Matvei Bronstein: Theorical physicist. Pioneer of quantum gravity. Arrested, accused of fictional “terroristic” activity and shot in 1938
Lev Shubnikov: Experimental physicist. Accused on false charges. Executed
Adrian Piotrovsky: Russian dramaturge. Accused on false charges of treason. Executed.
Nikolai Bukharin: Leader of the Communist revolution. Member of the Politburo. Falsely accused of treason. Executed.
General Alexander Egorov: Marshal of the Soviet Union. Commander of the Red Army Southern Front. Member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party. Arrested, accused on false charges, executed.
General Mikhail Tukhachevsky Supreme Marshal of the Soviet Union. Nicknamed the Red Napoleon. Arrested, accused on fake charges. Executed.
Grigory Zinoviev: Chairman of the Communist International Movement. Member of the Soviet Politburo. Accused of treason and executed.
Even the secret police themselves were not safe:
Genrikh Yagoda : Right-hand of Joseph Stalin. Head of the NKD Secret Police. He spied on everyone in Russia and jailed thousands of innocents. Yagoda was arrested and executed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genrikh_Yagoda
Nikolai Yezhov : Appointed head of the NKD Secret Police after the death of Yagoda. Arrested on fake charges, executed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Yezhov
Everybody was absolutely terrified during this period. At least 600 000 people were killed and over 100 000 people were deported to Gulags in Siberia.
Today, Russian schools no longer teach what Joseph Stalin did. Many young russians actually believe that Stalin was a great patriot.
This is part of an effort by Vladimir Putin to rehabilitate him:
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/05/21/stalin-is-making-a-comeback-in-russia-heres-why-a89155
How would you determine what the individuals collectively decide?
Talking with each other at the peoples local council not going to a ballot box to elect some stupid bastad to make decisions for them. I DO NOT CONSENT someone to have my all will. An example can enlight this. I vote for the opposite party as an lgbt+ individual but they are not mentioning my daily life problems instead they are making populism with the religion i do not believe.
You may say it is also a democracy by its defination and you are not wrong but the classical democracy is tyrant of the mass. I want the mass to be knitted for the minority. Just because we are the less should not mean that our opinions matter less. But under the classical democracy it is. Under the classical democracy homophobes are the majority and lgbt+ people are the minority.
You’re describing Direct Democracy vs Representative Democracy. Direct Democracy is what we also saw in places like Athens or ancient Greece, where all of the individuals came together and voted collectively on making decisions.
Representative Democracy is what we have in the US today with elected officials.
Direct Democracy is a lot more difficult to implement unless countries become smaller imo, although in the digital age it could be made more possible. Plus there’s the matter of maintaining a militia, although maybe we just expand the current version of the UN’s military budget in that case.
I feel that under Direct Democracy you would still have the issue of bigots outnumbering you in certain areas but not so in others.
The issue with the US’ representative system is that we artificially capped the amount of seats for the House of Representatives and even the Senate so that land has more power than people. If the House was uncapped Federally, and the even the Senate, then people living in Blue/densely populated states would have more fair representation.
I know it is more like comparing direct democracy and representative democracy but i also do have some anarchist, individualist opinions/beliefs. So i am not very certain about calling anarchy as direct democracy. tho i believe democracy under anarchy which is without hierarchy can be used as tool to decide and argue about something.
I am not from usa i am from turkey. English is my second language.
I’m not certain how you would classify that either. When I hear the word anarchy I think more ‘Wild West’ or ‘outlaw country’.
I’m pessimistic about good coming from anarchy in the long-run. To me it sounds like disorganized bands of communities. Without some sort of organizing or structure then I feel it makes it much more difficult to deal with natural disasters, famines, or antagonists.
I feel that in the case of Turkey I don’t know enough about the specifics of your country to comment on ways it could be improved politically to bring about good governance. I feel it’s still possible in my country, but from what I have heard Turkey leans more conservatively.
anarchy is always used by the right wing to describe chaos and destruction but it is not.
Anarchy is not “disorganization” It is organization without hierarchy. No one is greater than anyone. No one is a leader.
It sounds like you would reject a system where one unelected, unaccountable person or class of people ruling through force could decide on a whim to take away the rights of LGBT+ people, or any other minority, and instead prefer a system where all people have an equal voice and a method for that voice to be heard and counted.
deleted by creator
i feel the same as the person you’re replying to. i think our issue is that the opinion of non-queer person holds as much weight as that of a queer person’s. we don’t want equality, we want equity and being treated as the experts on our own lives and needs. a cis person shouldn’t get to dictate my medical care just because 51% of the population voted to deprive me of it. this is why I don’t trust in democracy
No one is asking you to trust it, just to choose it.
Strip away all the labels and theory and you’re left with two basic choices. One where the method of change is persuasion, and one where the method of change is bloody revolution, over and over and over without end.
As much as it might rankle you, and me, to accept having to convince a majority to allow us to live our lives as we damn well please, if I was given the opportunity to appoint a dictator, or dictatorial class, that would remake society exactly as I wanted, I wouldn’t do it. Because who would succeed them, and once you have given that power to a class of people, deposing them is a lot harder, and bloodier, than persuading a few percent of your neighbors.
I’m an anarchist, I don’t despise democracy because I love dictators but because I want tiranny to go away. it’s not a black and white choice between guillotining everyone and installing a dictator, that’s a made-up dichotomy by status quo theoreticians.
i wouldn’t have to persuade anyone if I lived in a community where the police were kicked out like a Zapatista town. who would even be there to enforce the transphobic law? the transphobic community members would have to dirty their own hands instead of deputizing a cop to get rid of me. and in those cases, everyone being trained in armed self-defense kicks in
Just because you didn’t do the persuading doesn’t mean that no one did. Somehow they got together and decided to kick the fuckers out.
If you think I’m creating a false dichotomy, please enlighten me how.
I’m saying either everyone gets an equal say or…
No matter what you put after the “or”, you’re creating a hierarchy with a class that gets to impose their will until stopped with force. As an anarchist, you should understand that.
absolutely, everyone gets an equal say unless it infringes on someone else’s bodily autonomy. hency why democracy is never gonna work for queer people. we have to work outside of the state