URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       True Left
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: True Left vs False Left
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 16740--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Communism
       By: rp Date: November 29, 2022, 11:55 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I wanted to mention another thing rightists have in common with
       communists is the use of economic argumentation to rationalize
       the behavior of mass shooters and "incels", and more broadly the
       bad behavior of "white" men.
       #Post#: 16742--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Communism
       By: guest78 Date: November 29, 2022, 1:11 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       "White" economics have made non-"whites" behave just as badly as
       "whites" themselves though. Economic considerations seem to be
       the main driving factor for the spread of "white" bad behavior
       among non-"white" populations....
       #Post#: 16744--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Communism
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: November 29, 2022, 4:45 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Rightists use economics to excuse "white" failure but blame
       "non-white" failure on heredity. This is a different approach
       than communists, who at least avoid this double-standard and
       apply economic explanations across the board.
       #Post#: 16962--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Communism
       By: rp Date: December 8, 2022, 9:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Good point. When it's a "white" shooter it's always "broken
       families", "lack of a strong father figure". But when it's a
       "black" shooter it's the "MAOA gene".
       #Post#: 16963--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Communism
       By: 90sRetroFan Date: December 8, 2022, 9:24 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Also:
  HTML https://data.junkee.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/police1.png
       #Post#: 18272--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Communism
       By: Communism Date: March 5, 2023, 6:01 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The Communist Cookbook That Defined Prague’s Cuisine
       [quote]For years, one book dictated how and what people could
       eat.[/quote]
       [quote]In the newly independent Czech Republic of the 1990s,
       cheap comfort food—such as goulash, pork knuckle, and
       dumplings—dominated every eatery. Meanwhile vegetarians were
       encouraged to feast on fried cheese and stewed cabbage. (The
       late Anthony Bourdain famously called it “the land vegetables
       forgot” in an episode of his travel show No Reservations.) For
       the most part, tourists loved Prague in spite of the food rather
       than because of it. But Czechs didn’t understand the criticism.
       After 40 years of communism, the culinary splendor that once
       dominated Czech culture was a distant memory due, in part, to
       one very specific cookbook.
       As a former cultural capital of both the Holy Roman and Habsburg
       Empires, ingredients and ideas once flowed freely between Prague
       and major metropolises in Austria, Hungary, Italy, France, and
       beyond. By the time Napoleon’s army claimed victory in the
       Battle of Austerlitz, the city was an epicurean epicenter
       rivaling Paris and Vienna. Czechs were roasting goose better
       than Germans, using gnocchi in ways the Italians never thought
       of, and incorporating French techniques that made their meat
       sauces even richer. Royal banquets often featured delicacies
       including pheasant, turtle, and Španělské ptáčky
       (Spanish birds), a Czech version of roulade made from beef or
       veal. Economic and gastronomic excellence even survived the
       First World War.
       It wasn’t until the Nazis invaded in 1939, implementing
       stringent rationing and 10-12-hour workdays, that Czechoslovak
       cuisine took its first big hit. Every person was issued coupons
       that signified the amount of bread, sugar, meat, and fat they
       could obtain (children under ten were given additional rations
       of butter and milk). But after a few years, Jews were forbidden
       to purchase fruit, cheese, and meat. Daily life was such a
       challenge and access was so limited that cooking was no longer a
       priority. Occupiers encouraged Czechs to cook Eintopf (a one-pot
       potato stew), but this was a far cry from traditional Sunday
       roast, and it never quite caught on. Those fortunate enough to
       have family in the country would meet them at quiet train
       stations to receive black market eggs and meat.[/quote]
       This was during war-time...
       Continuing with the article:
       [quote]When communists came to power in 1948, citizens were
       hopeful they could return to a life containing more prewar
       luxuries. Though the quality of food improved, life under
       socialist ideas still proved restrictive. Twenty years later,
       when liberalization started to gain traction, the party saw a
       need for even stricter control. In an effort to consolidate
       power, they purged reformist officials from the government and
       established a range of restrictions on everyday activities.
       Eating was no exception.
       The state Restaurants and Cafeterias company soon issued a
       national cookbook entitled Receptury teplých pokrmu, or Recipes
       for Warm Meals. Dubbed “normovacka,” or “the book of standards,”
       it dictated what cooks in the country could serve in 845
       recipes. Ladislav Pravaan, curator of the Gastronomie Muzeum of
       Prague, explains that the book even specified sources and
       serving styles for everything from sauces to side dishes.
