Liệu những vấn đề này có phạm nội quy???

Nước Nga khó có ai có cái tên rất lạ là Lênin cả. Nếu ông ta là Lêni thì tôi tin. Sao lại không nhớ ông Trostky khi mà ông phê phán Stalin và tách ra đi con đường riêng và bị ám sát bởi Stalin.

Lenin chỉ là tên tự đặt khi hoạt động, tên cúng cơm của ông ta là Vladimir I. Ulyanov. Cũng tương tự Trotsky là hiệu còn tên thật là Lev Davidovich Bronstein .
" đời đời nhớ ông" là quyền của bạn. Còn tôi, dẫu biết rằng " với 1 chữ 'nếu', người ta có thể bỏ cả kinh thành Paris vô 1 cái chai", nhưng tôi vẫn đặt ra giả thiết : liệu có 1 đất nước Việt nam sau thế chiến 2 hay không nếu ở Đông dương chỉ có 1 phong trào Đệ Tứ của các vị : Tạ Thu Thâu, Phan Văn Hùm, Trần Văn Thạch.... Tôi cho là không, mặc dầu tôi rất kính trọng họ - những người dám hy sinh cuộc đời & sự nghiệp của mình cho Tổ quốc. (Chủ thuyết Trotskyist đặt nhẹ vấn đề dân tộc, mục đích của họ là làm cách mạng thế giới xong thì bản thân dân tộc kia cũng tự được giải phóng ( tôi cho là viễn vông cũng như ....... mà ta thường nghe thấy ), Bạn có thể tham khảo ở trang web mà tôi giới thiệu trong bài viết trên.

Nhưng có một vấn đề không thể phủ nhận được đó là chẳng hạn như thằng Nguyển Văn A là xấu xa thì tôi giết thằng A thôi hay là giết hết ca dòng họ nhà Nguyễn trong đó có cả thằng A khó hơn .
Vả lại cái chuyện vì nghỉa cả quốc tế thì nói dể nhưng làm là chuyện khác .Dỉ nhiên bay giờ tôi đang đói dân tộc tui bi áp bức thì tui quan tâm đến tư do và cơm áo của tui cua dân tộc tui hay la cách mạng toàn thế giới .
Phần này nếu có lở miệng mà phạm qui xin bác Admin xoá dùm cảm ơn
Lúc trước Liên Xô đả từng bảo Bác phải làm cách mạng như vậy ở VN và Bác yêu nước thương nòi nên luôn cải lại mà bảo là cả 1 đám đế quốc bự quá xa xôi khó khăn quá để tui giải phóng dân tộc tui để người VN có cơm ăn áo mặc có hạnh phúc có tư do rồi tui tính tới cách mạng vô sản toàn diện sau .Chính vì thế mà cái ta có là Chủ Nghĩa Mac Lenin và tư tưởng Hồ Chí Minh .Tất nhiên đường lối của Bác là đúng đắn hợp với tình hình nước ta và chúng ta đã giải phóng thành công (nếu không thì không tồn tại ai trong số chúng ta ma ngồi đây nói xấu nói tốt ai .
Phải nói thêm là có 1 thời gian Bác bị Liên Xô cắt chức ở Đảng CSVN vì không nghe theo Liên Xô trong chuyện này
em chỉ nói thế để làm ví dụ điển hình thôi khong hề nói xạo boi nhọ các lảnh dạo hay chính sach trong nước gì cả ma lơ có phạm qui thì cung xin các bác tha thứ cho .

Đời người chỉ sống có một lần ,hãy sống sao cho đến ngày nhắm mắt ta không phải hối tiếc .

