Our friends at the North Star Compass published these photographs taken from the celebrations of the 130th Birthday of Josef Stalin on Dec. 21, 2009 (from the current issue of NSC).

On December 21, 2009 – the 130th Birthday of J.V. Stalin, people gathered on the Red Square in Moscow to celebrate this great event in the history of all mankind. Then came representatives from different parties and citizens from all walks of life.

First came the patriotic forces from the AUCPB, coming to the grave of Stalin and laid flowers and held a small meeting. After that the representatives of the CPRF and RCU of Youth, Trudovaya Rossia and many other parties and multitude of people came to pay respect to Stalin with flowers and wreaths.

Even though the authorities tried to stop some people, the multitude was just too much for the present regime to stop. The columns of people grew longer and longer and it brought back memories as to how it was during Soviet times.

There was a never-ending laying of flowers and wreaths to Stalin.

The people kept coming in greater numbers as never before since the demise of the Soviet Union.

Red Square from one end to the other had people waiting in line.

Soviet War Veterans, decorated with medals, paid their respect to Generalissimo Stalin.

Putin-Medvedev police started to hold back the Muscovites, but the people kept coming to pay respect to Stalin.

From the Red Phoenix, official organ of the American Party of Labor

Part I of VI: Beck’s Countless Lies about America & the Founding Fathers

By Marcus Winter, Farabundo Morazán and Ismail LaLanne

On January 22nd 2010, another hardened reactionary tried to attack the history of leftism and Marxism and (surprise) managed to bring nothing new to the table at all. Shock jock Glenn Beck, an admitted alcoholic and former cocaine addict, has made a career out of appealing to the most lunatic fringe of the right-wing. Even so, this week he finally managed to outdo himself, even after the time he said Obama was “a racist” and had a “deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture.” Revolutionary Holocaust: Live Free or Die begins oddly—with white X-Files font letters against a crackling static background. What this has to do with or why this is the least bit appropriate for the subject matter Beck tackles is anyone’s guess. As we shall see though, this is symbolic for the entire presentation, which, while clever, is the same hodgepodge of anti-communist views that we have all seen and heard a thousand times before.

A good question for Glenn Beck: why is such radical anti-communism necessary today if communism is discredited, dead, and buried? If communism is supposedly dead in the water, a footnote of history, and so on, and if capitalism is truly the greatest system, then why is it that we are facing a wave of anti-communist hysteria not seen since the Cold War? Mr. Beck, it might do you well to remember that hysteria and desperation are signs of weakness…and liars.

No matter how hard he tries, Glenn Beck cannot sell his line about how “this story has never been told.” Horror stories about communism have been told since before communists ever came to power in the first place. The opening of the secret Soviet archives actually reveals that these claims were in fact ridiculously exaggerated, not worse, than previously claimed.

So, what are his intentions here? Many things all at once—among them licking the boots of the bourgeoisie and re-packaging old and debunked lies. We shall tackle them one by one using our own sources and information. The complete transcript of Beck’s program is available here until further notice: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583732,00.html.

Because of the length of his program, we have decided to break this presentation up into several parts. For right now, we will content ourselves with refuting the introduction to his program.
We invite you to stay tuned for a little series of our own.

Beck’s Thesis
Glenn Beck’s allegedly “groundbreaking” exposé of “progressives,” whom he conveniently lumps together, is by no means new or groundbreaking at all. Revolutionary Holocaust seeks to establish a link between Joseph Stalin and communism on one side, and Adolf Hitler and Nazism on the other. While doing this it also seeks to talk about the reign of Mao Zedong in China, along with a segment about liberal icon Che Guevara.
This same “thesis” of fascism and communism being almost exactly the same or at least sharing fundamental similarities, has been repeated for us endlessly since we were kids. For Beck to champion this as a “new and groundbreaking” idea is either foolish or stunningly arrogant. It has been the dominant narrative shoved down our throats since the publication of The Origins of Totalitarianism in 1951 by Hannah Arendt. For a closer look at this laughable “theory,” look here: http://theredphoenix.wordpress.com/2009/09…otalitarianism/

Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, & Slave-Owning Freedom
The video begins with Glenn Beck praising the United States of America and its associated American Dream. “The story of America,” he pines, staring into the camera with his intellectual glasses on, “is really one of self-reliance and optimism, and profound faith.” He continues to milk this image for all its worth, bringing up the merits of the US Constitution and the Founding Fathers.

Glenn Beck has willfully ignored the history of the American Revolution. The spirit of the American Founding Fathers is only a myth and not a reality.

