sacha, come on. u know that u dont need to explain stalinism to an passionated anti-stalinist.but i read trotsky using the word totalitarian only in "..." -"totalitarian". i know what he means and agree with it. but his defination didnt made it throughout the world, and we cant just ignore that the international bourgeoisie developed their own theory of totalitarism, which played a most central role worldwide and espec. in germany, to justify capitalism &imperialism. u and the author above must know that, dont u? moreover, in germany this stalinism=fascism -where there is some truth in it- was used for a crude relativism and revisionism of history: "if other nations had their stalin and mao and ......., why shouldnt germany have had his little hitler? was he really worse than others?" so, "totalitarism" is used to downplay the singularity of german fascism in history.and i think its sad, that awl has no article about, when this debate among historians took place in germany some years ago. didnt it happen for you, or did AWL not find it important?
2. since this bourgeois theory of totalitarism succeeded, we shall be careful by using the word. to suggest that living under GDR-regime or under hitlerregime was same, or almost same, also does help to create illusions in bourgeois "democracy" as a much lesser evil. AND: the differences between GDR &nazigermany are definitive bigger, than the differences between mussolini&hitler or mussolini and stalin 1937. when i reminded u, that gdr-govtm didnt run concentration camps, and no massmurder, how can u simply rush over that?? also, before u posted here, i had send u another valid argument in a private mail, which u also ignored, what makes me a little angry: at least, the gdr-govtm did not resort to the "solution" of tiaman square, china 1989, as we all suspected. they probably thought about or prepared for, but at least they didnt! they gave up, after only 70.000 demonstrants marched to the doors of the secret-service-stasi. short after, the wall was opened without any bloodshet! is that gdr=hitler under the headline of "totalitarism"? (iam not downplaying stalinism, i dont want that wrong comparisms does at least downplay the singularity of german fascism.)and what do u think, what will happen, if the present german imperialism will be challenged? do u think, 70.000 will do? or 700.000? no way! i tell ya, this might become the biggest blodbath ever, where the eastgerman repression was nothing, compared to it. so if gdr=hitler, what will this than be, if it happens? more than hitler?
3. i remember my schooldays, where i learnt nothing about this period. german fascism didnt excist in my history-books. so i managed to get some schoolbooks from gdr and poland, and there anything was explained in detail. for the first time in my life, i saw the shocking photos from the concentration camps and so on. and how nazis on their way through ussr murdered babys and hanged children 4 being member of comsomol (CP-youthorg.) can u imagine, that for those in the c.camps, the ussr and thälmans teaching, that "stalin will break hitlers neck" was the only hope which kept them alive? can u imagine, how difficult it was then, to realize the real character of the ussr, working all day in the camps, and no polit. information? when the red army -arriving some days b4 the others- opened the prisons and freed them, and they saw the red flag wavin over berlin, it seemed 2 them, that stalin was the antifascist hero and anything will be better now.
many of the ex-gdr leaders have been in this prison camps by a young age, some b4 they turned stalinist. nowadays there are many eastgermans who wish the wall back -its true!- and remembr the old times with nostalgy, cause of more social security than in capitalism. if we were 2 tell them, that in gdr they lived the same than under hitler, than those few still living who experienced both, wud ask us, if we are nuts, and we would make it very, very easy for stalinists 2 recycle their propaganda about trotskytes who say the same than the bourgeoisie and who seem 2 support the other side. i wanna say, espec. in my country it cud be very contraproductive 2putGDR-regime and hitler under the same headline of totalitarism, and it could mean to slip from antistalinism into feeding anticommunism. we shud argue more differenciated here. is THAT so difficult to understand?