posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 05:57 AM
Most "Communist" leaders have been anything but. Mostly they have used the veneer and terminology of Communist ideals as a smokescreen for their
totalitarian dictatorial rule. Mao, Stalin, etc. They used the ideology and economic principles as a kind of new religion to control the masses.
Ironic, since Marx railed against religion - but one dogmatic ideology replaced another, and was held to with the same sort of fervent beliefs as have
been Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Judiasm...etc., etc. Same thing in a different form.
I do think Lenin actually believed in what he was doing and it's pretty clear that at the time of his death he was trying to make changes in the
system to make it more workable. Lenin really did live a very austere lifestyle, taking up residence in a very small, simple apartment within the
Kremlin and forgoing luxuries and such. That's not to say Lenin didn't use extreme brutality in establishing his government - all I'm saying is
that I think for him it was probably an ends justify the means situation. But, that brutality is what brought Stalin to the fore within his
administration. Stalin was a useful kind of person when you run a government that way, and so he rose to ever more power and influene, until by the
time of Lenin's death, he was really already very much in control of things (even if others didn't necessarily know it).
So, are the Kims of Korea true Communists? Well, they've always all lived in luxury - Kim Jong Il's son was infamously arrested trying to sneak
into Japan to go to Disney World, there - something he'd apparently done before. They have kidnapped South Korean actors to perform privately for
them, they import all manner of Western goods and luxuries - foods, liquors, etc., meanwhile their people live in desperate poverty, often going
through terrible bouts of starvation. So, are they Communists? No, not even remotely. They are dictators who care only for their own well being and
power - very, very far from the Communist ideal.