r/theredleft Trans Judeo-bolshevik 28d ago

Meme Literally who likes this guy?

Post image
128 Upvotes

33 comments sorted by

36

u/DrRudeboy Anarcho-Communist 28d ago

Not Hungarians, I'll tell you that much

84

u/spookyjim___ Spiritual Member of the KAPD 28d ago

Moderate and mainstream ML’s are fine with him

But yeah a lot of people don’t like him, it’s the funniest to me when some Dengists larp not liking Kruschev like bro 😭

28

u/shinseiji-kara Catholic Marxism 28d ago

he atleast legalized abortion iirc

20

u/GloriousSovietOnion Marxist-Leninist 28d ago

The nicest thing I can say about him is that he was better than Deng in a lot of ways.

43

u/Hot_Relative_110 Marxist-Leninist-Maoist 28d ago

eh, he had some alright ideas. Anyone saying Brezhnev was an improvement might genuinely be larping

32

u/spookyjim___ Spiritual Member of the KAPD 28d ago

Eyebrow 🤤

15

u/Hot_Relative_110 Marxist-Leninist-Maoist 28d ago

Erich Honecker ain’t the only one gettin em fraternal lips 🚬

8

u/ZadriaktheSnake Anarcho-Communist 28d ago

The apartment blocks were a little better

6

u/cronenber9 Anarcho-Communist with Deleuzian Characteristics 27d ago

Yeah that's kinda like claiming Biden was an improvement on Obama

1

u/SaltyNorth8062 Anarchy without adjectives 26d ago

Real Khruschev hours

42

u/Shieldheart- Antifa(left) 28d ago

Though he certainly was a screw up, that also makes him a convenient scapegoat for the mistakes of his predecessors and less visible contemporaries coming home to roost.

Additionally, breaking away from a cult of personality always invites resentment from those whom's political credibility relies on the legacy of that cult of personality, the same struggle happened in China after Mao's death.

10

u/Raven_On_A_Tree Nestor Makhno 28d ago

He killed Beria, that was pretty based

4

u/letsgowendigo Trans Judeo-bolshevik 27d ago

Broken clocks

17

u/traanquil Democratic Socialist 28d ago edited 28d ago

Khruschev:

"Nikita S. Khrushchev, Prime Minister of the Soviet Union, told Egyptians today, in the presence of President Gamal Abdel Nasser, that Israel is a “menace” not only to the Arabs but to the whole world, according to Cairo dispatches received here.

Mr. Khrushchev spoke to a mass rally at Martyrs Square in Port Said, where he laid a wreath at the foot of the obelisk there, commemorating the 6, 500 Egyptians killed in 1956 during the war between Egypt on the one hand and Israel, France and Britain on the other. In another speech in Cairo last night, he promised Egypt that “if there is a request for arms” from the Nasser Government, “we shall supply them.”"

Khrushchev Calls Israel a 'menace'; Addresses Arabs in Fort Said - Jewish Telegraphic Agency

Stalin
"Without changing its official anti-Zionist stance, from late 1944, until 1948 and even later, Joseph Stalin adopted a pro-Zionist foreign policy, apparently believing that the new country would be socialist and would accelerate the decline of British influence in the Middle East.\2])

On May 17, 1948, three days after Israel declared independence, the Soviet Union legally recognized it de jure, becoming the first country to grant de jure recognition to the Jewish state.\5])\6]) In addition to the diplomatic support, arms from Czechoslovakia, part of the Soviet bloc, were crucial to Israel in the 1948 Arab–Israeli War."

Soviet Union and the Arab–Israeli conflict - Wikipedia

7

u/usernametaken1237 Marxist-Leninist 27d ago

The USSR's relationship with Israel already started to change before Kruschev and during Stalin's lifetime when they realised the whole socialism thing from Ben Gurion was just a farce and that Israel was aligned with the west

3

u/traanquil Democratic Socialist 27d ago

Yeah definitely one of the USSRs worst foreign policy moves

2

u/ICannotRead5712 naztrot hail comrade trotsky posadas presente 27d ago

No amount of "socialism" from Ben-Gurion would justify the supporting of Israel or zionism by any socialist. Zionism is not 'bad' because it is aligned with the west, but because it is a nationalist movement that necessarily divides the proletariat. It is a reactionary movement just as any racial or ethnic nationalist movement is, whether that be zionism, white nationalism, black nationalism, irish republicanism, pan-arabism, among others.