Được antey2500 sửa chữa / chuyển vào 13:40 ngày 20/11/2002

Bác ruavang thân.
Riêng tôi vẫn nghĩ rằng với thành phần xuất thân Do Thái thì Trosky khó lòng có thể trở thành người đứng đầu một quốc gia chính thống giáo như nước Nga. Mặc dù như bác nói Stalin chỉ xuất thân từ một sắc dân thiểu số ở Grudia nhưng chắc chắn ông ta là tín đồ Ki tô giáo (hình như còn suýt trở thành linh mục). Người Do Thái có thể trở thành những triết gia vĩ đại (như Marx), khoa học gia thiên tài (Einstein) thậm chí là nhà chính trị xuất sắc (như Trosky) nhưng trở thành lãnh tụ ở các quốc gia Ki tô giáo nơi người Do Thái bị khinh bỉ như những kẻ dưới đáy xã hội thì thật là khó. Đó có thể cũng phần nào là lý do Lenin không lựa chọn Trosky kế vị, tất nhiên bên cạnh đó còn có sự khác biệt về tư tưởng. Trosky có tư tưởng mang tính tiểu tư sản (từng là lănh tụ Mensevích) và không phù hợp với trào lưu tư tưởng và lực lượng nòng cốt của cách mạng tháng Mười (công nhân, binh lính).
Nhận định về vai trò của những người đệ tứ ở Việt Nam cũng như quan hệ Việt- Xô là những vấn đề nhạy cảm (mặc dù tôi nghĩ là rất thú vị). Mong các bác tránh đề cập hay thảo luận về những vấn đề này.

Khi đêm xuống
Tôi úp mặt vào cánh tay
và mơ thấy thuyền của tôi
trôi mãi
dưới những vầng sao khuya

to VNHL : vâng, hy vọng sẽ có dịp ta trao đổi sâu hơn. vấn đề trên. Thì tôi đã cố gắng không đi sâu vào vấn đề trên nhưng bác yêu cầu tôi nói thêm đấy chứ...
[green] LONG TAIL

Bác Rùa ơi, còn cái "chủ nghĩa xét lại" của em thì thế nào?Hay bác cho cái link, hay cho em biết "chủ nghĩa xét lại" tiếng An là gì? để em nhờ chú Google vậy

********** ​

"When you get to college, biology is really chemistry, chemistry is really physics, physics is really calculus, and calculus is really hard."

Bác Rùa ơi nhân tiện bác VHNL có nhắc đến Mensevich thế bác cung cấp luôn tài liệu về cái này nhé. Mesevich và Bonsevich khác nhau chỗ nào a bác. Cảm ơn bác nhiều
MTH@
Được mth sửa chữa / chuyển vào 14:21 ngày 21/11/2002

To McWolf : key word để search : revisionism & Khrushchev
chủ nghĩa xét lại = revisionism
rất tiếc là không có thời gian viết lại vấn đề bạn nêu ra. vấn đề này liên quan tới ông Khrushchev ( Bí thư thứ nhất của Liên xô cũ ).
Có 1 trang webđề cập nhiều đến vấn đề này, của Professor Gerhard Rempel, Western New England College :
http://mars.acnet.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/russia/
.
trích một bài trong đó để bạn đọc nhé. Nếu muốn tìm hiểu thêm thì nhờ chú google. Sau đó bạn và tôi có thể tranh luận ' đùng đoành' như người ta chứ.