First, the Constitution of the United States was not set up by “the” people or any sort of popular democracy, but by financial autocrats. White males with property were the only ones allowed to vote under the system that men such as George Washington (the richest man in America), James Madison (owned enormous slave plantations), John Hancock (a rich merchant), Benjamin Franklin (a wealthy printer) and others aimed to set up. Of the 55 men who gathered to write the Constitution in 1787, most were lawyers and men of enormous wealth, making their fortunes in landowning, slave trading, manufacturing or shipping. Half loaned money out for interest, 40 held government bonds.
Regarding the writing of the Constitution:
“The manufacturers needed protective tariffs; the moneylenders wanted to stop the use of paper money to pay off debts; the land speculators wanted protection as they invaded Indian lands; slaveowners needed federals security against slave revolts and runaways; bondholders wanted a government able to raise money by nationwide taxation, to pay off those bonds” (1).

Governments are not neutral. They reflect the economic interests of the dominant class, expressed in America as men such as the Founding Fathers. The Constitution protects “life, liberty, or property” and little else in reality. Women, Blacks, Indians and poor whites were not mentioned, but the defense of private property was.
The clause about the “freedom of speech” was soon enough violated, as it is today, by clauses such as the Sedition Act of 1789, which was a response to the French and Irish Revolutions. It forbid under law the practice of writing or saying anything “false, scandalous and malicious” against the United States government, the Congress or the President. It is not immediately apparent that anyone’s “liberty” should be left to a government run by the rich and powerful.

Despite this, Beck says that “[…] those seeking a different path than the ones the founders settled on realized the only way to really defeat the Constitution was for the people to stop reading it.” He then insists that the Constitution, through its supposed system of check and balances, “kept dogs at bay” for 200 years. Despite this Utopian dream, the Founding Fathers were not men seeking a “balance” in society, and certainly didn’t believe that all men were created equal. If they wanted any sort of balance, it was between the wealthy, and not between such groups as Indians and whites, blacks and whites, men and women, boss and worker, or rich and poor, slave and slaveowner, and certainly not property owner and the propertyless.

Next Article
In the next part of the series, we shall see how Glenn Beck uses the story of Nazi Germany and WWII to further his own ends, and ends up whitewashing Nazi crimes in order to attack the USSR.

Sources:
1) Zinn, Howard. Peoples’ History of the United States, page 91.

Fold your little hands,

Bow your little head,

Think for five minutes

On Stalin.

J.V. Stalin is the brilliant leader and teacher of the Party,

The great strategist of the socialist revolution.

He is implacable in facing the enemies of socialism,

Absolutely true to principle.

He is the union of clear revolutionary perspective,

And clarity of goal in all His activities,

Combining them with extraordinary firmness and persistence.

The name Stalin is the symbol of the moral and political unity of the working class.

From Northstar Compass (Nov./Dec. 2009 ed).

By BRUNIDE LA MOTTE
Guardian newspaper
UK Nov/ 8/09

On November 9, 1989 when the Berlin Wall came down I realized that German unification would soon follow, which it did a year later. That meant the end of the German Democratic Republic (GDR), the country in which I was born, grew up, gave birth to my two children, gained my Doctorate and enjoyed a fulfilling job as a lecturer at Potsdam University. The union brought wealth for some, but it also brought social breakdown, widespread unemployment, blacklisting, a crass materialism and an “elbow society” as well as demonisation of the country I lived in and helped shape it. Despite some advantages, for most it was more a disaster than a celebratory event.

Here are just two. My best friend, a foreign languages teacher, lost her job and was then blacklisted because, at the time the wall fell, she was teaching at the GDR Law College. She wasn’t a member of the Party or a political activist. After much searching she managed to find a job helping students who were excluded from school, because their parents were working in the GDR Government.

My brother who has a PhD in Philosophy of Science, lost his research job at the GDR Academy of Sciences, and ever since has only been able to find odd low-paying temporary jobs.

After the Wall was torn down more than 85% of industrial enterprises were sold to private firms in West Germany. More than 1.7 million of hectares of agricultural and forest lands were sold off and 80% of agricultural workers lost their jobs.

In 1990 the GDR economy plunged into bankruptcy when the hasty “currency union” was imposed by the West. The results were that the GDR export products rose in price by 450% overnight and were no longer competitive and thus the West gained more markets at the expense of GDR and the working people who became unemployed on a massive scale.

In the GDR everyone had a home, a guaranteed job, health care and all benefits that the socialist GDR gave to the people. After the unification close to 3,000,000 claims by non-GDR citizens were made on the GDR citizens’ homes! Most of the GDR citizens lost their homes to West Germans that were abetted by the West. Scores of GDR citizens committed suicide when they were evicted from their homes that they and their children grew up in.

