Hungary 1956

This is a thread for discussion of the Hungarian (counter?) revolution of 1956. Both supporters and detractors of the uprising are welcome. What are your takes on the event? Was it a Horthyist counter revolution or a worker’s revolt against unjust tyranny of party bureaucrats? I hold the latter position, feel free to discuss and ask questions.

Attached: 5AFCCA1D-2601-4B51-A037-D0C5D3BDCE44.jpeg (1280x1024, 141.39K)

Other urls found in this thread:

marxists.org/archive/fryer/1956/dec/index.htm
espressostalinist.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/the-truth-about-hungary.pdf

My apologies for the double posting of this thread. Mods please delete one.

Hungary was a post-fascist occupied zone. The only thing the Soviets did wrong was not establishing a strong enough security and brainwashing beforehand.

What makes you think the uprising was pro fascist?

Typically, there were all kinds of malcontents in the rebellion. But it is obvious how it would end up: a fascist regime on Western payroll.

Hungary, as a former Axis member, had no claim to sovereign politics one way or the other.

What are you basing that assumption on?
So the Hungarian proletariat deserved to have their political agency and rights to national self determination (explicitly guaranteed by the Warsaw Pact) respected because they were forced to live under the yolk of a fascist government over which they had no control?

Russia in 1917 was a post-Czarist failed state full of monarchists, proto-fascists and conservative liberals. Therefore, the Bolsheviks were entirely unjustified in staging revolution due to the potential of a counter-revolutionary coup, and had no claim on sovereign power of the state anyways.

"national self-determination except when you try to exercise that right" continues to be a staple of tankie politics

Wew

marxists.org/archive/fryer/1956/dec/index.htm
An account of the Hungarian Revolution by a British Communist who witnessed the events. He paints it as a working class revolt.

Very, very unfortunate - like many things that happened in the Eastern Bloc. The discontent against the Hungarian security apparatus and the party leadership was genuine by all indications. The situation was complicated by the Cold War and that Khrushchev was attempting to de-Stalinize the USSR. He gave his famous secret speech earlier that year. If he had failed to crush the revolt it would have made him look weak in the eyes of the West, the Eastern Bloc, and the USSR.

...

What the fuck?

you forgot the reaction image.

lmao…

Attached: what_the.jpg (596x395, 32.01K)

From what I know, it seems the Soviets crushed the possible seed of true revolution (that might have even saved the USSR eventually).

The Horthy regime gets too much shit.
The Hungarian Kingdom (lol) was a boring faux democracy, not a fascist dictatorship.
Zero cases like this.

tanknigger pls

Nigga by this logic the DDR, Romania, and Bulgaria shouldn't have had any claims to sovereign politics as well.

Shit dude I couldn't tell you why

The "Hungarian Uprising" was an attempted Counter-Rev coup gone bad which failed because of the vast majority of the Hungarian Proletariate not supporting them
Budapest was the only city the rebels came close to claiming and the rest of the country remained loyal to the goverment of the PRH

Are you talking about Pal Maleter? He was a officer in Horthy's army yes, but during the war he defected to the Soviets and led a unit of anti-fascist partisans against the Nazis. During the revolution, at the first meeting of the worker's councils, he was reported as saying "We have fought and some of us have died in the cause of an independent, socialist Hungary… The purpose of this meeting is to lay the foundations of a new armed force in our country. This force is born of the insurrection, but we must ensure that reactionary elements, wanting to establish the old prewar regime, don't worm their way into it. That regime, fortunately, is dead. and there will never be capitalists or landowners in Hungary again."
What makes you think he was a socdem? He never stated any plans to privatize the economy, and his government entered into coalition with other parties on the condition that the economy would remain socialist.
And some liberals try to act like Marx was one of them, that doesn't make it so. You should be well aware of the efforts of establishment forces to make it seem as if revolutionary leaders were actually on their side.
That happened during the 1905 Russian revolution as well, and during the civil war.
Most of the leaders of rebel fighters were also party members, such as Steven Angyal. Lynchings of other party members were primarily directed against AVO agents and those associated with them and Rakosi's government. In addition, Red Guards in the cultural revolution lynched CCP members, were they reactionaries as well?
They released many prisoners, including many who had been longtime communists, veterans of the Spanish Civil War and Hungarian Soviet Republic, that had been imprisoned by Rakosi as supporters of the minority faction within the party.
That straight up didn't happen. Nagy asked the UN for help after Kruschev broke his word and invaded after recognizing Nagy's government and promising not to interfere in their internal affairs.
That's not true at all. The previous government was massively unpopular, which is why the Soviets forced Rakosi into early retirement and installed Nagy as PM. There is no evidence to suggest that the uprising was premeditated (much less by foreign agents), and by all accounts appears largely spontaneous.

