"August i '68" - Norwegian Anti-Revisionist Song 

I've seen a lot of commentary on the Prague Spring in the course of my readings, I've never seen an actual Czech perspective, neither from the left or the right. Thanks for your comment Just out of curiosity, do people in modern Czechia have any nostalgia for the socialist days? (Like some people do in former East Germany or Yugoslavia) Also do you think socialism wouldn't have been overthrown in 89, if the Soviet intervention never occurred against Dubceks govt?

@@warguy1945 Sorry for pretty long text, it was supposed to be much smaller... I think that even in the most terrible,oppressive countries there would be atleast some people, who would have nostalgia about something good about it and no matter what our history books say, it just wasn´t that, so yeah, there are many people, who have nostalgia, but thanks to their unreliable memories and thinking about it as "great times" and our unreliable news and books talking about it as "the worst dystopia ever", I still don´t really even know what it was like. As an example of that trouble, I would like to use stories of my grandpa, who was by the time of invasion doing his compulsory military service (as coordninator of fire in mobile artilery unit, so mostly about calculating trajectory) and studying college. He has also always had a temper, so although he has been one of the most inteligent people I know, he got the great idea to nail down a medal (he got it for his extraordinary military results) during a parade on which was Ludvík Svoboda, president of Czechoslovakia, as protest against the invasion. For this, he was kicked out from military service, from college and this "incident" was in his file. He technically could attend work where he wanted, but employers weren´t eager to employ person, who had such terrible relations with the Party right during the "normalization" (years right after the invasion when the regime turned back the reforms and wanted to get back to Soviet style of government, those years really sucked), so he had to work the low qualified jobs (also quite often in jobs that no one wanted to do, like driving car with material to incinerator, which for this reason had higher salary than other jobs with minimal qualification). Even in such job he had enough money to build a house, have relatively good life and all citizens had guaranteed some way of life, so there wasn´t fear to live on a street or get screwed by life in other ways, so even someone who angered regime like that has quite positive memories... but how reliable? As majority of older generation, he also have problems to use modern technologies, our society is more hectic, people have more things to think about, which was big problem for all those people who lived their whole lifes in totaly different regime... I see many people use the quote "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety", but majority of people don´t really use that liberty, nor care when they have it. Most people just want to have that work, be able to have their own home, have time for their family, friends and things that they like. During socialist times there were many provided activities for children, guaranteed education (ok, we still have free education and I am still thankful for that), than they gott to job, many jobs had apartments provied by employer, so it was close or if it was on the other side of the city, there would be company bus to get them in and out every day, state managed majority of administrative documents, so people didn´t have to worry that they forgot to pay bill or provide some document somewhere and then have masive bill. There were bonuses to new families, companies provided employees with tours. People couldn´t be politicaly active and protest against the government in some big manner (although trash talking the government with beer in hand in a pub was common), but they didn´t really want to care about it that much, so when regime changed and people got duties, that were before that solved by the state, it became big problem for many people. In socialist regime, they knew that policitians suck and said it over a beer, than in new regime they knew that politicians suck, said it over a beer and gave vote to one of the politicians, although believed that all of them sucked anyway and still didn´t really have power to change it and make country better. On the other hand, although I can´t deny that it was oppresive regime, basically all western sources always talk about it like it was one big dystopia and bad look would cause to be send to the mines for rest of life... which is obviously false. In those regimes, majority of population still just go to their jobs, have families, go on vacasions and just live their lifes. So yeah, hardly reliable nostalgic memories (many people like to promote restoration of military service and how it made them "real men",altough when they talk about it, many just got to endure it, although it really sucked and some still have trauma from it, but nostalgia makes them think that it wasn´t that bad...) from people who grew up in totaly different world and would probably say that the old times were better no matter what the modern country would look like. On the other hand, hardly reliable modern history books, which even celebrate people like Mašín´s brothers, who in their fight against communism and desire to escape to the West killed multiple innocent people (like random police officers or later accountant during their robery of company money for employees, because they needed money).

@@warguy1945 About change of regime, we have been generally much less radical nation and even the velvet revolution probably wouldn´t succeed if the party actually tried to keep their power. Regimes change and adapt, but the post-invasion regime just wanted to keep status quo and tried to ignore many problems, so when it got bad, all those problems catched them. Its honestly hard to guess to where would those reforms lead us, but yeah, I think that it might actually survive if reformists got a chance.

@@tefky7964 Sorry for responding so late, but thanks for the response, You've definitely given me much to think about and I'm glad to read your perspective

Basically their goal was to return to true socialism instead of the revisionist and corrupt socialism imposed by soviet social imperialists It’s funny to see communists buy into the capitalist revolution myth for both Czechoslovakia and Hungary

We invite you to Comintern (SH) comrade!

Just call yourself a communist, leftist infighting exists because people ideologically identify themselves with variants of communism.