       The cookbook’s authors, František Syrový and Antonin Nestával,
       were relatively well-known chefs at the time (Nestával had even
       represented Czech gastronomy at the 1967 Montreal Expo). But the
       book emphasized limiting food imports and cooking economically,
       so it didn’t include anything you might expect to try at a
       culinary competition. Nutrition was also a core component of the
       book: The idea was that the the better-balanced people’s meals
       were, the harder people would work. In the book, calorie count
       and vitamin details were listed alongside ingredients and
       instructions, and certain recipes were suggested for certain
       professions. Portion sizes were designed by the hundreds,
       indicating that select dishes were to be cooked in large
       quantities each day.[/quote]
       In comparison, National Socialism and Aryanism are only
       concerned with cooking ethically, not economically.
       Continuing:
       [quote]Cooks that wanted to deviate from these recipes had to
       get approval from the Ministry of Health, a request that could
       take years to go through. Most people opted for the easier
       route, which is how thousands of nearly identical menus came to
       be established across the country. Paired with limited
       ingredient diversity, the nation suffered a creative drought: It
       wasn’t just that all the same dishes were served, but the dishes
       were prepared exactly the same way, resulting in identical
       versions of dishes, too. Each bite was calculated as a means of
       productivity, and dining for pleasure was considered
       extravagant. “Special” meals were no longer considered, and the
       scope of Czech cuisine shrunk...[/quote]
       Entire article:
  HTML https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-communist-cookbook-that-defined-prague-s-cuisine?utm_source=pocket-newtab
       All western ideological considerations in regards to diet,
       whether it be communism or capitalism, merely focus on growth
       and productivity\economics. Only National Socialism and Aryanism
       have ever truly be concerned with a diet based on the ethical
       consideration of "do unto others as you would want done unto
       you". Westerners prove that they are immoral and unethical
       people simply by their diets alone.
       (Not an endorsement of pro-Western Ghandi):
  HTML https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-the-greatness-of-a-nation-and-its-moral-progress-can-be-judged-by-the-way-its-animals-mahatma-gandhi-51-33-11.jpg
       Is nature\Yahweh also not cruel? Human-beings worked hard to
       remove themselves as much as possible from nature's laws via
       civilization, yet left all the other non-human people behind to
       continue to suffer from nature's laws, did they not?
       There was widespread support for animal welfare in Nazi
       Germany[1] (German: Tierschutz im nationalsozialistischen
       Deutschland) among the country's leadership. Adolf Hitler and
       his top officials took a variety of measures to ensure animals
       were protected.[2]
       [quote]Several Nazis were environmentalists, and species
       protection and animal welfare were significant issues in the
       Nazi regime.[3] Heinrich Himmler made an effort to ban the
       hunting of animals.[4] Hermann Göring was a professed animal
       lover and conservationist,[5] who, on instructions from Hitler,
       committed Germans who violated Nazi animal welfare laws to
       concentration camps. In his private diaries, Nazi Propaganda
       Minister Joseph Goebbels described Hitler as a vegetarian whose
       hatred of the Jewish religion in large part stemmed from the
       ethical distinction this faith drew between the value of humans
       and the value of other animals; Goebbels also mentions that
       Hitler planned to ban slaughterhouses in the German Reich
       following the conclusion of World War II.[6] Nevertheless,
       animal testing was common in Nazi Germany.[7][8][9]
       The current animal welfare laws in Germany were initially
       introduced by the Nazis.[10] [/quote]
  HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_welfare_in_Nazi_Germany
       Ghandi did not realize that Hitler was not Western either:
       [img width=1280
       height=720]
  HTML https://quotefancy.com/media/wallpaper/3840x2160/3725899-Mahatma-Gandhi-Quote-I-do-not-consider-Hitler-to-be-as-bad-as-he.jpg[/img]
       Ghandi was a Humanist, just like Westerners still are today!:
       [img]
  HTML https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-d650ac85c2f4dd8d5bff2ce470f27fba-lq[/img]
       Ethically and morally speaking, do westerners not deserve to be
       treated the same exact way they have been treating non-human
       people, if not worse? Could non-humans ever wage an effective
       and just war against human-beings without the help of an
       anti-Western human?
