Why do a lot of people hate Stalin ?
This guy was objectively the best leader Russia had in the past centuries.
In 1926, Russia was a wasteland devastated by the civil war and full of ignorant peasants. It was an irrelevant country. In 1953, the USSR was a superpower leading almost half of the world and a top-tier country in scientific, military and educationnal field. I don't get why the hate
Killed 20 million people
GREAT MAN HERO OF RUSSIA
I am not hoxhaist, but the lies about Stalin are ridiculous.BAzilion deaths?
Soviet UNion actualy had insane population growth mainly because people had good lives and felt secure for the future
When Stalin took power RUssia was destroyed from civi war and had iliterate population, Stalin industrialised the nation, removed iliteracy and electrified the nation. Soviet Union had awesome science, good healthcare, amazing industry, was creating cars, televisors and other goods.Stalin was awesome
Sorry,but Stalin wasn't bad leader and he wasn't and evil man.
>I share my nationality with this idiot.
Under Stalin soviet union
BEcame second largest economy in the world
Iliteracy was removed
NAtion was inudstrialised, started creating onw awesome everthyng, from cars to computers
HAd awesome science
HAd good healtcare
Had young population duo to awesome population growth.
I am not Stalinist, but to say that Stalin was bad is ridiculaus.
you know, there are methods of rapid economic development that don't require the liquidation of the intelligensia, the starvation of millions and the virtual enslavement of the peasantry.
ANd there were no bad things about latter Soviet Union during Stalin. No bread lines, no alchocolism, not trying to get away from it and things like that. People were actualy tryin to move to Soviet Union
>arbitrary death camps
>officer purge of 1936
>made a deal with Hitler
>lost to Finland
>honestly surprised by Barbarossa
>ate shit till late 1942
>died because his own people were too scared of him to interrupt him.
Any of these are decent reasons to consider Stalin a shit leader
>arbitrary death camps
>officer purge of 1936
Asholes deserved it.
>made a deal with Hitler
After England and France refused to make aliance with Stalin to take Hitler out early, Stalin made aliance with Hitler to prepare for war. Read Stalins wiki page first paragraph,
>lost to Finland
TOok what he needed, BEaten it during continuation war forced it to atack germany during Lapland War
>honestly surprised by Barbarossa
>ate shit till late 1942
>died because his own people were too scared of him to interrupt him.
Well, I'll give him this much.
With all his purges, he probably killed more commies than anyone else
Of course it was. The daily caloric intake of the average soviet was pitiful.
Only insofar as the civilized world was a big ash heap because of ww2. Soon enough they were overtaken by Japan.
And yes, the average soviet in the 1950s was still hungry. He also usually lived in a small shack with 20 other people. Living standards in the USSR were so deplorable that it's one of the few countries not to have underwent a baby boom.
I heard everyone in Soviet Union died actually.
Stalin created this horrible society where people where afraid to breath in the wrong way. Are you sure the country would not have done just as good or perhaps even better with another leader?
Perhaps North Korea becomes a democracy and in the future they will all talk how Kim Jong was such a great leader through the tough time they had.
>Btw, I'm 100% French
I don't have any problem believing that, the French are forcefed marxist propaganda.
If you like Stalin so much there's a similar country which exists today, it's called North Korea.
>top-tier country in scientific, military and educationnal field.
Maybe Foreign language wasn't their top "educationnal" field.
Are you stupid? The graph is the population, not the standard of living. That's this graph.
Most of Stalins military and Political achievements can be attributed to individual military leaders and politicians respectively.
Look I get that he comes across as larger than life, especially compared to Kruchev and Brezhnev. But Stalin was an unstable man.
Kim Jong Un is a clown. What matter is the result. Stalin made his country great, Kim made his country even more ridiculous and isolated than it was before in just a few years.
>Are you stupid?
Are you? I realize what the graph was you stupid nigger. I said that your graph was shitty because it was a projection.
I also said that the standard of living boom in the 1950s Russia was due to 27 million Russians exiting the world in the decade preceding it. It's basic malthusianism. Lower population means more for those who survived. The same thing also happened after the black plague in Europe.
So my question to you is : how many nigger cocks do you suck on a regular basis?
>Kim Jong Un is a clown
Not anymore than Stalin was.
>What matter is the result. Stalin made his country great, Kim made his country even more ridiculous
That's not true. Kim accomplished everything Stalin accomplished.
He industrialized north korea, made literacy rates 99%, developed a nuclear program and even the start of a space program.
North Korea today is exactly like the USSR in the 1950s. What a paradise!
NOTHING MORE THAN A JEW PUPPET.
>There wasn't many Jews and niggas around when Stalin was in charge
The early bolshevik leadership was like 90% jewish, but you're right that Stalin killed a whole lot of jews during the great purge (probably his only redeemable action...)
