Could help posting it in addition to the link to the Chezh army book…
The soviet Red Army officer shouts: Kill them all!!! And they will kill everyone from Bagdad to Paris… 
And here are more pictures of the enslaved and turned into robot soviet people…
The free education is not the prerrogative of the comunism ideals, the socialism and/or national-democracy (like Argentina) applied in some countries also give the free education and it could include also free health cares…without the “side effects” of communism.
So…who want comunism aniway?
The genetic and cybernetic were declared to be “the hores of capitalism”. False science, you know. You see we have to watch out for West trying to plant some faulty ideas int oour heads. We kind of burnt our finger on the Communism thing…
I can tell you even more. For several years until 1933 or so the subject History was excluded from the curriculum. The rationale behind was that history teaches about the past. That past belongs to the sociaety with wrong (bad) social system. Hense there is no need to learn about all those wrong things since we are building a new world. Crazy stuff, huh?
BTW, it is largerly due to Stalin that this line of thinking was dropped. 
I mean it. It is true.
So what will be the price at the end of the payment?
I recon in 30 year with 5% it turns into 35000. And in reality it will be of course higher.
The opposite has been true here for the past 11 years under a neo-con government of benighted troglodytes.
That government, which thankfully was thrown out a few weeks ago, wanted to impose its own, i.e. its own neo-con party’s, view of history on the national primary and secondary curriculums.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/05/1062549021882.html
Control of history, whether by refusing to acknowledge it or making it conform with their views, is as much at the heart of fascism as communism. The last thing any of them want is the truth.
You see, I actually do not think that the removal of History from curriculum was ment to control what people learned. The control was happening later when the subject was restored and still going on. And not only in Russia.
But the reallity was in fact worse than that. Those bolshevics sincerely thought that they do not need history. And if you try to get into their mind you will see that it was logical within the frame of their worldview.
That is why I (following some other smart, in my mind poeple.) give Stalin credit for at least getting away from the Bolshevik’s path.
Well, true. Not just Soviet socialism was amed to the free education and equal social rights but also and National-Socialism:)
But i do rather doubt they have no its OWN “side effect”
Chevan,
The Scandinavian countries also have free education system. At least in Denmark fo sure.
In Danmark, for example, they have this notion that can be translated as “Welfare Society” or “Welfare state”. It is in fact very similar to the ideals of socialism that we had in USSR: free medical care, free education, free elder care and so on. And they try to stick to it as much as they can keeping the capitalist economy going.
As it has been mentioned the word “free” has to be understood properly. Meaning that it has to be payed one way or an other. In case of denmark it is payed after people get jobs and start paying taxes. In case of Denmark it can easily reach 60%. I am not kidding.
Becouse you did not read his “In Circle First”
Solgenitsyn was prisoned firstly in 1945 into the Special prison" Sharashka" where worked as a Mathematic ( his primary profession).
Howevere soon he was removed to the usial Gulag camp- coz he conflicted with prison administration.
In the GULAG the conditions were much worsen - he was forced to work as a usial prisoners.
The One Day of Life of Ivan Denisovich is one of his bright nowel.
I/m remember i ve read it for the first time - it was a shock.
However today was proved that manies epicodes from this nowel were invented and never had place in camp where he was.
Plus the many his “facts” was proved to be falsificied ( or more softly- invented) by him.
For instance he was asserting the Stalin run away from the Moscow in the 1941- lates opened documents proves this fact as wrong.
His next mistake was a his famouse figures of prisoners 20 mln - is also more then fantastical.
Nevertheless his book were very interersting for reading coz he was first autor how has wrote about GULAG.
His books were the first about this subject - and in the beginning of 1990 when the people have sincerely belived him, nobody want to doubt in what he wrote.
Today the situation is bit complicated - there a lot of materials o historians and p[eoples who were in GULAG who study this matter and the critically analyse the many eposodes of that book.
For instance one of the interesting critical analysis that i found is here (just in russian)
http://lib.aldebaran.ru/author/almazov_v/almazov_v_suka_ty_pozornaya/almazov_v_suka_ty_pozornaya__1.html
The former Zekas ( prisoners) of GULAG discussed the book of Solgenitsyn “Arhipelag GULAG”
This is very interesting for reading.