  HTML https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/582/453/e59.jpg
       See also:
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/mythical-world/turanian-diffusion/
       
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-false-left/true-left-breakthrough-seriousness-in-environmentalism/
       
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/leftist-vs-rightist-moral-circles/
       
  HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/farming-vs-ranching/
       #Post#: 18441--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Communism
       By: rp Date: March 15, 2023, 6:26 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML https://twitter.com/dr_duchesne/status/1635001854995349504?s=20
       [quote]
       Dr. Ricardo Duchesne
       @dr_duchesne
       Blaming socialism is a strategy orchestrated by right wing
       establishment to sidetrack from the equal culpability of
       capitalist globalists in the promotion of immigration
       replacement and transsexualism. As Marx said, capitalism
       destroys traditions and makes the world homogenous.
  HTML https://twitter.com/dr_duchesne/status/1635001854995349504?s=20
       [quote]
       Carl Benjamin
       @Sargon_of_Akkad
       The salt that emerges when someone correctly points out that the
       Nazis were a socialist party, followed a form of socialism, and
       engaged in political violence as socialists is just
       delicious.[/quote]
       [/quote]
       #Post#: 18563--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Communism
       By: antihellenistic Date: March 22, 2023, 11:43 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Communism only worked on the people who already adapt to
       industrialism and already accept capitalism
       See the sentences which given bold if don't have time to read
       all of the quoted content
       [quote]Movement is the mode of existence of the entire material
       universe. Energy and matter are inseparable. Moreover, movement
       does not come "from outside", but is a manifestation of internal
       tensions which are inseparable not only from life, but also from
       all forms of matter. Development and change occur through
       internal contradictions. Thus, dialectical analysis begins by
       exposing these internal contradictions through empirical
       investigation which then results in development and change.
       From a dialectical point of view all the "opposites" are
       one-sided and inadequate, including the contradiction between
       "truth and error". Marxism does not accept the existence of
       "Eternal Truth". All "truth" and "wrong" is relative. What is
       right at one time and context is wrong at another: right and
       wrong cross one another.
       So the progress of knowledge and science does not start from the
       negation of an "incorrect theory". All theories are relative,
       explaining one side of reality. Initially they were assumed to
       have universal validity and application. They are "right". But
       at some point, the shortcomings of this theory began to be
       recognized; they can't be used for all situations, exceptions
       always exist. This had to be explainable, and at some point, new
       theories were developed to explain the exceptions. But these new
       theories not only "negate" the old, but also incorporate them in
       a new form.
       We can set aside contradictions only by considering objects as
       inanimate things, static and situated separately from one
       another, that is, metaphysically. But once we understand things
       in their movement and change, in their life, in their
       interdependence and interaction, we encounter a series of
       contradictions.
       ...
       All forms of human society exist because it is a necessity of
       time: "No special order disappears before all the productive
       forces to which it belongs, have been developed: and new, higher
       relations of production never arise until the material
       conditions of their existence have sufficiently matured." in the
       womb of the old society. Mankind has therefore always taken up
       problems only which he can solve, for, on observing these
       problems more closely, we will always find that the problem
       itself arises only when the necessary material conditions for
       its solution already exist or are at least in the process of
       being formed. ”. (Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of
       Political Economy).
       Slavery, at its time, represented a great leap beyond barbarism.
       Slavery was a necessary stage in the development of the
       productive forces, culture and society. As explained by Hegel:
       "It is not from slavery, but through slavery that humans become
       free". (Hegel, Philosophy of History)
       Likewise capitalism is also a necessary and progressive stage in
       society. However, like slavery, primitive communism and
       feudalism (see section 2), capitalism has long ceased to
       represent a necessary and progressive social system. It is
       already rickety because of the deep contradictions that lie
       within it, and will in time be overthrown by the rise of
       socialism, which is represented by the modern proletariat.
       Private ownership of the means of production and the
       nation-state, which are the basic features of capitalist
       society, which originally marked a step forward, now only
       hinders the development of the productive forces and threatens
       all the progress that has been made after centuries of human
       development.
       Today capitalism is a porous and backward social system, which
       must be overthrown and replaced by its opposite, Socialism, if
       human culture is to survive. Marxism is determinist, but not
       fatalist, because the alignment of contradictions in society can
       only be achieved by humans who consciously seek to bring about
       the transformation of society. The struggle between these
       classes is not something that is natural. Who succeeds depends
       on many factors, and a rising progressive class has many
       advantages over an aging force of reaction. But in the end, the
       result must depend on which side is stronger determined, bigger
       organization and more talented and formidable leadership.