I'd also like to add that there are numerous reports of Soviet soldiers openly expressing sympathy and siding with the rebels, and crowds responding to this by chanting "Long live the Soviet Army!" There were also cases of Soviet units firing on AVO agents in defense of the protesters.

LMAO
The Uprising only took root in Budapest and after the Dangerous Nature of Nagy's reforms became evident Kadar and Several other members of the Politburo Left Budapest and Established a New Socialist gov to Prevent the Collapse of Socialism because of Nagy's Reforms this new goverment would De-Facto control the rest of the Hungarian territory outside of Budapest until order was restored

I will Re-Iterate once more
Even if Nagy himself was not a counter-Revolutionary his actions would have led directly to one because of the Likely odds the Socialist Party would have lost the Bougie elections he held and it would have also let the US now that the USSR was unable to Defend the WP resulting in more Situation like the 50s crisis's

Already posted this but Basically just read this is you unironically believe the Idea that the Counter-Revolution would have brought about "Better Socialism"

espressostalinist.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/the-truth-about-hungary.pdf

...

First of all, I fail to see how elections held in a socialist country can be bourgeois. Second, none of the other parties were calling for a return to capitalism, and the majority of the parties in the coalition (old school socdems [reformist anti-capitalists] and peasants party) were anti-capitalist since their inception. Third, that’s just speculation. We could sit here and say x or y would have happened all night long and not get anywhere because such claims are unfalsifiable.

Its a book not written by a StalinBoo even
E.S just put in on their wordpress
That dosent invalidate it

I am pretty indifferent, its kind of hilarious how angry leftists on both sides of the isle get at each other for having the "wrong stances" even though it happened over 60 years ago. I guess its more worth looking into than Katyn though since you could attribute it to being the result of revisionism which obviously is historically important. I'm just not interested in who was "good or bad" in regards to Hungary because that's fairly useless.

As far as modern politics goes I would agree. I wouldn’t refuse to work for somebody because they were a tankie, however it’s still an interesting discussion topic. Plus I’m writing a paper on it and this is a good way to fish for sources.

Jews fought for the revolution also. I'm guessing it would be inconvenient of you to mention the Jewish socialist leader István Angyal who was hanged by the pro-soviet authorities for taking part in the fighting.
Yes, there were undoubtedly reactionaries during the revolution. Pointing out such really does not constitute as legitimate criticism of the revolution.

Especially when those reactionaries appear to have been disparate and disorganized with no influence on any of the organized bodies of the uprising. Clearly they had little influence on the worker’s councils because these overwhelmingly supported Hungary remaining socialist.

nigga what
No one truly knows why Kádár defected. The most likely explanation seems that he knew, if the Revolution was crushed, Moscow would appoint Ferenc Münnich as the new PM, who was an actual tankie.
Kádár probably believed in the Revolution, he just took a more pragmatic approach, because he knew it was a doomed cause.

Attached: Munnich_Ferenc_1921.jpg (364x524, 109.61K)

Perpetual. Revolution.