"Hilara moarte a lui Dej"

Cine stie adevarul incontestabil?
Nici ce s-a intamplat acuma 30 de ani nu stim

Nu , nu poti muri in 2 ani de la un minereu de uraniu de marimea unei cutii de chibrituri expusa intru-n birou .

E doar o cretinatate de articol .

Pe Daco_Get

pentru ca incepuse un proces de "destalinizare" a Romaniei.

Ce inseamna comunisti si ce inseamna securisti?

Nu este ok sa aruncam cu pietre in toata lumea.

Dupa principiul tau col. Trosca ce a fost?

P.S. unii dintre oamenii de seama din USR au o gandire mai apropiata de ceea ce inseamna comunismul leninist (adica ala adevarat) decat Dej si Ceausescu impreuna.

That there is but one way to bring about the triumph of liberty, of justice, and of peace in Europe's international relations, to make civil war impossible between the different peoples who make up the European family; and that is the formation of the United States of Europe.
That the United States of Europe can never be formed from the states as they are now constituted, considering the monstrous inequality which exists between their respective forces.

That the example of the now defunct Germanic Confederation has proved once and for all that a confederation of monarchies is a mockery, powerless to guarantee either the peace or the liberty of populations.

That no centralized state, being of necessity bureaucratic and militarist, even if it were to call itself republican, will be able to enter an international confederation with a firm resolve and in good faith. Its very constitution, which must always be an overt or covert negation of enduring liberty, would necessarily remain a declaration of permanent warfare, a threat to the existence of its neighbors.

Since the State is essentially founded upon an act of violence, of conquest, what in private life goes under the name of housebreaking – an act blessed by all institutionalized religions whatsoever, eventually consecrated by time until it is even regarded as an historic right – and supported by such divine consecration of triumphant violence as an exclusive and supreme right, every centralized State therefore stands as an absolute negation of the rights of all other States, though recognizing them in the treaties it may conclude with them for its own political interest....

That all members of the League should therefore bend all their efforts toward reconstituting their respective countries, in order to replace their old constitution – founded from top to bottom on violence and the principle of authority – with a new organization based solely upon the interests, the needs, and the natural preferences of their populations – having no other principle but the free federation of individuals into communes, of communes into provinces, of the provinces into nations, and, finally, of the nations into the United States of Europe first, and of the entire world eventually.

Consequently, the absolute abandonment of everything which is called the historic right of the State; all questions relating to natural, political, strategic, and commercial frontiers shall henceforth be considered as belonging to ancient history and energetically rejected by all the members of the League.
Recognition of the absolute right of each nation, great or small, of each people, weak or strong, of each province, of each commune, to complete autonomy, provided its internal constitution is not a threat or a danger to the autonomy and liberty of neighboring countries.


The fact that a country has been part of a State, even if it has joined that State freely and of its own will, does not create an obligation for that country to remain forever so attached. No perpetual obligation could be accepted by human justice, the only kind of justice that may have authority amongst us, and we shall never recognize other rights or duties than those founded upon liberty. The right of free union and of equally free secession is the first, the most important, of all political rights, the one right without which the federation would never be more than a centralization in disguise.


From all that has been said, it follows that the League must openly prohibit any alliance of any national faction whatsoever of the European democracy with the monarchical State, even if the aim of such an alliance were to regain the independence or liberty of an oppressed country. Such an alliance could only lead to disappointment and would at the same time be a betrayal of the revolution.

On the other hand, the League, precisely because it is the League for Peace and Freedom, and because it is convinced that peace can only be won by and founded upon the closest and fullest solidarity of peoples in justice and in liberty, should openly proclaim its sympathy with any national insurrection, either foreign or native, provided this insurrection is made in the name of our principles and in the political as well as the economic interests of the masses, but not with the ambitious intent of founding a powerful State.

The League will wage a relentless war against all that is called the glory, the grandeur, and the power of States. It will be opposed to all these false and malevolent idols to which millions of human victims have been sacrificed; the glories of human intelligence, manifested in science, and universal prosperity founded upon labor, justice, and liberty.