       Therefore Marxist philosophy is essentially a guide to action:
       “Philosophers have interpreted the world in various ways;
       but the aim, after all, is to change it.” (Marx,
       Feuerbach's theses)
       The victory of socialism will mark a new and clearly different
       stage in the history of mankind. More accurately, it would mark
       the end of humankind's prehistory, and begin real history.
       But, on the other hand, socialism signifies our return to the
       earliest form of society - tribal communism - but at a much
       higher level, which stands above all the tremendous
       contributions made over the thousands of years of class society.
       An abundant economy will be made possible by the application of
       socialist planning to industry, science and engineering, which
       has been established by capitalism, on a global scale. This
       would in turn abolish the division of labour, the distinction
       between mental and physical labor, between town and country, and
       the barbaric and unnecessary class conflicts, and allow humanity
       to finally be able to allocate its resources to the domination
       of nature: in the words of Engels who famous, "Humanity's Leap
       from the world of necessity to the World of Freedom". (Marx and
       Engels,Capital Vol. III)
       Translated by Sekar from “What is Marxism?” by Rob
       Sewell and Alan Woods (In Defence of Marxism)14th September
       2018[/quote]
       In short, communism need capitalist and western colonialism in
       order to made the colonized being educated to manage the
       industry and technological advancements. And then they will
       support communism because feel oppressed by the capitalist
       unjust economic system which enforced by the colonialist.
       Communism can be applied only on highly industrialized and
       technologically advanced society. Therefore only the nation or
       community which expert to exploiting world's resources which
       able to accept communism. And the nations who can't do that will
       got preyed by the communist states in order to got introduced to
       industrialist oppressive system by the communist states. I hope
       China will not do this to the non-western states and instead see
       their main enemy is Western Civilization. Communism don't
       believe absolute truth, only relativism. Because it promoting
       human interest to reform into different way of life which suited
       for communist western industrial advancement. Communist viewed
       slavery are not evil, but necessary conditions to accept "human
       development"
       Source :
  HTML https://www.marxist.com/apa-itu-marxisme-bagian-pertama-materialisme-dialektis.htm
       #Post#: 18692--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Communism
       By: antihellenistic Date: April 1, 2023, 11:24 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [color=red]Inferiority of Communist Doctrine[/color]
       Communist saw everything relative depending on the society's
       material's progressive condition
       [quote]b) Everything is determined by circumstances, place and
       time
       Recognizing that there is an organic mutual relationship between
       phenomena also means that the existence of something cannot be
       separated from the circumstances around it, or the existence of
       something that has certain conditions. The meaning of something
       is determined by the circumstances or situation. When the
       situation changes, the meaning also changes. For example, the
       growth of the capitalist mode of production or capitalism
       requires certain conditions, that is, on the one hand there is
       capital, on the other hand wage labor is available. And these
       conditions only existed at the end of the feudal era in Europe.
       At a time when capitalism has a revolutionary meaning against
       feudalism, the bourgeoisie has a revolutionary role against
       feudalism. But capitalism and the bourgeoisie in the countries
       of Western Europe and America are no longer revolutionary, but
       reactionary. Because the bourgeoisie in these countries no
       longer wants revolutionary changes in society, they are
       desperately defending a system of society that is no, they
       repeated what the feudal lords they had overthrown had done.
       Thus it is clear that dialectical materialism is opposed to a
       frozen metaphysical view, which seeks to perpetuate or absolute
       something, or to look at and analyze something that is separated
       from its surroundings, from being separated from other things.
       For example, viewing capitalism as something that stands alone;
       because capitalism is a system of exploitation of humans by
       humans, it is considered a reactionary system and must be
       opposed absolutely anywhere and at any time. As a continuation
       of this erroneous assumption, is to assess the position of the
       national capitalists in our present country definitively as a
       reactionary class, because they consider the paying class. Thus,
       they do not see each other in conflict with imperialism and
       feudalism, so that the revolutionary role of the national
       bourgeoisie is not seen at the present stage of the Indonesian
       revolution which is objectively anti-imperialism and
       anti-feudalism.