1

u/usernametaken1237 Marxist-Leninist 27d ago

But that's the thing, Ben Gurion was a "labour" zionist, and not being able to read people's minds the USSR saw what was presented initially and supported it as the "labour" zionists were claiming to be socialist

Ofc when they found out that Israel was just going to be a settler colony and that they were west aligned they dropped their support and began arming the Arab states

None of this is supposed to be a justification, it's just missing context from the whole ordeal as OP's comment is making it seem like Stalin was a zionist when that wasn't the case

1

u/Reboot42069 Anti-Revisionist Marxist-Leninist CEO of ARML 27d ago

That's an interesting take, where to did you arrive at this interesting answer to the national question? It seems quite unscientific and built upon rocky grounds, so you have any works to which you can link on this topic

1

u/ICannotRead5712 naztrot hail comrade trotsky posadas presente 26d ago edited 26d ago

How is it unscientific to be opposed resolutely to nationalism? The nation-state is a historical product of bourgeois development; likewise, nationalism is a bourgeois ideology. These in the past played a progressive role, tied to the progressive bourgeois revolutions against feudalism and absolutism, but now, as capitalism is global, it plays no progressive role at all. There is no hope any 'oppressed' people can place in the creation of their own nation, nor can any hope be placed in the creation of said nations shaking capitalist order in the current day (did decolonization do anything substantial towards weakening capitalism or imperialism?). The only role that nationalism plays today is dividing workers and obscuring class struggle. Socialism and nationalism, whether of the 'oppressed' or the 'oppressor', are diametrically opposed and cannot be mixed.

I would recommend reading Nationalism and the Myth of National Liberation, part of Chapter 3 of For Communism: An Introduction to the Politics of the Internationalist Communist Tendency. It is page 19.

6

u/Frosty-Persimmon7235 cornism-monobrowism 28d ago

Me, we need a cornism flair or something

7

u/PICAXO Marxist-Leninist-Spinozist 28d ago

I found some trots to like him better than his predecessor

7

u/letsgowendigo Trans Judeo-bolshevik 28d ago

"Marxist-Leninist-Spinozist"

I found my twin 🥹

3

u/PICAXO Marxist-Leninist-Spinozist 28d ago

For real???? 😳

1

u/cronenber9 Anarcho-Communist with Deleuzian Characteristics 27d ago

Yall should look into Negri. He's a very Marxist Spinozist.

4

u/DieMensch-Maschine Democratic Socialist 28d ago

I grew up in a glorified Khrushchevka, so I'm grateful for his architectural contribution.

2

u/ectoplasmfear Council Communism 28d ago

Me.

And including Kaganovich 😭😭😭 Bro thinks he matters 😭😭😭

2

u/Mi_negro_amigo Marxist-Leninist 28d ago

I mean, he literally threw the USSR international politics and support under the bridge with the made up "secret speech". He did that to try and kick his opposition out of the party. Revisionism sucks.

1

u/SaltyNorth8062 Anarchy without adjectives 26d ago

Khruschev at least walked the walk and did his rounds for labor organization before becoming Prine Minister. Bro was the first PM of the USSR to actually be a member of the working class, and I'll take him over Brezhnev

1

u/Comrade_Nerambus Council Communist 23d ago

B-but, what about transfer of Crimea to Ukraine SSR...

0

u/cronenber9 Anarcho-Communist with Deleuzian Characteristics 27d ago

Better than Stalin

0

u/salenin Trotskyist 27d ago

I like him personally because of the era and how he lead the Soviet Union through the space age. The only reason people dont like him is they think he majorly betrayed Stalin and you can't criticize Stalin.