is extremely informative. Kotkin is a Western Liberal, so holds no sympathies for communism, but he is a highly respected historian and his works are cited the world over. I bring this up, because your analysis is quite off base from one of the world's most respected historians, so you may find it interesting to dig through his sources.
@@SamtheIrishexan Stalin was so inept that in a couple decades the USSR went from a poor underdeveloped agrarian nation to the world's second industrial superpower, despite being invaded by foreign powers twice during the civil war and WWII.
@@tokarev3094 The present book is an exhaustive critique of Stephen Kotkin, Stalin. Waiting For Hitler, 1929 - 1941 (New York: Penguin, 2017). This is the second volume of what Kotkin, a professor of history at Princeton University and a Fellow at the Hoover Institution, intends to be a three-volume work and the definitive biography of Joseph Stalin. This book is written primarily for those who will never read Kotkin’s book. It has to be - because very, very few people will in fact read this humongous tome (= a large book) - humongous in size, and also in dishonesty. The reader will not learn the history of the Soviet Union during 1929 - 1941 from Kotkin’s book. Kotkin’s book is completely unreliable. It is filled with false statements and unsupported assumptions. It is dedicated to convincing the reader that Joseph Stalin was a monster, a mass murderer and all-round evil person, and that the Soviet Union during his day was little short of a hell on earth. It is also devoted to trashing the idea of communism itself, partly through associating the communist movement with the monster Stalin, partly by smuggling in the notion that market capitalism is a far better form of political and social organization. Kotkin has not attempted to write an accurate, objective account of Stalin’s life during these years. Instead, he cherry-picks phony evidence to try to “prove” his very negative views about Stalin, the Soviet Union, and the communist movement. This book is not a “defense of Joseph Stalin.” It is an attempt to discover the truth, no matter what it is. You should read this book if you want to know how Soviet history of the Stalin period is distorted, falsified, mangled, by mainstream historiography. You can learn about the Anti-Stalin Paradigm - the false and dishonest model of Soviet history to which mainstream historians are expected to conform and to which almost all of them do in fact conform.
I've been hesitant to read theory because I am terrible with reading on a screen, so this channel has been unbelievably helpful to me in my journey to understanding theory. I know I'll be coming back to these basics videos later in life to glean more from them than I am now. Thank you for providing a service for people like me.
I really enjoyed this reading. Stalin was indeed very intelligent and was a true Marxist as well. Some anarchist are reading Marx but trying to mix it up with their own ideology. It was good to listen/read all the counters Stalin made against anarchist accusations. I like this part too: "The most widespread, mass organizations are trade unions and workers' co-operatives (mainly producers' and consumers' co-operatives). The object of the trade unions is to fight (mainly) against industrial capital to improve the conditions of the workers within the limits of the present capitalist system"..."But trade unions and co-operatives alone cannot satisfy the organizational needs of the militant proletariat. This is because the organizations mentioned cannot go beyond the limits of capitalism, for their object is to improve the conditions of the workers under the capitalist system. The workers, however, want to free themselves entirely from capitalist slavery, they want to smash these limits, and not merely operate within the limits of capitalism. Hence, in addition, an organization is needed that will rally around itself the class-conscious elements of the workers of all trades, that will transform the proletariat into a conscious class and make it its chief aim to smash the capitalist system, to prepare for the socialist revolution." I liked how you mentioned how wrong Richard Wolff's belief that worker coops would end capitalism. This type of belief is prevalent with members of the Socialist Labor Party of America. They believe that "only" Socialist Industrial Unions would end capitalism which includes the immediate adjournment of the US government. One has to realize that not everyone is in a union or a workers coop. But we do what we can to wake up the working class to organize.
I'm following along with the physical book as I listen. I don't know why I used to read 2-400 page books in a day or 2 back in school like 12 years ago but today it's so difficult. This is a 30 page book 14 year old me would have speed read in 30 minutes. You're voice is easy to understand and I LOVE the explanations. I guess because it's not a story it's theory and when reading yourself it gets frustrating to continue reading if you're not understanding something. Even after listening to chapter 1 I'm still unsure exactly what dialectical materialism is.