The League will recognize nationality as a natural fact which has an incontestable right to a free existence and development, but not as a principle, since every principle should have the power of universality, while nationality, a fact of exclusionist tendency, separates. The so-called principle of nationality, such as has been declared in our time by the governments of France, Russia, Prussia, and even by many German, Polish, Italian, and Hungarian patriots, is a mere derivative notion born of the reaction against the spirit of revolution. It is aristocratic to the point of despising the folk dialects spoken by illiterate peoples. It implicitly denies the liberty of provinces and the true autonomy of communes. Its support, in all countries, does not come from the masses, whose real interests it sacrifices to the so-called public good, which is always the good of the privileged classes. It expresses nothing but the alleged historic rights and ambitions of States. The right of nationality can therefore never be considered by the League except as a natural consequence of the supreme principle of liberty; it ceases to be a right as soon as it takes a stand either against liberty or even outside liberty.

Unity is the great goal toward which humanity moves irresistibly. But it becomes fatal, destructive of the intelligence, the dignity, the well-being of individuals and peoples whenever it is formed without regard to liberty, either by violent means or under the authority of any theological, metaphysical, political, or even economic idea. That patriotism which tends toward unity without regard to liberty is an evil patriotism, always disastrous to the popular and real interests of the country it claims to exalt and serve. Often, without wishing to be so, it is a friend of reaction – an enemy of the revolution, i.e., the emancipation of nations and men. The League can recognize only one unity, that which is freely constituted by the federation of autonomous parts within the whole, so that the whole, ceasing to be the negation of private rights and interests, ceasing to be the graveyard where all local prosperities are buried, becomes the confirmation and the source of all these autonomies and all these prosperities. The League will therefore vigorously attack any religious, political, or economic organization which is not thoroughly penetrated by this great principle of freedom; lacking that, there is no intelligence, no justice, no prosperity, no humanity.

Ignorant esti tu ca nu reusesti sa intelegi nimic din comunism. Comunismul nu a avut nicio secunda intentia sa lase societatea in stadiul de anarhie, scopul final a fost mereu, din momentul in care l-a gandit Marx, instaurarea unei dictaturi sangeroase. Ideile anarhiste au fost valabile atata vreme cat serveau scoupului de a ajunge la putere, adica slabirea statului pe care il atacau. Dupa dobandirea puterii devenisera contraproductive, era ca si cum si-ar fi dat singuri cu tesla in co***.

Ceea ce au facut bolsevicii in Rusia in anii 20' este adevarata fata a comunismul. Curentele care au evoluat ulterior sunt efectiv niste ,,secte'', unele cu o directie complet diferita de cea comunista, desi pastrau umbrela numelui.

Hai ca pana la urma a iesit comunismul din tine mai ceva decat multiculturalismul din papa. Ai pus si un clip mai sus cu imnuri bolsevice. La mai mare tovarase, la mai mare!

De cand te-am vazut cum postezi enormitati ce denota o autosuficenta demna de discursurile Anei Pauker am banuit ca esti antifar, intrat pe Softpedia pentru propaganda politica.

Daca adminii tolereaza propaganda anarho-marxista pe acest forum este treaba lor dar eu nu te voi tolera.

Din partea mea ai ignore si poti sa te duci dupa Lenin sa va imbalsamati reciproc!

Rusul i-a spus ca nu are nimic la ficat si a demonstrat cu probe.

Profesorul Troncota trateaza pe larg acest subiect in lucrarea Duplicitarii. Dej a fost operat de un medic evreu, care a avut grija sa nu mai traiasca mult. Nu doar ca nu l-a operat dar , stiind ca are cancer, i-a si recomandat sa se expuna constant la soare.

Chestiunile acestea s-au aflat rapid la varful conducerii comuniste dar nici Ceausescu si nici Bodnaras nu au spus nimic, neavand curaj sa infrunte fatis URSS-ul in acel moment.

Așa-zisa „teorie oficială”, privind moartea lui Dej a fost, de fapt, doar un zvon,
...

Trebuie precizat ca Dej, ca si foarte multi romani cunoscatori l-au sprijinit in cazul planului Valev. De atunci s-a resuscitat antirusismul si rusii nu l-au iertat.