If you are interesting i could transtalte for you some of more fun threads:)
In addition to what Chevan said about Solgenitsyn.
I think his books were needed for his time. But from the today’s perspective we can see they are not presice. But again at the time they were writen no statistics and such was avaialble so he used the best sources he could find. Which means mainly rumors and people talks. Unfortunately the impressions (including 20 million figure) that the book left on the minds of the people.
Plus there is an extra dimention about Solgenitsyn that should be considered as well.
Here is translation from the book “Russia 20th century. 1939 - 1964” by Valentin Kozhinov (1930 - 2001),
the chapter “Moscow - Rzhev - Berlin”.
These are the well know words said by Solzhenitsin in his “Letter to the leaders of the Soviet Union” (1973) which call to get rid of the ideology unnatural for Russia:
[INDENT]“Stalin from the first days of the war did not count on that roten ideoligical foundation and smartly got rid of it and took the old Russian flag - partly even the Orthodox Christian banner - and we won! (only closer to the end and after the war this communist ideology was again taken out of closet)”
But the things were more complex than that. Stalin displayed that “old Russian flag” very cautiously, in small dozes and did not in reality get rid of the “revolutionary” mindset. It is just enough to mention his speech on 6th of November 1941 where shortly before the victory in the battle for Moscow he put equality sign between “old” Russia and the Nazi Germany!But an other thing is even more vivid. Self Aleksandr Isaevich [Solzhenitsin] during the war, i.e. 30 years before his “Letter to the leaders of SOviet Union”, was openly and seriously unpleased by that very taking out of the “old Russian flag”. Because according to his own words “there was time in my youth… when there was such a strong ideological influence that I am being a student and reading Marks, Engels and LEnin thought that I opened great truth… with this mindset I went to the war in 1941.”
highly interesting and enlightening the memoirs of his first wife - N.A.Reshetnikova - about the conversations between them in May 1944 (the accuracy of this memoirs is confirmed by Solzhenitsin’s own words and by the transcripts of his “trial” in 1945).
«He sais that he sees meaning of all his life in the service to the world revolution. He is not happy with al lthat is going on today. The alliance with Britain and USA (i.e. with capitalistic countires - V.Kozhinov). The Comintern has been dismissed. The national anthem has been changed. In the army the uniform has been changed to resemble the old Russian one. He advised me to buy the book by Marks, Engels and LEnin. It could happened that they may disappear from the shops and the libraries. For all that we would have to fight after the war. And he is ready for that fight.»
But Solzhenitsin did not wait until the end of the war. In the time when all the letter were strictly censored, he accused Stalin of drifting away from Leninism. On the 9th of February 1945 he was arrested and in his papers a portrait of Trotsky was found (he thoght of him as of true Lenin follower)! Later as we know the writer accepted that Stalin was “correct” and even, we have to say, overestimated Stalin’s patriotism. Stalin has not been against the ideology, which was expressed in the letter by Solzhenitsin writen by him on the verge of entereing into East Prussia, shortly before his arrest:
“We stand on the borders of 1941. On the border beteen the patriotic war and the revolutionary war.” - i.e. the war that was ment in his mind to make Europe communistic, or at least part of Europe…
[/INDENT]
Egorka & Chevan
I don’t know what your view is of what the Western view of the USSR and communism was in the past, but there was a great deal of (in my view badly misplaced) sympathy and support for both during all the phases of the Cold War, amid much opposition from the formal elements of most Western governments.
People like Solzhenitsyn gave the conservatives the ammunition they needed to show how communists ran bestial regimes.
Conversely, all the pro-socialist intellectuals, students, etc during the same period in the 1960s-70’s were the ones who actually read Solshenitsyn’s books from start to finish, and got excited about them, and grew those PITA jaw / chin beards that they modelled on their idea of him, which still infest our universities, along with, thank god, increasingly rare Che Guevara impressions by people who are two generations removed from him and have no idea what a miserable psychopath he was. None of them ever started a movement to stop abuses in the GULAGs, let alone stop people in South America being killed to achieve the communist dream there, although the same people who didn’t oppose GULAGs and communist killings in South America, and South Vietnam, vigorously opposed killings by the fascist regimes in those places.