That’s the price of the forced reunification and the sell off by traitors like Gorbachev and others!

This is the question that I ask to people who think bringing back Stalinism or Hitlerism or Jihad or Talmudism or the Ku Klux Klan is logical. I’m not discussing morality here. That’s not the point of the discussion. It’s 2009. It will soon be 2010. It isn’t 1940!

This is a question I ask to Besoshvili, to Alex Linder, to Chaim Ben Pesach, to Daniel Shays, to Texas Dissident of original dissent. What year is it?

Long Live comrade
Stalin!

By  Kuo Mo Jo

(Chairman of All
Chine Association of writers and Artists)

Great Stalin, beloved
steel, eternal sun!

Because humanity has
you,

Marxism Leninism can
exert its might today;

Because humanity has
you,

The proletarians can
display its strength today;

Because humanity has
you,

The work of
liberation can extend its glory today,

It is you who lead us
to the open sea of world Communism;

It is you who
instruct the west to not forget the East;

It is you who unite
us into a force unparalleled in history.

The peace fortress of
Soviet Union stands firm,

The unity and
progress of the New Democracies of Europe and Asia advance;

And the brilliance of
the People´s Republic of China shines forth.

The history of
mankind has started new chapter;

The order of native
to will follow the path of revolution;

The name of Stalin
will forever be the sun of humanity.

Long Live great
Stalin!

Long Live beloved
Steel

Reference: People´s China Vol 1, No 1,  Jan 1 1950; Pg 4

I have been theorizing about why Southern Europeans look more like “classic Caucasoids” (Middle Easterners) compared to Northern Europeans. I think I am reaching an answer that satisfies me.

What we have to remember is that blondism and red hair occur at low rates even in Arab and Mediterranean populations. These are not “new evolutions” or “racial traits” but just genes that “grew in popularity.” The term “Aryan” and the term “Semite” have linguistic roots and are not tied to racial origins. The Caucasoid race was always capable of depigmentation, because pigmentation is controlled by the complex interaction of genes and it only takes a single “bad gene” to cause someone to lose pigmentation. Look at an Albino black! But the bone structure is what makes Negroids a separate race!

What I’m arguing is that the change in pigmentation is not genetically important. Northern Europeans really are just depigmented Mediterraneans. Mediterraneans are just classical Caucasoids. Terms like “Alpine” and “Nordic” are not really logical. While there is an east-west genetic divide within Europe, there is little evidence that “Alpines” and “Nords” are separate races with distinct histories. It is merely random variation.

I really think the answer is sexual selection. Part of it is nature and part of it is human beings becoming conscious of the environment. People know the environment is colder, Mediterraneans are adapted to the desert, and that is what causes the change.

An interesting point is that Jews in Northern Europe are more depigmented than other Jews, even though they are (partially) genetically linked to other Jews. All Caucasoids are capable of depigmentation.

In his monumental legal work on the science of jurisprudence in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), entitled The Law of the Soviet State (1948), Comrade Andrei Vyshinsky (Procurator-General of the Soviet Union, Deputy People’s Commissar of Foreign Affairs and later Minister of Foreign Affairs), reaffirmed the Marxist-Leninist concept of the law:

Law is the totality (a) of the rules of conduct, expressing the will of the dominant class and established in legal order, and (b) of customs and rules of community life sanctioned by state authority – their application being guaranteed by the compulsive force of the state in order to guard, secure, and develop social relationships and social orders advantageous and agreeable to the dominant class.

This simple thesis and observation was not new to Vyshinsky, but an objective characteristic of all legal systems, dating back to even the most primitive and ancient forms of historical jurisprudence.

But the difference between bourgeois jurisprudence and socialist legality is not only the necessary transition of state authority from one dominant class to the other (from bourgeoisie to proletariat), but is distinctively marked by the unity of theory and praxis. Unlike bourgeois “Constitutionalism,” as seen in Western liberal capitalist democratic states, the legal system of the Soviet Union was exemplified by this normative and descriptive cohesion. The most demonstrative evidence exists in the lack of so-called “Constitutional protections” that reflect vague or abstract principles whose validity exists beyond the realm of the material world, but a real-life reflection of the existing conditions prevalent in Soviet social relations.

Proceedings in 1945 trial of Polish nationalist-military conspirators

The above characteristic serves as the fundamental basis for the social, economic and political transformation of jurisprudence from capitalism to socialism; further evidence to socialist jurisprudence as the most progressive, scientific and fundamentally correct application of the law to have ever existed in history.