International Stalin Society Formed

Press Release: International Stalin Society Formed

The formation of International Stalin Society (ISS) has been officially announced today on 17th June 2014. ISS would be a consortium of various Stalin Societies functioning in individual countries across the globe. It has been decided that Mr. Harpal Brar of the Stalin Society (UK) will act as the founding Chair of ISS in its first term. Mr. Zane Carpenter from the Stalin Society (UK), Mr. Saad Yousaf Aahni from the Stalin Society Pakistan, Mr. Kari Kalan from the Stalin Society of India and Mr. Alfonso Casal from the Stalin Society of North America will be acting as the Vice Chair, General Secretary, Joint Secretary and Information Secretary of the ISS respectively in the first term.

The request of the Stalin Tour, an organisation from Georgia, to join ISS has also been approved and further memberships requests are expected.

The International Stalin Society will help coordinate different pro-Stalin organisations across globe to fight anti-Stalin propaganda and to promote Stalin’s progressive legacy. Standing against all massive anti-Stalin false propaganda and lies, ISS will be propagating research-based reliable history of Marshal Joseph Stalin, the great teacher of the working class and liberator of humanity from the clutches of Fascism.

The Head Offices of the Stalin Societies of UK, Pakistan, North America and India will serve as the regional offices of the ISS.

Signed:

Chairman (Harpal Brar)
Vice Chairman (Zane Carpenter)
General Secretary (Saad Yousaf Aahni)
Joint Secretary (Kari Kalan)
Information Secretary (Alfonso Casal)

International Stalin Society
June 17, 2014.

Source: http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/rdv20n2/stalsoc.htm

Lenin’s Sister on Lenin-Stalin Relation

M.I. Ulyanova to the presidium of the
joint plenum of the cc and CCC of the RCP(b)
.

26th July, 1926

To the Joint Plenum of the CC and CCC

The oppositional minority in the CC in the recent period has carried out a systematic attack on Comrade Stalin not even stopping at affirming as though there had been a rupture between Lenin and Stalin in the last months of the life of V.I. With the objective of re-establishing the truth I consider it my obligation to inform comrades briefly about the relations of Lenin towards Stalin in the period of the illness of V.I. (I am not here concerned with the period prior to his illness about which I have wide-ranging evidences of the most touching relations between V.I. and Stalin of which CC members know no less than I) when I was continually present with him and fulfilled a number of charges.

Vladimir Ilyich really appreciated Stalin. For example, in the spring of 1922 when V. Ilyich had his first attack, and also at the time of his second attack in December 1922, he invited Stalin and addressed him with the most intimate tasks. The type of tasks with which one can address a person on whom one has total faith, whom you know as a dedicated revolutionist, and as a intimate comrade. Moreover Ilyich insisted, that he wanted to talk only with Stalin and nobody else. In general, in the entire period of his illness, till he had the opportunity to associate with his comrades, he invited comrade Stalin the maximum. And during the most serious period of the illness, he invited not a single member of the politbureau except Stalin.

There was an incident between Lenin and Stalin which comrade Zinoviev mentions in his speech and which took place not long before Ilyich lost his power of speech (March, 1923) but it was completely personal and had nothing to do with politics. Comrade Zinoviev knew this very well and to quote it was absolutely unnecessary. This incident took place because on the demand of the doctors the Central Committee gave Stalin the charge of keeping a watch so that no political news reached Lenin during this period of serious illness. This was done so as not to upset him and so that his condition did not deteriorate, he (Stalin) even scolded his family for conveying this type of information. Ilyich, who accidentally came to know about this and who was also always worried about such a strong regime of protection, in turn scolded Stalin. Stalin apologized and with this the incident was settled. What is there to be said – during this period, as I had indicated, if Lenin had not been so seriously ill then he would have reacted to the incident differently. There are documents regarding this incident and on the first demand from the Central Committee I can present them.

This way, I affirm that all the talk of the opposition about Lenin’s relation towards Stalin does not correspond to reality. These relations were most intimate and friendly and remained so.

26th July 1926. M. Ulyanova.

(Ts PA IML, F. 17, Op. 2, D. 246, Vyp. IV; Tipografskii tekst).

Courtesy: ‘Izvestia Ts.K. KPSS’, 1989, No. 12, p. 196. available at http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/

mariya

Bill Bland on Dimitrov

Despite the contributions made by Bill Bland to the communist movement it is not possible to ignore some serious errors of interpretation committed by him pertaining to the history of the international communist movement. As is known the victory of Nazism in Germany brought about a situation in which the perspectives of a revolutionary socialist offensive envisaged by the Sixth Congress of the Comintern of 1928 no longer held and it became imperative to reorientate the international communist movement towards a policy of defeating fascism. In 1934 Dimitrov and Stalin took the initiative to apply the tactics of united front in a new manner, especially through the popular front. During the course of the war they jointly refashioned the organizational forms of proletarian internationalist unity, dissolved the Comintern in 1943, established the International Information Department of the CPSU(b) and, later, the Cominform. Bill Bland rejected these policies even though Stalin had expressed his support for them, dubbed them as ‘revisionist’ and located these as the fountainhead of modern revisionism. Stalin was not directly or openly assailed on these questions but Dimitrov was categorized as an agent of Nazism and a tool of imperialism. Stalin had, it was argued, no role to play in the Comintern after 1928 which was controlled by a ‘revisionist majority’. By this contrived fiction artificially superimposed on the history of the Comintern the actual policies of Stalin were rejected and the ‘real policies’ of Stalin as interpreted by Bill Bland were counterposed in their place. We may also note the pronounced errors on the national and colonial questions. Bill Bland rejected the views of Lenin and the Comintern on the existence of the black nation with the right of self-determination in the USA. He also upheld the social-democratic theory of ‘decolonisation’ propagated by M.N. Roy by which it was considered possible for significant economic development, industrial advance and ‘decolonisation’ to take place in colonies such as India without the occurrence of a democratic revolution. This theory was rejected firmly at the Sixth Congress of the Comintern in 1928 and its falsity has been confirmed in the decades after 1947.