bài viết của giáo sư Gerhard Rempel , trường Western New England :
Khrushchev's Decline and Fall
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The most important achievement of the XX Party Congress of 1956 was Krushchev's so-called "secret speech " in which he attacked and denouced the errors and brutalities of Joseph Stalin. No one had dared to do that before. It was the central most important event of the decade. It in effect made Khrushchev the father of the later Gorbachev Revolution.
I. The XXI Party Congress
The XXI Special Party Congress met against a background of successes for Nikita Khrushchev. He had consolidated his victory over the "anti-Party group" by removing Bulganin from the Presidium in September 1958; in December he had named as new chief of the KGB A. N. Shelepin. Khrushchev had other reasons for feeling confident. In 1958 the USSR had the best harvest in its history. In November 1958 his threat to hand Berlin over to the East Germans within six months had spread alarm in all Western capitals - though he did not carry through the threat. In January 1959 Fidel Castro had seized Cuba with strong Communist support, and thereafter identified himself with Communism and the USSR.
There had also been several significant domestic innovations of Khrushchev's. In April 1958. just as the American clamor for imitation of Soviet schools was reaching its height, he severely criticized the educational system for failing to meet the needs of socialist construction and called for greater emphasis on physical labor and actual part-time work in factories as part of the curricular pattern; such a program was enacted in December. Actually the program was soon a dead letter, except for the limitation of compulsory schooling to eight years and in its consequence the abandonment of the 1956 decision to extend full secondary education to all. Another important step in agriculture was taken by the abolition of the Machine Tractor Stations, which act the kolkhozy welcomed because it turned over farm machinery to them, but the results were dubious because they had to assume the great financial burden of paying for it and because complex equipment could not be properly maintained on most collective farms.
At the same time a number of collective farms were being converted into state farms called sovkhozy . In 1957 sovkhozy embraced over 25% of the land as against 10% in 1952. A Central Committee warning in February 1958 warned that conversion should not be too hasty. The old Khrushchev notion of the agrogorod, which he discussed again in a speech in his native Village in October 1958, remained on the Soviet agenda as a distant objective. Such developments in the Soviet countryside, pointing in the same direction as the Chinese "people's communes," suggested that the dispute between Khrushchev and Mao was less about goals than about whether the USSR was to be recognized as leading the way there.
The XXI Congress, meeting in January-February 1959, represented Khrushchev's attempt to reassert this claim against Mao's challenge. Ostensibly its task was merely to adopt an ambitious Seven-Year Plan, to run from 1959 to 1965, replacing the last two years of the Sixth Five-Year Plan which had more modest targets. Actually the aim was to demonstrate Khrushchev's supremacy in the USSR and the USSR's primacy in the international Communist Movement. Speech after speech attacked Bulganin, Pervukhin, and Saburov as members of the "anti-Party group" and lauded the leadership of Comrade Nikita Sergeevich. Nevertheless the remaining limitations on Khrushchev's power were shown by the fact that Voroshilov remained a full member and Pervukhin a candidate member of the Presidium.