There weren't any niggers, but then neither were there any in the capitalist west at the time.
Why didn't he heed his generals! Imagine the world today.
Relax.. You can't read graphs. The population was higher, not lower, for every single year. No 'malthusian effect'. The projection is for the future, not for then. Learn to read.
Soviet Union and today's Russia =jewish empire
Jews rule the Russians from 1917
Russia could be rich if it were ruled by patriots - Romanov dynasty
He was probably the best, most intelligent leader in human history. Unfortunately he also became a psychopath when his first wife died. If it wasn't for that maybe he would have used his skills for the good of mankind.
>They are here because of capitalism.
No they're not. They're here because kike leftists and socialists who were paid for by the KGB pushed for massive immigration.
>Relax.. You can't read graphs
I can very much read graphs. You on the other hand appear to have a defective brain.
>The population was higher, not lower, for every single year.
Because your graph starts in 1950 you stupid fucking nigger. Post the graph from 1930-1950 you fucking idiot.
> The projection is for the future,
No shit, which is why it's called a "projection".
Could you please stop posting? Turks aren't allowed on this board.
Merkel didn't left all the muslims get into the country because she was a leftist, neither did the US with the Mexicans. They let them because they are cheap stupid God-loving workers.
>Merkel didn't left all the muslims get into the country because she was a leftist,
Yes she did. She is part of the "new left", that monstrosity which was birthed by those fuckers of the frankfurt school as a replacement to traditional socialism.
Immigration has its roots in marxism.
Because people exagerate the numbers. Hitler was a bad leader, and Stalin was probably an evil man, but when history is discussed, one should use facts,not over-exagerated numbers.
>No they're not. They're here because kike leftists and socialists who were paid for by the KGB pushed for massive immigration.
You're delusional. The French industrialists brought them for cheap hands. The 'KGB'. Nice strawman, retard. You just said that the SU couldn't feed their citizens, but they secretly subverted the whole world? It's never the right-wing to blame I guess. Only Jews and KGB.
>Immigration has its roots in marxism.
Immigration has its roots in capitalism.
During the five years 1905–09 the average number of immigrants entering America (the United States alone is referred to) was over a million a year.
Says the communist. How did Syriza work out for you, nigger? Might as well call your country "Syria" lmfao
>The French industrialists brought them for cheap hands.
Not true, french industrialists tend to be rather conservative. They were brought on because "It's the year 1968! Don't be ray-ciss!"
Of course there were guest workers, but they were supposed to GO BACK. What leftists did was two-fold :
- they abolished the clause which said that guest workers had to go back
- they enacted a law, the law of "family regrouping", which meant that every fucking nigger and sandnigger in Apefrica could claim french citizenship if he had a family member currently as a guest worker. Of course this opened the floodgates.
>The 'KGB'. Nice strawman, retard.
That's not what a strawman is, retard. And what I said is factually correct, the KGB funded many leftist organizations in the west.
>You just said that the SU couldn't feed their citizens, but they secretly subverted the whole world?
>It's never the right-wing to blame I guess.
The right wing can be blamed for many things, but immigration isn't one of them.
>Only Jews and KGB.
You're starting to understand.
Oh yeah, which is why ultra-capitalist Japan is absolutely flooded with Syrian refugees!
He was from a relative and objective perspective a great leader, if not one the greatest.
But keep in mind that Russia is an extremely rich country in terms of resources and even if they lagged 70-100 years behind countries like the US and Germany and managed to catch up and surpass - they had help. They paid companies like Ford to help them kickstart the industry - but the USSR catching up to the west is still very impressive though.
20-60 million figures is just propaganda, there is no "proof" or logic behind these figures. And more people are in US prisons today than ever sat in Gulags.
1. Death camps highly exaggerated but they did exist yes, and innocent people were sent there, yes. But how many sit in US prisons now? Way more than ever sat in Gulags.
2. Officer purge - how do you know it was not necessary? I think Stalin and his people knew more than you and the west.
3. He made a deal with Hitler after trying for 2 weeks to make a deal with the west. He knew Hitler was building up for war - something the west was ignorant about. It was a clever move, and not evil taking the circumstances.
4. He won against Finland and got territory. And they had to do it, because Finland was flirting with Nazi-Germany. Clever and not evil move.
5. He did not trust Hitler, what make you think that? If he trusted Hitler he would not have pushed the industry towards military production in the scale he did.
6. Surprised that Hitler was stupid enough to attack this early, he knew he would attack. I think all of the world was surprised.
7. Because 1943 was when the large scale production was scheduled to be done.
8. I do not think anybody could save him from the strokes he had.
It's so cute to see westerners trying to talk about something they have no idea about.