But when it came down to it, none of them ever fought anywhere. Growing suitably impressive beards and other appearances of solidarity with whomever they were being solid with, who were killing whover they were opposed to, mattered more.
Somehow Solzhenitsyn’s chronicles of what life was like under communism encouraged a lot of lefties in the West to think it was a great idea and, at the same time, energised them to be concerned about human rights, because he was treated so bady by the regime they wished to see instituted in the West.
Sure, it doesn’t make sense, but those people never do.
It was the same sort of mentality that saw a modest poet like Yevgeny Yevtushenko lionised in the West. He could have written the sort of shit that Lawrence Ferlinghetti wrote (and he sometimes did - I say this as someone who followed their so-called poetry at the time and now wonder what particular part of my brain was badly wired then) but jumbled up the words to make it even less impressive, and he still would have been a hero in the West. To people sympathetic to communisim and, perhaps, to the USSR, while supporting a few individuals who opposed and had been oppressed by both communism and the USSR.
As the Americans say: Go figure.
Well, true. Not just Soviet socialism was amed to the free education and equal social rights but also and National-Socialism:)
But i do rather doubt they have no its OWN “side effect”
USA, France, UK, Canada, Spain, and a very long etc, provided his citizens of free education, none of those is national socialism country.
The University (College) in Argentina is also free as the healt care and we are not national socialist, so your argument is pretty much Preponderous ( thank you Man of Stoat for teaching me that word ;)) , but probably you now already.
Interest is charged at the same rate as the rate of inflation (currently about 2.4% in the UK), so the purchasing power of the money I pay back is the same as that of the money I borrowed. Were I to put the money I borrowed in a bank account I’d actually make a profit.
Sounds OK.
Yeah, I actually think it’s about as close as you’re going to get to a fair system. There were students protesting about it when it was first introduced, but that’s like everyone else complains when told they aren’t going to get free money any more.
The cost of teaching my degree was subsidised to the extent of about £60,000 or so anyway (I paid £1000/year, tuition fees for overseas students (i.e. not subsidised by the government) plus college fee adds up to about £16,000/year). Tuition fees for overseas students will tend to reflect the real cost of teaching a degree by the way - they aren’t designed to make a profit.
That’s the whole problem RS with him.
He was just USED of the west to protray for you the “bestal regime”.
Solzenitsyn did not write how the Communism positively helped for the success Straggle of Working class for 8-hours working day, social rights and ets.
How it forced the Capitalist increase the life level its worker in fear of “evill communism”.
You will laught may be , but Solzenitsys primary critic at the STalin was for the “go away from Lenins and Marx principles”
Actually, he was prisoned for the first time for that he wrote that to his friend in letter.
So indeed he was a MORE communist and bolshevic in that period then many of people around him:)
Later when he emigrated in the West during Cold war- he was ill of n Idea of Ortodoxy Union of all slav states - the form of New Soviet block indeed.
The was a honest when he told that he was AWARDED by the Nobel Prize for the Politic.
He actually was used but the all of rusofobs agains russia ( that have no deal with and exist form ancient Tsar russia times) - we all clearly saw it as when after downfall of communism - the west still move the Nato forward, placed the new bases and nuclear rockets ,support all of separatists in here.
You will laught again- but the American discrimination and limitation in export of certain goods of STILL exist for the Russia.
Oh common.
You mean the state and privite grants and found who provide the FEW students the paid for education?
How many percent of people could use it in the list of states that you have wrote?
1 or may be 2% ALL OF STUDENTS?
This has nothing familiar that was in the Soviet Union- the guaranty of TOTAL FREE education.
No you are kidding:)
I could believe in 25-30 well may be 40% taxepays ,but not in 60%
If seriously - what wrong wth that mate.
You live in happy welfare state- this is a great.
You worry about taxes- you better calculate how many money could SAVE the usial family in Denmark for Studeing of the for instance three children- and you will be really wonder.