       In short, with this view of mutual relations, we teach that when
       looking at and solving a problem, do not separate it from the
       relationship as a whole, because there is nothing that has no
       cause or effect, everything is determined by circumstances,
       place and time.[/quote]
       Source :
  HTML https://www.marxists.org/indonesia/indones/1962-AiditTentangMarxisme.htm
       Recall on what Marx view on "black" slavery by the "whites"
       [quote]"Without slavery, North America, the most progressive of
       countries, would be transformed into a patriarchal country. Wipe
       out North America from the map of the world and you will have
       anarchy— the complete decay of modern commerce and civilization.
       Abolish slavery and you will have wiped America off the map of
       nations.10- Karl Heinrich Marx
       What Marx was saying in effect was that Negro slaves were needed
       to produce raw cotton; cotton was the basic raw material of
       modern capitalist industry; therefore, Negro slavery was
       necessary to the survival of America and to the survival of
       modern civilization.[/quote]
       Source : Karl Marx Racist by Nathaniel Weyl, page 75
       [quote]Slavery, at its time, represented a great leap beyond
       barbarism. Slavery was a necessary stage in the development of
       the productive forces, culture and society. As explained by
       Hegel: "It is not from slavery, but through slavery that humans
       become free". (Hegel, Philosophy of History)[/quote]
       Source :
  HTML https://www.marxist.com/apa-itu-marxisme-bagian-pertama-materialisme-dialektis.htm
       Try to compare what Marx say with what Hegel say. They both not
       consider slavery as absolutely bad for the sake supporting
       "material progress"
       Memory
  HTML https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/images/large/5ecf80f1-33b8-4168-a6b9-da7ca00745a5.gif.pagespeed.ce.opXl7UZUHQ.gif
       Kill Western Civilization, no Compromise
       #Post#: 18840--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Communism
       By: antihellenistic Date: April 13, 2023, 7:49 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Communism's theory of Dialectical Materialism justify
       colonialism for the sake forcing people of a community into
       history and western industrial way of life
       [center][size=12pt]Marx in Neue Rheinische Zeitung February 1849
       Democratic Pan-Slavism [314]
       by Frederick Engels
       Neue Rheinische Zeitung No. 222
       Translated by the Marx-Engels Institute
       Transcribed for the Internet by director@marx.org,
       1994[/size][/center]
       Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels on this letter justified "white
       German" people's colonization of the "white Slavic" peoples for
       the sake their adoption into western industrial living and they
       more prefer the Slavs to live under German colonialism rather
       than subjugated by the Islamic Ottoman Caliphate
       [quote][b][color=black]Cologne, February 14, 1849...Peoples
       which have never had a history of their own, which from the time
       when they achieved the first, most elementary stage of
       civilization already came under foreign sway, or which were
       forced to attain the first stage of civilization only by means
       of a foreign yoke, are not viable and will never be able to
       achieve any kind of independence.[/b][/color]
       ...
       In point of fact, the position of the Germans and Magyars would
       be extremely pleasant if the Austrian Slavs were assisted to get
       their so-called rights! An independent Bohemian-Moravian state
       would be wedged between Silesia and Austria; Austria and Styria
       would be cut off by the "South-Slav republic" from their natural
       debouche [outlet] - the Adriatic Sea and the Mediterranean; and
       the eastern part of Germany would be torn to pieces like a loaf
       of bread that has been gnawed by rats! And all that by way of
       thanks for the Germans having given themselves the trouble of
       civilizing the stubborn Czechs and Slovenes, and introducing
       among them trade, industry, a tolerable degree of agriculture,
       and culture!
       But it is precisely this yoke imposed on the Slavs under the
       pretext of civilization that is said to constitute one of the
       greatest crimes of the Germans and Magyars! Just listen to this:
       "Rightly do you rage, rightly do you breathe vengeance against
       the damnable German policy, which has thought of nothing but
       your ruin, which has enslaved you for centuries...." p.5
       "... The Magyars, the bitter enemies of our race, who number
       hardly four millions, have presumed to seek to impose their yoke
       on eight million Slavs...." p.9
       "I know all that the Magyars have done to our Slav brothers,
       what crimes they have committed against our nationality, and how
       they have trampled underfoot our language and independence."
       p.30
       What then are the great, dreadful crimes committed by the
       Germans and Magyars against the Slav nationality? We are not
       speaking here of the partition of Poland, which is not at issue
       here, we are speaking of the "centuries of injustice" supposed
       to have been inflicted on the Slavs.
