^^^ CB: But you haven't thought it through. You ignore the fuller context of the Nazi imperialist invasion which was gigantically devastating to the SU, the then recent U.S. imperialist aggression in Korea, the fascist social base in Hungary then probably still existing. You impliedly take at face value with no skepticism the character of the "workers'councils" as socialist oriented. Side with the socialist republic or side with the workers councils which you don't even bother to claim were socialist oriented. Not at all as simple a decision as you brainlessly imply.
^^^^^
In fact it is a bit of a no-brainer. Side with the Hungarian workers' councils, or side with the military authorities crushing them? Same with Stalin. Side with the working class, or side with the brutal dictator? How hard is that? What it did demand of people who were committed to social change is moral courage. That was the hard part. Everyone in the Communist Parties knew that they were choosing to turn a blind eye to oppression.
^^^^^ CB: This is begging the question. No, everyone in the Communist Parties did not agree that this was oppression _of socialists_. Could very well be preventing agents of imperialism from starting things down a path toward capitalist restoration, as actually happened in the 1980's in Eastern Europe.
^^^^
Some people had the moral courage to make the break with Stlalinism, like my good friend Dave Hallsworth http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/1899/ Other, like Herbert Aptheker did not.
^^^^^ CB: Naw, you can't self-proclaim your political position as morally superior. You are biased by your immoral anti-Sovietism.