>Muh soviet losses during WWII
Pure military losses ratio of USSR/Germany is 1.3 / 1. "Zerg Rush" myth comes from adding civillian casualities into SU's losses.
>B-but muh purges!
>Muh evil Stalin
Average amount of imprisoned/GULag'd people in 1930's USSR was 583 for every 100000 citizens.
Average amount of imprisoned people in 1992-2002 was 647 for every 100000 citizens.
>B-but muh starving Soviet Union!
Friendly reminder that meat and bread norms in a modern Russia's consumer basket are about the same as the allowed ration of german POW in 1942(!).
You said immigration is because of Marxism. I guess America is the most Marxist nation, 200 years now.
>You said immigration is because of Marxism.
Holy Christ, are you acting like a complete fucking idiot on purpose or are you actually this stupid?
I'm talking about immigration to Europe since the 1960s. Not fucking America two centuries ago.
Kill yourself, turk.
>immigration isn't one of them.
>Who could have thought those "guest" workers wouldn't go back home ? The Jew-KGB must be behind that ?
Also the US were cucked way before communism was even a real worldwide political movement
I literally told you that the laws which allowed guest workers to stay were pushed by radical leftists. Could you please stop ignoring facts for a minute? Probably not, since you're a braindead marxist nigger.
Seriously, go live in North Korea.
>Also the US were cucked way before communism was even a real worldwide political movement
What does that even mean lmfao. Kill yourself nigger.
>French industrialists are conservarive.
Fiscally, possibly. I don't think they care much if you live next to Ahmeds, though. Money doesn't have ideology, really.
>MUH NO TRUE COMMUNIST SCOTSMAN
Socially too. Very catholic.
These laws were pushed by radical leftists, and spearheaded by a jewish pedophile named Daniel Cohn Bendit.
Stalin was a mass-murderer and he deserves all the expected hate because of this. Also, all the people saying that he did make his motherland into a worldpower are overrating him. The Russian Empire was a superpower and its future could not have been predicted.
>Death camps highly exaggerated but they did exist yes, and innocent people were sent there, yes. But how many sit in US prisons now? Way more than ever sat in Gulags.
Other arguments are ok. Are you comparing being in US prison with being in a Gulag? And it does matter why they were sentenced there. Example, when Soviet freed war prisoners from germany they were sent to the Gulag. Their own war veterans.
Anyone with a brain would have known that they were not going to go back home. This law would never have been enforced anyway, you can't tell 1 million people to leave your territory in a western democracy
>What does that even mean
The US had massive immigration since the 1880's, communism became a worldwide powerful movement after WW2. Their immigration-problem was caused by capitalism
>Anyone with a brain would have known that they were not going to go back home. This law would never have been enforced anyway, you can't tell 1 million people to leave your territory in a western democracy
Of course you can. This "you can't just make people leave!" is a typical example of the kind of marxist demoralization inflicted upon western society since the 1960s.
You do know that following the Algerian war a million french people fled Algeria in a few days, right? A few days!
>The US had massive immigration since the 1880's,
I already told you, you stupid fucking nigger, that the USA is not remotely comparable to Europe because the USA is a land of immigration to start with. How fucking stupid are you? I'm talking about Europe since the 1960s, not the USA in the 19th century! Understood? Probably not, since you're a stupid nigger...
>how do you know it was not necessary?
Sure. Why would an expansionist state flirting with war in the west possibly need a command structure?
>He won against Finland and got territory.
Oh yeah, all that shitty frozen tundra was suddenly at the disposal of the Soviet Union. Under the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, Finland was Russia's. Stalin tried, and failed, to annex it.
> Surprised that Hitler was stupid enough to attack this early, he knew he would attack. I think all of the world was surprised.
Stalin refused for several days to believe that Hitler was preparing to invade when all of his competent(surviving) military commanders implored him to deploy a defensive line. He even had intelligence reports warning him of an impending assault.
> I do not think anybody could save him from the strokes he had.
but they maybe could have saved him from the 3 days left festering in his office.
Okay, I can see your points. There is some truth in both actually. The 68tards became the ruling class in Europe and much of the older 'bourgeois' disappeared under taxation etc. But I don't really believe in KGB conspiracy and the Jews. Maybe a marginal role, which is natural. I understand how you feel though, the situation is unbearable.
>But I don't really believe in KGB conspiracy and the Jews. Maybe a marginal role,
>You really think capitalism has nothing to do with the massive immigration we're facing ?
Europe has been capitalistic since the late 18th century.
Massive immigration started after mai 68 when leftists started dominating mass culture.
Why did no massive nigger immigration to France occur during the 19th century, when Europe was as capitalistic as you can possibly be?