Bill Bland will be remembered by the communist movement for having devoted his entire adult life to the cause of communism, for standing by the principles of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin when almost the whole international communist movement was being penetrated and corroded by lesser doctrines, for having applied the principles of the classics to cognise the problems engendered by modern revisionism and to have sought out the path to communism in difficult times. If in these complex circumstances he sometimes strayed or erred in his interpretations these will be put to one side and all that is positive will form part of the treasure-house of Marxism.

Prof. Vijay Singh

Source: http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org/rdv7n2/blandobit.htm

bland on dimitrov

Brezhnev acknowledging Stalin-era Achievements

“Communists and all Soviet people knew that the building of socialism was only the first step towards communism. Already in 1939 at its 18th Congress the Party began to chart the first steps of the transition to the next stage, to the building of communism. But before these steps were taken our country, our people had to with-stand the sternest test in their history.

The great successes achieved by the Soviet people, who in less than a quarter of a century turned their country into a flourishing socialist state, evoked fury in the imperialist camp….”

L. I. BREZHNEV (1967)

Source: Fifty Years of Great October Revolution (Report by L. I. Brezhnev), Novosti Press Agency Publishing House, Moscow, 1967. 

brez st

Lenin on ‘Jewish Nation’

” But the Bund’s third argument, which invokes the idea of a Jewish nation, is undoubtedly of the nature of a principle. Unfortunately, however, this Zionist idea is absolutely false and essentially reactionary. “The Jews have ceased to be a nation, for a nation without a territory is unthinkable,” says one of the most prominent of Marxist theoreticians, Karl Kautsky…

Absolutely untenable scientifically, the idea that the Jews form a separate nation is reactionary politically. Irrefutable practical proof of that is furnished by generally known facts of recent history and of present-day political realities…

That is precisely what the Jewish problem amounts to: assimilation or isolation?—and the idea of a Jewish “nationality” is definitely reactionary not only when expounded by its consistent advocates (the Zionists), but likewise on the lips of those who try to combine it with the ideas of Social-Democracy (the Bundists). The idea of a Jewish nationality runs counter to the interests of the Jewish proletariat, for it fosters among them, directly or indirectly, a spirit hostile to assimilation, the spirit of the “ghetto”. “

 

V. I. LENIN (1903)

Source: The Position of the Bund in the Party, Iskra, No. 51, October 22, 1903.

Lenin  Israel

Lenin’s Wife on Stalin and the Trotskyites

“۔۔۔When Lenin died, the masses came even more close to the party. ‘Lenin is no more but his work lives on’. The years went by and we witnessed how the organisation of thousands and millions of workers grew from day to day, workers who got immersed into the management of the country, into building socialism. The entire social fabric of our country of Soviets changed. From the midst of the mass of people thousands of organisers have grown. The Stakhanovite movement is an eloquent witness to this, so is the conference of the leaders of the party and government held last winter with the working organisations of the various productive spheres, the kolkhozniki, the workers, the combine operators and other collective farmers who have achieved high yields etc. Everyone can see, how the friendship between people is strengthening on the basis of the various economic organisations, how the masses have grown culturally. The masses can see how completely, tirelessly comrade Stalin is giving himself to this sacred work, the work of Lenin, the building of socialism, how he is carrying them forward towards a better life. Everybody can see that and they believe him, he is surrounded by their trust and love.”

And it is not a coincidence, that Trotsky, who never understood the essence of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the role of the masses in building socialism, thinking that it can be built merely by an order from above, is now standing on the path of organising terrorist acts against Stalin, Voroshilov and other members of the Politburo, who are helping the masses to build socialism. It is not a matter of chance, therefore, that the unprincipled bloc of Kamenev and Zinoviev together with Trotsky have pushed them from one step to another into a deep abyss of an unheard betrayal of Lenin’s work, the work of the masses, the ideals of Socialism. Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev and their entire band of killers acted together with the German fascists, entered into a pact with the Gestapo.”

“They wanted to create unrest in the ranks of the masses, kill the brain and heart of the revolution – Comrade Stalin himself. This did not happen. This despicable gang of scoundrels has been shot.

Now the masses are rallying around the Party even more closely. Their love for Stalin has grown.

Even people who are not members of the Party are writing that it is necessary to bring out the collected works of Lenin and Stalin as supplementary reading in newspapers which have a wide circulation…”

“…With the organisers in various areas of production, with the collective farmers, workers, the combine workers, the beet growers etc. Everybody can see how on the foundation of these economic organisations the friendship amongst people is strengthening in this country of Soviets, how the masses have grown culturally. And millions of workers can see how selflessly, completely and without a break, comrade Stalin is giving himself to their vital work, the work of Lenin, the work of building Socialism, how he is leading them forward towards a better life. They can see this and they believe him and engulf him with all encompassing trust and love.”

“Neither the Trotskyites, nor the Zinovievs or the Second International will be able to hide the true facts, or will be successful in blowing dust into the eyes of the workers…”

 

N. Krupskaya (1936).

Source:  Why Is the Second International Defending Trotsky?, Izvestia, 4th September 1936, No. 224. Retrieved from http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.org

Krupskaya and Stalin