       In the north, the Germans have reconquered from the Slavs the
       formerly German and subsequently Slav region from the Elbe to
       the Warthe; a conquest which as determined by the "geographical
       and strategical necessities" resulting from the partition of the
       Carolingian kingdom. These Slavs areas have been fully
       Germanized; the thing has been done and cannot be undone, unless
       the pan-Slavists were to resurrect the lost Sorbian, Wendish,
       and Obodritian languages and impose them on the inhabitants of
       Leipzig, Berlin and Stettin. But up to now it has never been
       disputed that this conquest was to the advantage of
       civilization.
       In the south, the Germans found the Slav races already split up.
       That had been seen to by the non-Slav Avars, who occupied the
       region later inhabited by the Magyars. The Germans exacted
       tribute from these Slavs and waged many wars against them. They
       fought also against the Avars and Magyars, from whom they took
       the whole territory from the Ems to the Leitha. Whereas they
       carried out Germanization here by force, the Germanization of
       the Slav territories proceeded much more on a peaceful basis, by
       immigration and by the influence of the more developed nation on
       the undeveloped. German industry, German trade, and German
       culture by themselves served to introduce the German language
       into the country. As far as "oppression" is concerned, the Slavs
       were not more oppressed by the Germans than the mass of the
       German population itself.
       As regards the Magyars, there are certainly also a large number
       of Germans in Hungary, but the Magyars, although numbering
       "hardly four millions", have never had the occasion to complain
       of the "damnable German policy"! And if during eight centuries
       the "eight million Slavs" have had to suffer the yoke imposed on
       them by the four million Magyars, that alone sufficiently proves
       which was the more viable and vigorous, the many Slavs or the
       few Magyars!
       But, of course, the greatest "crime" of the Germans and Magyars
       is that they prevented these 12 million Slavs from becoming
       Turkish! What would have become of these scattered small
       nationalities, which have played such a pitiful role in history,
       if the Magyars and Germans had not kept them together and led
       them against the armies of Mohammed and Suleiman, and if their
       so-called oppressors had not decided the outcome of the battles
       which were fought for the defense of these weak nationalities!
       The fate of the "12 million Slavs, Wallachians, and Greeks" who
       have been "trampled underfoot by 700,000 Osmans" (page eight),
       right up to the present day, does not that speak eloquently
       enough?
       And finally, what a "crime" it is, what a "damnable policy" that
       at a time when, in Europe in general, big monarchies had become
       a "historical necessity", the Germans and Magyars untied all
       these small, stunted and impotent little nations into a single
       big state and thereby enabled them to take part in a historical
       development from which, left to themselves, they would have
       remained completely aloof! Of course, matters of this kind
       cannot be accomplished without many a tender national blossom
       being forcibly broken. But in history nothing is achieved
       without violence and implacable ruthlessness, and if Alexander,
       Caesar, and Napoleon had been capable of being moved by the same
       sort of appeal as that which pan-Slavism now makes on behalf of
       its ruined clients, what would have become of history! And are
       the Persians, Celts, and Christian Germans of less value than
       the Czechs, Ogulians, and Serezhans?
       Now, however, as a result of the powerful progress of industry,
       trade and communications, political centralization has become a
       much more urgent need than it was then, in the 15th and 16th
       centuries. What still has to be centralized is being
       centralized. And now the pan-Slavists come forward and demand
       that we should "set free" these half-Germanized Slavs, and that
       we should abolish a centralization which is being forced on
       these Slavs by all their material interests!
       In short, it turns out these "crimes" of the Germans and Magyars
       against the said Slavs are among the best and most praiseworthy
       deeds which our and the Magyar people can boast in their
       history.
       Moreover, as far as the Magyars are concerned, it should be
       specially pointed out here that, particularly since the
       revolution, they have acted too much submissively and weakly
       against the puffed-up Croats. It is notorious that Kossuth made
       all possible concessions to them, excepting only that their
       deputies were not allowed to speak the Croatian in the Diet. And
       thus submissiveness to a nation that is counter-revolutionary by
       nature is the only thing with which the Magyars can be
       reproached.[/quote]
       Source :
  HTML https://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1849/02/15.htm
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page