>The alternative to the Bolsheviks was the democratic socialism of Kerensky
>or of the agarian socialist revolutionary party which was in the large
>majority in 1917, which is way the Bolsheviks ruthlessly surpressed them,
>like all socialists who were not Bolsheviks. It was known to the other
>socialists that Lenin and his followers were insane.
>
>I find it odd these defenses of Lenin, Stalin and Mao.
I entirely agree that secret police have no place in my utopia, and that the brutal idiocies of Stalinism are a betrayal of Marxism. But Kerensky or any other democrat you want to name would have faced the implacable hosility of the domestic foreign bourgeoisie. For a more recent example, look what happened to Allende. How do you keep the CIA at bay without jails and firing squads? I really don't know the answer to that, but it's not just a matter of making good or bad choices.
Insane seems an odd word to apply to Lenin.
Doug