The section about the shoe maker describes so many people I know. Except for the becoming socialist minded part. They normally just become super libertarian chuds. 😭😭
Good Video, thanks for making audio recordings of the books as getting this information out their in as many forms as possible is necessary for allowing a wider group of the working class to understand Marxism(ML(M)) and why of all the movements it is the most revolutionary. Your additional commentary is also quite necessary as it allows workers to grasp why the writings of the past are still valid ie the ongoing struggle against anarchists which have in contemporary time have been able to bring the workers to their line. TLDR Good vid,Stalin was right, struggle against anarchists
I fuckin love Stalin's writings. They're always so based, I think most people fall into liberal thinking and don't realize how smart he was, until they read his works. Thank you for your hard work, comrade! ❤
37:00 I believe Stalin is basing this example off of his father. I know from reading Stephen Kotkins Stalin vol 1 his father was a cobbler who became a proletarian after losing his business. Stalin was also from Taflis.
Not sure if you look back at stuff like this but this was really great, the commentary was nice and your easy to listen to. I have a really hard time focusing so listen to some read as I do is very helpful! Hope you keep doing this stuff
Done. Great piece. The part about the Paris Commune helped to further clarify the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Very helpful. Thank you, S4A. Thank you, comrade Stalin.
I love your channel so much, I love listening to these and having someone there to break things down. Its kind of funny how matter of fact and plain Stalin's writing is, considering my home country paints him as some kind of crazy, sociopathic, demon-hitler.
25 mins in. It's a great piece so far. I have the same sentiments as a few others in the comments regarding how clear and easy it is to follow Stalins reasoning. I find that I do not have to hit the 10 second rewind (to re-listen to what was said) when listening to Stalin. I can cruise through the work and grasp it much more quickly than with other works. I have to hit the rewind constantly when listening to Engels.
This has been very enlightening on anarchist theory 🤔 lots of things I had no idea about, like the metaphysical aspect 🤯 makes sense! Thank you for reading to us and for your helpful comments ❤⭐ oh Richard Wolf.. he's got some good things to say, but also lots of bad 😝
@@SocialismForAll Yup, asking first is the least I can do after all the work you put in. The video I was going to suggest was the debate/talk between Thought Bat(Anarchist) and Fellow traveler. I remember seeing you pop up there, and personally that video was what made me think that anarchists are kinda utopian/don’t really think things out. I know debates usually (and for good reason) have a bad rep, but this might actually be interesting.
If any one is struggling to understand historical materialism (as I was) I recommend Walter Rodney’s, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. His description there in the specific context of Africa I think is the clearest description of historical materialism I’ve ever seen. I only now feel like I understand historical materialism. i don’t know if it is the specific context or W. Rodney’s skill but I recommend How Europe Underdeveloped Africa very highly.
I feel like I am not the most intelligent person but...I understood what dialectical materialism was, even if I did not know it by name, when I was a young child. Maybe it was all the trauma at a young age, abject isolation being a small part of it. Maybe when being placed in an empty room for hours even days, a homemade isolation chamber, I had enough time to really think about how I got here. A Honduran child in the hands of monsters, trafficked by the systematic violence of poverty. It made me see something was not right with the world from as early as 9. Marx was right, the social conditions of ones environment really does determine their consciousness
Thanks for sharing this. It's baffling how the political application of scientific theory (which obviously implies trial and error) has been dishonesty reduced to a personality cult by history.
I was listening again and i feel like the role coops should take in the movement is one of support, a means to procure food, equipment or housing for the more militant workers, but this would require i think disciplined dedication or organization to avoid a pacifying effect on workers who feel content in securing their own immediate future.
Hey everyone, I’ve been interested in learning more about Stalin but it’s so hard to find any material that’s not just anti communist propaganda that makes Stalin some cartoonishly evil person. Can anyone give me a list of books or documentaries that could be helpful?
Look at the series made by "It's Called Leninism" and the Book "Stalin History and Critique of a Black Legend" by losurdo. If you have questions about the lies against Stalin I recommend Grover Furrs "Khrushchev Lied" and his books on the Moscow trials as that's kind of big in anti Communism.
