>Doug, do you intend by this statement that since the
>Soviet Union is no longer "alive" that we should just
>stop talking about it...that it is useless to discuss
>what happened there and the model upon which it was
>built? Did Stalin give rise to the undemocratic
>nature of the Soviet Union or did the undemocratic
>nature of the Soviet Union give rise to Stalin? Isn't
>it important to study and discuss this phenomena
>whether we defend that model (or, at least, some
>aspects of it) or a radically different model of
>socialism/communism ?
Of course it's important, but it's a matter of emphasis and perspective. Right now, it's just not the most urgent question of the day.
I think we also have to be careful about "models." What happened in the USSR was a product of many things - like Russian history and development and the reaction of the west. You can't just extract some features and apply them outside of history or culture. I've said many times that I think Leninism offers little in the way of lessons for First World radicals in 2002. But anti-Leninism can be just as irrelevant. U.S. radicals have to figure out how to do radical politics in the U.S. today, and going on about the show trials of the 1930s is mostly a distraction, though it can be a back door into "I choose the West" crap.
Doug