Perhaps the most significant event at the Congress was Chou En-lai's speech. in which he renewed the same kind of acknowledgment of Soviet primacy as the Chinese had made at the 1957 meeting of Communist parties, without hinting that in the meantime Mao .had challenged the Soviet position unsuccessfully. Doubtless Chou found the speech somewhat easier to give in consequence of a new Soviet grant of 5 billion rubles' worth of aid to China, announced just after the Congress.
Khrushchev's sixty-fifth birthday was commemorated in the Soviet press in April 1959, but so was Stalin's eightieth anniversary in December - for the first time in years. The new History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, published in 1959, contained criticism of Stalin, but of a much milder kind than was to be found in the "secret speech." One noteworthy development of 1959 was the extension of extra judicial methods of compulsion and punishment. In April 1956 the Soviet worker had been relieved of some of the direst penalties of the Stalin era: prosecutions for absenteeism were stopped; compulsory transfer of workers from one plant to another was ended; the prohibition of unauthorized change of job was repealed. To be sure, the plant manager still had at his disposition all sorts of instruments to keep workers working: the labor book and passport still recorded the circumstances of change of job, and various economic privileges could still be denied the laggard.
In 1959 a device long intermittently used was energetically revived: the comrades' courts, in which one's neighbors and fellow workers might mete out certain punishments for social delinquency. New Volunteer squads called druzhiny were also encouraged to form and act as guardians of public order and good conduct, hauling suspicious persons out of public places for questioning and combating "hooliganism." Labor discipline was the direct concern of a new series of judicial enactments, the "anti-parasite" laws passed in several republics in the late 1950's and in the RSFSR in May 1961. Their vague provisions made it difficult for a dissident or critic. if charged under such laws, to show he was not a "parasite."
At the XXI Congress Krushchev had claimed that no "political prisoners" were left in the USSR. However, only weeks before, in December 1958, a law had extended the death penalty as a maximum punishment for a variety of "crimes against the state," and in May 1961 such provisions were further broadened. Under such legislation several hundred people were executed and many more sent to detention, often for "economic crimes." The prominence of priests, Jews, and medium-rank Party officials among the victims, however, suggested that the laws were being used as political weapons. An especially clear example was the arrest of Olga Ivinskaia, close friend of Boris Pasternak, within weeks of the latter's death, nominally for financial misconduct.
II. Cultural Policy, 1956-1964
In the aftermath of the "secret speech," a few Soviet writers (and publishers) began to take risks by bringing out novels about Soviet society as it was, not as it was ideally supposed to be currently or to become in the future. Vladimir Dudintsev's book Not by Bread Alone, for example, was sharply attacked by official spokesmen in a public discussion held in May 1957, but his defenders bluntly retorted, and no punishment was inflicted on him.
Boris Pasternak's great novel, Doctor Zhivago, was a quite different sort of work. Published in Italy in November 1957 despite reversal of an earlier Soviet decision to publish simultaneously in the USSR, it rapidly earned world-wide admiration. In the book Pasternak depicted a man who comes from the intelligentsia, is caught up in the Revolution, Civil War, and the building of the Soviet system, but retains his own system of human values and is destroyed because of them. Rather than an attempted depiction of Soviet reality, the work is a prose poem about the meaning of life: "Reshaping life! People who can say that have never understood a thing about life . . life is never a material, a substance to be molded . . . it is constantly renewing and remaking and changing and transfiguring itself, it is infinitely beyond your or my obtuse theories about it." Although Zhivago dies, his spirit triumphs.
The Christian that Pasternak had become shows in the last stanza of the poems with which this thoroughly poetic work closes:
I shall descend into my grave,
And on the third clay rise again.
And, even as rafts float down a river,
So shall the centuries drift, trailing like a caravan,
Coming for judgment, out of the dark. to me.
After Zhivago's death, his beloved Lara disappears into a concentration camp; the Soviet regime faithfully fulfilled this prophecy by arresting Ivinskaia. Only in 1958 did the novel enter public discussion in the USSR when Pasternak was awarded the Nobel Prize and Khrushchev compelled him to refuse it in exchange for being allowed to remain in the soviet Union, where he died in 1960.
The post-Hungary freeze during which Zhivago had been condemned was followed by a mild thaw in 1959. Eugene Evtushenko, one of the more popular young dissident poets, published "Babii Yar," a poem referring to a mass murder of Jews by the Nazis near Kiev as a means of striking at Soviet anti-Semitism. In November 1962 the boldest novel yet to be published in the USSR appeared: Alexander Solzhenitsyn's One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich., which was a narrative of life in one of Stalin's concentration camps. Reportedly it was published on the authority of Khrushchev himself. Later in the same month, however, someone persuaded the First Secretary to visit two exhibitions of modern art in Moscow, and he reacted with gutter language and brutal threats delivered on the spot to artists accompanying him.