It's strange because anarchists have worked alongside communists. The black army sort of helped the red army during 1919. The red army then turned around on them and used their defenseless position to their advantage. Im sure many just view it as a superior war strat, but overall kind of scummy. But i also think communism simply fears anarchism and MUST dissuade people from taking it upon themselves to learn about it whatsoever. I do approach the world with anarchist ideology for the most part. Although ideology is rather complex. However this could only be made on the basis that anarchism and communism are incompatible. Anarchy (the etymology of the word) comes from greek. An meaning without, archy meaning government. Anarchy means without government. It was a pejorative used amongst greek aristocrats to describe how people would behave without rule of law and governing. The word developed into something else much more complex over time. Anarchism is quite complex, and many people hold anarchist ideas already. Anarchism doesnt necessarily describe an entire political ideology that only describes government. Its ideas seek to destroy power disparity that is to take away the well being of another, is not valid, is not EFFICENT etc. Good/evil morality. Good is action that leads to betterment of another's well being, evil is action that leads to the detriment of another's well being. Anarchism seeks to destroy power disparity that is to be to the detriment of another's well being. Unfortunately this happens to be a lot of power disparity in a ton of places. Power is the ability to will ones own intentions. Anytime in all of human history that a governing minority has had the ability to will its intentions over others has lead to "evil" power disparity, that has led to suffering. We will still always be united on the basis that we are the governed, and they are the governing. Even if you destroy the conceptualization of the currency exchange system induced plutocracy and kleptocracy. Therefore, where humans have such great ability to will their intentions over masses, comes their inability to see every individual for who they are. How can someone so high up see every detail of every individual? So to them, we will always be lines on a graph, columns on a spreadsheet, numbers, and masses like puppets on strings to guide around, so they can will their intentions, and protect themselves and their assets. This is why the anarchist and the communist will never see eye to eye. The anarchist wants the destruction of class, the removal of private property, destruction of the state, communal ownership of property. The route they wish to do so is through the complete destruction of the state, right from the get go. Where as the communist seeks to inhabit the state and install a dictatorship of the proleteriat, so it can guide its way to the higher stages of communism, where the masses no longer need to be nursed by it. This is only the opportunity for another empty promise. The risk of putting our quality of lives in another small group's hands, hoping and praying they have our best interests. We think we are the dominant species. We think we are superior. We invent so many great things, we have so many things to do. An ant however, seeks only to act with its group cohesively. It has a simple function it must do, so it can benefit its own species and itself with maximum efficiency. Its life then serves a vital function to the world around it, a symbiotic relationship with nature in which it must survive to keep the planet's entirety in balance. All through very basic and primitive actions. They outnumber us 1000 to one, and have a fruitful amount of species within the genus they belong to. Yet we, feel we need a government so we don't lead ourselves to our own demise. Because we are supposedly uncontrollable. Yet, i know every one here, statistically majority of the people commenting know they would be okay with helping a number of people without any reciprocation. And they would not be out to take over and conquer. It seems as if we are stuck in a psychological protection racket to keep us subdued. Some look at the anarchist idea of post revolution and say "what stops a small group of bad guys from taking over and re asserting their dominance" to that i say, "is that not what's already happening"? And beyond that, thats the mentality this conceptualization of communism further promotes. 2 strands of socialism. Authoritarian socialism Libertarian socialism. Simple. Peace and love yall. Just wanted to share the ideology i have accumulated. If the communists truly wish to have a system that strives forwards in its efficiency and humanity, then it ought to thank the anarchist, as it wishes to destroy "unjust" powrr disparity as described above, for the greater well being and flattening of all classes. For utmost fairness. Anarchism will always exist, as a force that always attempts to go against power disparity, and correct issues it sees as unjust. Yet here stalin goes on to try and pin this ideology as something inferior and not to be focused on. The same exact thing capitalists do. Doesnt anyone see a pattern in behavior here?