Today the many families in the west and east europe did not want to have the children ( in most cases just single) MOSLTY DUE the experience of good education.You could pay 30% of taxe and feel good:)
May be the someone Scandinavian Abramovich could not buy the one more fucking british football club - but does it matter of worry for you?
You live in a state that did not starts the Space aircrafts, did not have the Lagest world Army that spends a handreds billion dollars for the “Installing of democraty” all over world, and that did not have the Super-rich-bastard capitalist oligarh who getting enjoy of demonstration of ther power and superiority over the simple people.
But you live in the state that could give all of you children the GUARANTY of good education and medical service- do you even realise how should you be happy:)
Make your children be happy:)
Not here, mate.
We had it in 1856, over a decade before Marx even published the first volume of Das Kapital. It was a world first. The commos got the idea from us, along with the idea of the workers’ paradise.
On 21 April 1856, following negotiations between building tradesmen and contractors and with the approval of the colonial government, an eight hour day was introduced into the building trades in Melbourne.
Two employers, with substantial contracts for public buildings at the Western Market and Parliament House, resisted the new working hours agreement. In response to their intransigency, the stonemasons lead a protest march from University of Melbourne to Parliament House, calling out workers at building sites on the way. Within a fortnight the contractors had given way.
Melbourne’s building workers, generally without loss of pay or other conditions, had gained an unprecedented widespread and sustainable victory. Their achievement established a national and international standard to which working people everywhere could aspire. It was widely celebrated as a world first and formed the basis of Australia’s reputation as a ‘workingman’s paradise’.
http://eherald.alp.org.au/articles/0406/maghistory12-01.php
There’s still a monument in my city, Melbourne, to achieving the 8 hour day. Because of its great significance to the labour movement here, it’s often a rallying point for important labour causes and demonstrations. There’s a couple of images of it on the right here http://www.takver.com/wharfie/melb04.htm
I’m somewhere in that crowd. I’m surprised that my handsome face doesn’t stand out.
Close up of the top of the monument. 888 refers to the demand for eight hours labour, eight hours recreation, eight hours rest
More info here.
http://www.vthc.org.au/index.cfm?Category=131§ion=2&contentid=2189&viewmode=content
You have some very twisted views… “How it forced the Capitalist increase the life level its worker in fear of “evill communism”.”? WTF?
How is it in any way moral that somebody else has a right to more of my money than I do? a “happy welfare state”? where people who don’t want to work don’t have to, and those that work have to pay for them? where billions of pounds are poured into a bottomless health care system which is significantly worse than the insurance based schemes in nearby countries? and for education, have you seen the ridiculous things you can study at university these days? So no, you have no GUARANTEE of either a good education or a good medical service.
As for your idea of saving money, let’s do some simple maths:
Let’s say the usual family earned €60.000 gross. 60% of this is 36.000.
Let’s also say that university fees are 20.000 per year. Three children is unrealistic, let’s make it two (it’s more likely 1.4). Each child studies for three years, so that is 120.000 in total. This equates to 3.3 years worth of taxes, yet they will be paying these taxes over their whole working life, and on their pension.
Let’s put this another way. A family earns 60.000, and pays 60% tax. This means that they are paying 3000 per month in tax (that’s just income-tax, not including sales tax which is 25% in Denmark). This also means that, is both members of the working couple earn the same,1 of them is working solely to pay tax. What’s on this earth justifies such an “average” family paying €3000 a month of their income into a bottomless pit? What are they get in return?
Let’s look further: over their working lives they will pay 1.26 million in tax. In return, they will get 120.000 in university education for their kids, say 420.000 in health care (based on a family insurance policy costing €1000 a month which is probably 3 times too high than in reality), say approximately 130.000 in school education for their kids. This leaves 590.000 to pay for occasional road maintenance not covered by Council tax, defence, police, chavs and politicians. If we take a more realistic value of a health insurance policy, we are left with 870.000. this latter figure equates to about 25.000 per year, or 70% of the tax paid. So you are getting “value” for something around 30% of that 60% tax that you pay, the rest goes into the big bottomless money pit.
Doesn’t look like good value to me…