At a closed meeting in the Kremlin in March 1963, Khrushchev denounced abstract art and literary experimentation in the strongest terms, sharply criticized Ehrenburg and Evtushenko, and declared that "the moldy idea of absolute freedom" would never find a place in Soviet life. In a few cases, dissident writers such as Valery Tarsis and Alexander Esenin-Volpin (son of the peasant poet of the twenties) were seized and confined on the grounds of "mental instability," thus recalling Nicholas I's treatment of Peter Chaadaev in 1836. A few others, such as Joseph Brodsky, were exiled under the "anti-parasite laws". For the most part, however, Khrushchev's regime confined itself to verbal warnings and refusals to publish or exhibit, and the limits of the permissible, though fluctuating, were certainly broader than before Stalin's death.
Some of the dissident writers and artists--notably Pasternak and Solzhenitsyn--had religious convictions, and there was enough of a revival of interest in religion among Soviet youth to provoke a campaign of repression beginning in 1959. During the next five years perhaps half of the remaining 20,000 Orthodox churches and all of the monasteries except for perhaps fifteen were closed. In June 1960 the first show trial of an Orthodox clergyman since 1927 was held: the defendant, the archbishop of Kazan, was sentenced to prison. Apparently because he refused to cooperate in the new crackdown, Metropolitan Nicholas Krutitsy, the long-time mainstay of church collaboration with the regime, fell from favor, was deprived of his offices in 1960, and died mysteriously the following year.
The beginning of resistance to religious repression appeared in 1961 in the formation of the Initiative Group (Initsiativniki) within the Baptist-Evangelical Christian Council. Repeated statements by high Party officials reminded their hearers that to be a Communist was to be an atheist, but even some of the rank-and-file showed disturbing hesitation on that apparently obvious point.
III. The XXII Party Congress
Khrushchev had tried to follow up Chinese submission at the XXI Congress with action. Indications are that in July 1959 Marshal P'eng Teh-huai and others, with Soviet backing, tried to remove Mao as chairman of the Chinese party. They failed, and P'eng was purged. But the Chinese internal offensive had brought the economy near collapse, and Mao was unable to press a counterattack. His regime faced a full-scale revolution in Tibet in March 1959 that required months to put down. Though neither the U.N. nor any of the Western powers could be persuaded to take perceptible interest in the Tibetan blood bath, the result was unfavorable publicity abroad and intensive domestic precautions lest an echo of the rising appear within China proper.
The Chinese were enraged when Khrushchev, after test visits by Mikoyan and then Kozlov, visited President Eisenhower, and became the first head of any Russian government to set foot in the United States. Talks at the President's mountain hideaway produced the "Camp David spirit," which served chiefly to pave the way for a planned summit meeting in the spring of 1960. It never took place. Khrushchev announced that an American high-flying reconnaissance plane, or U-2, had been brought down over the USSR; arriving in Paris for the summit, he demanded an apology. Eisenhower, ignoring the ancient precedent, that spies are not acknowledged when caught by the enemy, first denied the flight and then admitted it, but refused to apologize. The summit meeting was promptly called off. In September Khrushchev appeared at a U.N. General Assembly meeting, making news by a fraternal meeting with Fidel Castro and by the astonishing act of taking off his shoe and pounding the table with it to show disapproval of a U.N. speaker.
Returning from these travels, the Soviet leader convened a meeting of eighty-one Communist parties in Moscow in November-December 1960. In April Mao had put into a manifesto entitled "Long Live Leninism!" his objections to the Soviet line of detente with the West. In June at the Bucharest congress of the Rumanian party--the first such conclave in the Communist world for over thirty years to witness serious debate-Khrushchev had spoken of the Chinese as "madmen" who were ready "to unleash war," and in July had withdrawn all Soviet economic and military technicians and advisers from China. Soviet trade with China was plummeting.
At the Moscow meeting Peking's delegates yielded *****ch pressure and signed the conference manifesto stating that the Soviet Communist Party was the "universally recognized vanguard" of the international movement. The Chinese did manage one minor achievement: they detached Enver Hoxha's Albania from the Soviet camp. For a time it was tacitly agreed that when Peking attacked "revisionism" it mentioned Yugoslavia and not the USSR; when Moscow attacked "despotism," it gave Albania and not China as its example. The Sino-Soviet dispute would still publicly observe a few amenities.
During the next few months Khrushchev did not press further toward detente with the West. Despite Soviet approval of the cease-fire in Laos in May 1961 and subsequent agreement at Geneva to reconfirm Laotian neutrality, Khrushchev, had used brutal language in his message to President Kennedy over the ill-fated attempt to overthrow Castro at the Bay of Pigs in April. At the meeting of the two leaders in Vienna in June he convinced the new President that he was ready to provoke a new US.-USSR confrontation, and followed up tough talk with the erection of the Berlin Wall and resumption of nuclear testing.