"But i also think communism simply fears anarchism and MUST dissuade people from taking it upon themselves to learn about it whatsoever" No, Marx and Engels extensively criticized anarchism as a petty bourgeois and harmful ideology that had no really revolutionary tactics back to Stirner, Proudon, Bakunin, Kropotkin. I have a whole playlist on this. th-cam.com/video/m_5wE2RXJUQ/w-d-xo.html
Wow, only a Philosopher would care about this. I was trained as a Philosopher, but I think most Communists or Socialists do not need this book. Much more Earthly motivation is sufficient for practical people. The central issue is, we think how we do because of the physical and social environment we are born into. I know how to solve the derivative of a polynomial. Few people will be interested in proving the technique mathematically when they can learn the trick that gives right answers each time.
Respectfully, I strongly disagree. A lot of people find this text really useful in explaining some of the errors in anarchism and how Marxism approaches the same problems correctly.
@@SocialismForAll I think we may both be right. In every subject, there are tiers of abstraction, each tier loses a slice of the audience to disinterest. This one is near the top of the pyramid, but I am sure it has an audience.
As usual with these longer videos, if anyone wants to note timestamps and send them in a comment, I'll put them in the description.
@@chagoriver7159 legendary
@@nguyenquangminh4814 or reactionary? Where is it? I cannot see their comment
Thanks to cold war propaganda I used to believe that Stalin was a brute simpleminded anti-intellectual on the same level as Hitler and other reactionairies. But when I actually read Stalin's writings I was incredibly surprised how well versed Stalin was on topics of philosophy, economics and politics. Comparing Stalin's writings to that of our contemporary political leaders and heads of state really display how our current political system promotes anti-intellectualism and is pure spectacle.
In reality he was actually a pretty well meaning individual. Especially when he socialized with his fellow comrades. Would even give a fellow proletarian a ride back home.
@@chagoriver7159 "Give them bread and circuses and they will never revolt"
He was smart and killed millions
@Zurk 👍🏾
@Koba Zhurk🇰🇵 this is a joke, right?
This was my first real look into Stalin’s writing and I must say I’m pleasantly surprised, I suppose I still have a great deal of propaganda to overcome.
hang in there, it is worth it. and yes, Stalin was a fantastic writer and educator. kind of elementary in terms of understandability which totally surprised me when i first started reading Stalins works. really opened the doors fast let me tell you.
i mean Stalin technically is whim stitched together “Marxism-Leninism” formally, which is the core of everything at this point.
Stalin had a very easy writing style straight and to the point but not missing the mark.
Elijah Giles, check out Grover Furr on Stalin if you get a chance. He helps a lot in overcoming the propaganda you mentioned
Same.
Yeah they paint him as a brute, but his theory is good. He was just sturdy in his resolve for the socialist state.
Holy moly. Stalin is funny! Love how much shade he is throwing. Serious smart ass. You have to work on your titles. Should be called "Stalin DESTROYS Anarchists."
with FACTS and LOGIC.
Never thought much of Stalin as a writer (having only read Foundations of Leninism and excerpts of his textbook), but Ol’ Koba had a sharp wit in this one.
As an American it is such an interesting feeling , waking up to the fact that Stalin was not some evil dictator. I watched some footage of Stalin and he seems to be a rather quiet, shy person. To me it makes sense if Stalin was resolute or somewhat strict as a leader- they were building their society from the ground up and they were up against counter revolutionaries and capitalists from other countries. Please correct me if I'm wrong but that is how I am perceiving the situation.
Minimal note:
Was not from the ground up, but, _as it emerges from Tzarist times._
@KozelPraiseGOELRO "as it emerges from Tzarist times"
I mean, yes, that's the historical context it's emerging from, but of course, there was no socialism then, so it's still "from the ground up" in terms of inventing what building socialism means in reality
Still listening to this as I type... great stuff to listen to. Been trying to read more of Comrade Stalin but, as always the ADD/ADHD gets in the way. A great commentary on the liberalism of anarchism in general. As I often say this guy was by far the most maligned political leader of the 20th century! Even more than Mao! Like any human being, flawed and made many mistakes but he also achieved amazing things, along with the movement he led and contrary to popular myth, was far from a paranoid dictator but a genuine debater and reasonable person to be around. This coming from people who knew him well and not the ones like Khrushchev who kissed his arse and then demonised him after he died. Great upload and many thanks for it! :)
It's great to listen and read about Stalin's writings. It shows his commitment to the struggle and what would be best described as a true communist revolutionary. One who believed in the cause of building a future for humanity and worked diligently to achieve it.