@@scarecrow533 Επειδή είναι μαοϊκοί - συγγνώμη για τη γλώσσα μου, αλλά χρησιμοποιώ διαδικτυακό μεταφραστή.

Anasintaxi is the ICMLPO affiliated party in Greece.

@@NeoEngel-pc1bd On our site you can find documents showing the true face of this "International."

You know that USSR was not just Russia and that modern Russia is a Capitalist country? Or you're just dumb?

Ага, только российский будто, остальные империалистические банды совсем не виноваты.

Anti-Revisionists correctly analysed the soviet system after 1956 as social imperialism and a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. The repression of the Czech Republic wasnt a preservation of the revolution, but instead a further advancement of Soviet capital interests

Western Leftists were alienated as the USSR employed military means against the people, the people who wanted reform and change, socialism or communism isnt about suppressing the people, they protested that as Soviet communism was increasingly turning authoritarian, even Italian communists once revearing the USSR were increasingly turning away from them, western socialists as a whole had a split with the east.

Even Maoist China and Albania were shocked.

True!

Not to mention Hungary was more fascistic than Germany.

What? West betrayed us in 1938, there wasn´t desire to restore capitalism and politicaly orient back to west, thats why the government started with the "socialism with the human face" and restore part of freedom to the people, which was "big red flag" for the Soviets. It was a betrayal and 20 years long occupation. (also even if we wanted to restore capitalism, what right did the Soviets have to start an invasion?)

(not attempting to argue or disagree with you, I am impartial on the issue, just providing historical context) Many communists in the world, primarily Hoxhaists, Maoists, and pro-Ceausescu communists, denounced the events as social-imperialist because Dubček didn't want to leave the Warsaw Pact and abandon the Communist Party like the Hungarian protesters did. Hoxha especially was appalled at the intervention and caused him to withdraw Albania from the Warsaw Pact, while Ceausescu publicly denounced the Soviet Union and refused to commit troops to the intervention. This view was shared by a lot of pro-PRC and pro-Albania international communist parties, especially in Scandinavia, which is why this song was created. Once again, not trying to argue or anything, just providing historical context

@@roedagardetthank you, I know basically nothing about this event so some context is appreciated

Agreed 100%. It was absolutely justified

Are you russian troll or crazy?

If you curious on the Stalinist perspective of why the Warsaw Pact invasion was unjustified, then I’d recommend the following: 1. The Demagogy of the Soviet Revisionists Cannot Conceal Their Traitorous Countenance (By Comrade Enver Hoxha) 2. The Theory of “Limited Sovereignty” - A Flagrant Expression of the Imperialist Policy of the Soviet Revisionists (From an Albanian Today article in 1972) 3. Revisionist Economic Integration and Its Contradictions (Albania Today 1974, though it’s not on the invasion exactly it does go into why Stalinists generally consider COMECON to have been a tool of the soviet-social imperialists post-Stalin. Which includes why they desires to keep Czechoslovakia within it) 4. Diabolical Social-Imperialist Face of the Soviet Revisionist Renegade Clique (1968 Peking Review, not really a fan of Maoist related items but this is alright) There’s some Cuban criticisms as well that are alright but stray away from Stalinism too much for me to add them.

go back to lick russian boots, clerical fascist

Why?

@@tefky7964 It claims to be anti-revisionist and agitates against the fight against the counterrevolution, which makes them even more revisionist themselves

It is anti-revisionist, it comes from the Rød Front-leire who were an anti-revisionist group in Norway. They opposed the Soviet Union as "social imperialists" and "soviet fascists," seeing the crushing of the Prague Spring as inhumane and evil. The Soviet Union at this time period weren't really anti-revisionist, most of the international communist movement, such as Mao and Hoxha, saw them as revisionists

@@roedagardet Both groups became revisionist. Both the Maoists/Hoxaists and the Soviet revisionists. The "social imperialism" thesis is bullshit, since a state does not automatically become capitalist - let alone imperialist - just because it introduces small market reforms (which is bad, of course) - here the superstructure phenomenon is mixed up with the base. This sounds similar to the Trotskyist theory. Also, the Maoists have a strange understanding of the "mass line", since class consciousness must first be brought to the working class by communists and the communist party is the leading force (Lenin: What is to be done?). The list is endless. The Prague counterrevolution, which invoked "democratic socialism," was a product of this Soviet revisionism. It wanted to allow bourgeois parties and restore capitalism. They argued the same way as the Gorbachev counterrevolutionaries. The Soviets should have intervened much earlier. Siding with the commoners and calling that "anti-revisionist" is wrong. This later resulted in China siding with US imperialism against the USSR.

@@Musterprolet this is a topic that can be debated. as I want to focus on music and not provoke arguments, I will not carry this forward. All I will say is that Lenin and Stalin both talked of social-imperialism, it is not something exclusive to "higher stages of socialist development," as Maoists and Hoxhaists call their ideologies.