Yeah he just had to murder millions through ineptitude
Oh and killed everyone who disagreed with him due to his paranoid psychosis. Comments like yours are so off base its insane. There is no defending this man, one of the biggest mass murderers in history, who only achieved ensuring his country would be run by tyrants to this present day. The problem with socialism is someone always has to run things, they are always held above everyone else. Socialism is theory and one that is ignorant of human nature.
@@SamtheIrishexan if haven't already, I'd recommend checking out Stephen Kotkin's biography on Stalin as it is extremely informative.
Kotkin is a Western Liberal, so holds no sympathies for communism, but he is a highly respected historian and his works are cited the world over.
I bring this up, because your analysis is quite off base from one of the world's most respected historians, so you may find it interesting to dig through his sources.
@@SamtheIrishexan Stalin was so inept that in a couple decades the USSR went from a poor underdeveloped agrarian nation to the world's second industrial superpower, despite being invaded by foreign powers twice during the civil war and WWII.
@@tokarev3094 The present book is an exhaustive critique of Stephen Kotkin, Stalin. Waiting For Hitler, 1929 - 1941 (New York: Penguin, 2017). This is the second volume of what Kotkin, a professor of history at Princeton University and a Fellow at the Hoover Institution, intends to be a three-volume work and the definitive biography of Joseph Stalin. This book is written primarily for those who will never read Kotkin’s book. It has to be - because very, very few people will in fact read this humongous tome (= a large book) - humongous in size, and also in dishonesty. The reader will not learn the history of the Soviet Union during 1929 - 1941 from Kotkin’s book. Kotkin’s book is completely unreliable. It is filled with false statements and unsupported assumptions. It is dedicated to convincing the reader that Joseph Stalin was a monster, a mass murderer and all-round evil person, and that the Soviet Union during his day was little short of a hell on earth. It is also devoted to trashing the idea of communism itself, partly through associating the communist movement with the monster Stalin, partly by smuggling in the notion that market capitalism is a far better form of political and social organization. Kotkin has not attempted to write an accurate, objective account of Stalin’s life during these years. Instead, he cherry-picks phony evidence to try to “prove” his very negative views about Stalin, the Soviet Union, and the communist movement.
This book is not a “defense of Joseph Stalin.” It is an attempt to discover the truth, no matter what it is. You should read this book if you want to know how Soviet history of the Stalin period is distorted, falsified, mangled, by mainstream historiography. You can learn about the Anti-Stalin Paradigm - the false and dishonest model of Soviet history to which mainstream historians are expected to conform and to which almost all of them do in fact conform.
I love how clear Stalin is in his writings.
I've been hesitant to read theory because I am terrible with reading on a screen, so this channel has been unbelievably helpful to me in my journey to understanding theory. I know I'll be coming back to these basics videos later in life to glean more from them than I am now. Thank you for providing a service for people like me.
Glad it's helpful! Also be sure to go to the Home tab and scroll down to the recommended reading/syllabi playlists for the foundations.
Audiobook starts at 0:53
Why did you use old Stalin for a book written in 1907? There’s no shame in using a picture of him during his Twink phase
yesssss!!! been avoiding revisiting this one for a month or so since i learned you were working on a new recording of it!
Yes! Three cheers to comrade Stalin!
I really enjoyed this reading. Stalin was indeed very intelligent and was a true Marxist as well. Some anarchist are reading Marx but trying to mix it up with their own ideology. It was good to listen/read all the counters Stalin made against anarchist accusations.
I like this part too: "The most widespread, mass organizations are trade unions and workers' co-operatives (mainly producers' and consumers' co-operatives). The object of the trade unions is to fight (mainly) against industrial capital to improve the conditions of the workers within the limits of the present capitalist system"..."But trade unions and co-operatives alone cannot satisfy the organizational needs of the militant proletariat. This is because the organizations mentioned cannot go beyond the limits of capitalism, for their object is to improve the conditions of the workers under the capitalist system. The workers, however, want to free themselves entirely from capitalist slavery, they want to smash these limits, and not merely operate within the limits of capitalism. Hence, in addition, an organization is needed that will rally around itself the class-conscious elements of the workers of all trades, that will transform the proletariat into a conscious class and make it its chief aim to smash the capitalist system, to prepare for the socialist revolution."
I liked how you mentioned how wrong Richard Wolff's belief that worker coops would end capitalism. This type of belief is prevalent with members of the Socialist Labor Party of America. They believe that "only" Socialist Industrial Unions would end capitalism which includes the immediate adjournment of the US government. One has to realize that not everyone is in a union or a workers coop. But we do what we can to wake up the working class to organize.
Man...am I glad I found this channel, I've never seen/heard ANY of these writings.
Welcome
I'm following along with the physical book as I listen. I don't know why I used to read 2-400 page books in a day or 2 back in school like 12 years ago but today it's so difficult. This is a 30 page book 14 year old me would have speed read in 30 minutes. You're voice is easy to understand and I LOVE the explanations. I guess because it's not a story it's theory and when reading yourself it gets frustrating to continue reading if you're not understanding something. Even after listening to chapter 1 I'm still unsure exactly what dialectical materialism is.
Sorry 69 lol I exaggerated a bit
Wow I was not expecting it to end like that! He was arrested and it remained unfinished. Crazy
Anarchists forever being annoying laughingstock’s. Around 55:00 actually had me laughing, they think marx said the more you eat the smarter you are 💀
The section about the shoe maker describes so many people I know. Except for the becoming socialist minded part. They normally just become super libertarian chuds. 😭😭
It is interesting how libertarianism co-opted a lot of would-be socialist anger, very fascistic movement.
Good Video, thanks for making audio recordings of the books as getting this information out their in as many forms as possible is necessary for allowing a wider group of the working class to understand Marxism(ML(M)) and why of all the movements it is the most revolutionary. Your additional commentary is also quite necessary as it allows workers to grasp why the writings of the past are still valid ie the ongoing struggle against anarchists which have in contemporary time have been able to bring the workers to their line. TLDR Good vid,Stalin was right, struggle against anarchists
I fuckin love Stalin's writings. They're always so based, I think most people fall into liberal thinking and don't realize how smart he was, until they read his works. Thank you for your hard work, comrade! ❤
37:00 I believe Stalin is basing this example off of his father. I know from reading Stephen Kotkins Stalin vol 1 his father was a cobbler who became a proletarian after losing his business. Stalin was also from Taflis.
I love the analysis of dialectics in this
Not sure if you look back at stuff like this but this was really great, the commentary was nice and your easy to listen to. I have a really hard time focusing so listen to some read as I do is very helpful! Hope you keep doing this stuff
Damn, the vaush references went wild, how did stalin know about him. This video made 2 hours feel like a full day btw, I'm glad I grabbed my beer
Uncle Joe knows what's good!
Not like the non working Uncle Joe from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, fucking freeloader
Done. Great piece. The part about the Paris Commune helped to further clarify the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Very helpful. Thank you, S4A. Thank you, comrade Stalin.
Finally
Thanks 😊
A new version
That “Damn” at 50:21 was hilarious 😂
I’m still listening to this but people shouldn’t overlook Stalin this man was very intelligent in his writings
Thanks for the innumerable "notes".... Guess I owe it a proper reread.
If this is your first reading/hearing listen to it!!!! It's fairly good!
✊
I love your channel so much, I love listening to these and having someone there to break things down. Its kind of funny how matter of fact and plain Stalin's writing is, considering my home country paints him as some kind of crazy, sociopathic, demon-hitler.
25 mins in. It's a great piece so far. I have the same sentiments as a few others in the comments regarding how clear and easy it is to follow Stalins reasoning. I find that I do not have to hit the 10 second rewind (to re-listen to what was said) when listening to Stalin. I can cruise through the work and grasp it much more quickly than with other works.
I have to hit the rewind constantly when listening to Engels.
No, Stalin's writings have a "self-rewind" feature lol
Appreciate your work!
Rest in power, comrade Stalin
This has been very enlightening on anarchist theory 🤔 lots of things I had no idea about, like the metaphysical aspect 🤯 makes sense! Thank you for reading to us and for your helpful comments ❤⭐ oh Richard Wolf.. he's got some good things to say, but also lots of bad 😝
Hey S4A, loving the audiobooks and the work you put in! By the way, would you be open for a video suggestion?
Usually, people just shove them down my throat, so thank you for asking first
@@SocialismForAll Yup, asking first is the least I can do after all the work you put in. The video I was going to suggest was the debate/talk between Thought Bat(Anarchist) and Fellow traveler. I remember seeing you pop up there, and personally that video was what made me think that anarchists are kinda utopian/don’t really think things out. I know debates usually (and for good reason) have a bad rep, but this might actually be interesting.
Thanks, I am kind of done doing reaction videos for the time being though
If any one is struggling to understand historical materialism (as I was) I recommend Walter Rodney’s, How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. His description there in the specific context of Africa I think is the clearest description of historical materialism I’ve ever seen. I only now feel like I understand historical materialism. i don’t know if it is the specific context or W. Rodney’s skill but I recommend How Europe Underdeveloped Africa very highly.
I feel like I am not the most intelligent person but...I understood what dialectical materialism was, even if I did not know it by name, when I was a young child.
Maybe it was all the trauma at a young age, abject isolation being a small part of it. Maybe when being placed in an empty room for hours even days, a homemade isolation chamber, I had enough time to really think about how I got here. A Honduran child in the hands of monsters, trafficked by the systematic violence of poverty. It made me see something was not right with the world from as early as 9.
Marx was right, the social conditions of ones environment really does determine their consciousness
Thank you for uploading the work of this short king 👑!
Interesting
Thanks for sharing this. It's baffling how the political application of scientific theory (which obviously implies trial and error) has been dishonesty reduced to a personality cult by history.
The “damn” at 50:10 was hilarious lmao
Thanks for the read! Great stuff!
Thanks! This was Very Interesting
Great video comrade, thank you!!
I was listening again and i feel like the role coops should take in the movement is one of support, a means to procure food, equipment or housing for the more militant workers, but this would require i think disciplined dedication or organization to avoid a pacifying effect on workers who feel content in securing their own immediate future.
Great reading as always
I liked the commentary
Excellent, glad it's helpful
28:19 Haha, great way to end section 1!
Great read!
1:53:50
Nice
commenting for the algorithm
39:54 bookmark
1:42:11
Good video
32:00
Personal timestamps
9:40 "all that decaya day by day is irrational" fascism is capitalism in decay.
9:55 great follow-up comment to parallel how fascism is irrational and do damage but ultimately ends in defeat
4:55 how marxism and anarchism are opposites when viewed from foundational principles
Hey everyone, I’ve been interested in learning more about Stalin but it’s so hard to find any material that’s not just anti communist propaganda that makes Stalin some cartoonishly evil person. Can anyone give me a list of books or documentaries that could be helpful?
Look at the series made by "It's Called Leninism" and the Book "Stalin History and Critique of a Black Legend" by losurdo.
If you have questions about the lies against Stalin I recommend Grover Furrs "Khrushchev Lied" and his books on the Moscow trials as that's kind of big in anti Communism.
@@AutrevmlMthank you!
1:30:23
Why was stalin arrested?
Stalin was arrested a number of times, for revolutionary activities of various types.
It's strange because anarchists have worked alongside communists. The black army sort of helped the red army during 1919. The red army then turned around on them and used their defenseless position to their advantage. Im sure many just view it as a superior war strat, but overall kind of scummy.
But i also think communism simply fears anarchism and MUST dissuade people from taking it upon themselves to learn about it whatsoever.
I do approach the world with anarchist ideology for the most part. Although ideology is rather complex.
However this could only be made on the basis that anarchism and communism are incompatible.
Anarchy (the etymology of the word) comes from greek. An meaning without, archy meaning government. Anarchy means without government. It was a pejorative used amongst greek aristocrats to describe how people would behave without rule of law and governing.
The word developed into something else much more complex over time.
Anarchism is quite complex, and many people hold anarchist ideas already. Anarchism doesnt necessarily describe an entire political ideology that only describes government. Its ideas seek to destroy power disparity that is to take away the well being of another, is not valid, is not EFFICENT etc. Good/evil morality. Good is action that leads to betterment of another's well being, evil is action that leads to the detriment of another's well being. Anarchism seeks to destroy power disparity that is to be to the detriment of another's well being. Unfortunately this happens to be a lot of power disparity in a ton of places.
Power is the ability to will ones own intentions. Anytime in all of human history that a governing minority has had the ability to will its intentions over others has lead to "evil" power disparity, that has led to suffering. We will still always be united on the basis that we are the governed, and they are the governing. Even if you destroy the conceptualization of the currency exchange system induced plutocracy and kleptocracy. Therefore, where humans have such great ability to will their intentions over masses, comes their inability to see every individual for who they are. How can someone so high up see every detail of every individual? So to them, we will always be lines on a graph, columns on a spreadsheet, numbers, and masses like puppets on strings to guide around, so they can will their intentions, and protect themselves and their assets.
This is why the anarchist and the communist will never see eye to eye. The anarchist wants the destruction of class, the removal of private property, destruction of the state, communal ownership of property.
The route they wish to do so is through the complete destruction of the state, right from the get go. Where as the communist seeks to inhabit the state and install a dictatorship of the proleteriat, so it can guide its way to the higher stages of communism, where the masses no longer need to be nursed by it.
This is only the opportunity for another empty promise. The risk of putting our quality of lives in another small group's hands, hoping and praying they have our best interests.
We think we are the dominant species. We think we are superior. We invent so many great things, we have so many things to do.
An ant however, seeks only to act with its group cohesively. It has a simple function it must do, so it can benefit its own species and itself with maximum efficiency. Its life then serves a vital function to the world around it, a symbiotic relationship with nature in which it must survive to keep the planet's entirety in balance. All through very basic and primitive actions. They outnumber us 1000 to one, and have a fruitful amount of species within the genus they belong to. Yet we, feel we need a government so we don't lead ourselves to our own demise. Because we are supposedly uncontrollable. Yet, i know every one here, statistically majority of the people commenting know they would be okay with helping a number of people without any reciprocation. And they would not be out to take over and conquer. It seems as if we are stuck in a psychological protection racket to keep us subdued.
Some look at the anarchist idea of post revolution and say "what stops a small group of bad guys from taking over and re asserting their dominance" to that i say, "is that not what's already happening"? And beyond that, thats the mentality this conceptualization of communism further promotes. 2 strands of socialism.
Authoritarian socialism
Libertarian socialism.
Simple. Peace and love yall. Just wanted to share the ideology i have accumulated.
If the communists truly wish to have a system that strives forwards in its efficiency and humanity, then it ought to thank the anarchist, as it wishes to destroy "unjust" powrr disparity as described above, for the greater well being and flattening of all classes. For utmost fairness. Anarchism will always exist, as a force that always attempts to go against power disparity, and correct issues it sees as unjust. Yet here stalin goes on to try and pin this ideology as something inferior and not to be focused on. The same exact thing capitalists do. Doesnt anyone see a pattern in behavior here?
"But i also think communism simply fears anarchism and MUST dissuade people from taking it upon themselves to learn about it whatsoever"
No, Marx and Engels extensively criticized anarchism as a petty bourgeois and harmful ideology that had no really revolutionary tactics back to Stirner, Proudon, Bakunin, Kropotkin. I have a whole playlist on this. th-cam.com/video/m_5wE2RXJUQ/w-d-xo.html
Wow, only a Philosopher would care about this. I was trained as a Philosopher, but I think most Communists or Socialists do not need this book. Much more Earthly motivation is sufficient for practical people. The central issue is, we think how we do because of the physical and social environment we are born into. I know how to solve the derivative of a polynomial. Few people will be interested in proving the technique mathematically when they can learn the trick that gives right answers each time.
Respectfully, I strongly disagree. A lot of people find this text really useful in explaining some of the errors in anarchism and how Marxism approaches the same problems correctly.
@@SocialismForAll I think we may both be right. In every subject, there are tiers of abstraction, each tier loses a slice of the audience to disinterest. This one is near the top of the pyramid, but I am sure it has an audience.
@@SocialismForAll I do love this chanel.
Uncle Joe knows what's good!