>not a conspiracy
>this guy takes the interview
That's just a ploy to sell books, anon.
No one here likes modernity, believe me.
But you have to understand that the Marxists or the Jews couldn't DREAM to have the power to essentially change the world like that.
France hasn't been catholic for over a hundred years. Degredation of values has been happening slowly, but surely. It's modernity.
Because then kids worked in the factories for 12 hours and no shits were given. There were no big unions to raise the wages, as in the 60's and 70's. That's why they had to take niggers. Wake up. It's the economy that moves the world, not theory and bullshit politicians like Cohn Bendit.
This autistic kike again. Also reminder that the SYRIZA traitorous commies have flooded Greece with 800000 shitskin refugees most of them will stay in Greece unable to move to Europe or return home.
The origins of mass immigration are ideological not economic.
Because Europe was a shithole and Europeans flooded the US, who were as capitalist as you can possibly be. Also 68tard never ruled the country, the conservative could have done something about immigration when they were in chage if they were really against it.
No need to I will just continue voting for Golden Dawn. Close the border keep all the shitskins out and eliminate all marxist traitorous filth from Hellas.
It's not my problem if you got educated from infographs. Immigrants came in because European workforce unionized and basically became middle class. Immigrants often don't even get health insurance, even in Germany, which is the most progressive of all. In Greece they get 5 dollars to pick strawberries for a day.
>Immigrants came in because European workforce unionized
Immigration before the 90s from countries outside Europe was negligible. Nice try marxist filth. Besides most immigarnts don't even work they are busy collecting welfare.
You are the attention whore shilling for jewish ideology on /pol/. You are not even Greek get out of my country trash.
>didn't care about industries leading them to bankruptcy
>when USSR's money ran out, they suffered a breakdown and had to split away the countries in the union
Yes, commies just forgot if your production is ineffective and it earns no profit at all, you run out of money at some point.
>Russia was a wasteland devastated by the civil war
That was precipitated by the Bolshevik civil war precipitated by Lenin and sustained his chief crony Stalin. 13 million casualties there. Russia wasn't in any danger of losing the WW1 against Germany, it was Bolshevik propaganda that led to abandonment of the army and tyranny of the soviets. The Bolsheviks overthrew the Constituents Assembly after being crushed in the democratic elections by the SRs and Mensheviks. This deprived Russia of its choice for government in the first time in history. The Romanovs were far less tyrannical than the Soviets. No serious historian denies this.
The forced famine and genocide of the Ukrainian kulaks is another one of the most ridiculous and obscene actions in history. The Soviet Union never recovered from death of 8 million and the annihilation of Russia's most efficient and productive farmers. Of course, in the insanity of Marxism ideology, your class infers behavior, your class determines your person.
That lovely collectivization you referred to that "cured" the peasantry cost 9.5 million lives, more than a third of these had been shot or tortured, perished on long death marches into exile, or died in the frozen wastes of Siberia and the far north. The rest died of famine.
If you want to talk about "Stalin's genius" in WW2, had stalin undertaken a number of essential measure, as was urged to do by his generals, his intelligence sources, and Winston Churchill the war that followed would have been shorter and less costly in lives. Had the forces at Stalin's disposal been deployed on full-alert in their planned defensive positions even a week before Hitler's invasion, the blow from the Nazis would have been absorbed to significant degree. Stalin's miscalculations were of such vast, catastrophic proportions that it is hard to anything comparable in history.
Do any of you guys actually study history? This shit is literal Kremlin propaganda.
Stalin was a complicated figure, most of the recent historiography is a little more generous to him, but that doesn't exclude the immense human suffering which was common during his rule. Read some of the newer biographies that have recently come out, including a great one by the head of the Stalin archives in the State Archive.
Irish bro is actually right
Yes, we studied your "history" and found it lacking in facts.
>This shit is literal Kremlin propaganda.
I hope you are here to present us with the CIA version, then.
usa has a debt of 18.000.000.000.000$
seems like the capitalists forgot that too. but its somehow different (protip: american cultural hegemony makes us think about them favourably)
you laugh at north koreans, when they're crying for their deceased leader, yet somehow, all the madness about let's say british royal family is somehow accepted. it's the same shit, but anglos and gringos (and brazilians apparently) think you're sooo much better than anyone else
so fucking arrogant
don't you see?
if we stay in economics: capitalism is based on crushes for fucks sake.it's so instable, the whole economy comes crashing down from time to time. and that's somehow better than any other system? you're blind. and an idiot
I didn't say bolcheviks were great though. They put their country into chaos but they didn't achieved to restablish order. They had good attentions but they got bad results, unlike Stalin
It's actually higher, numbnuts.
Adler, N., Victims of Soviet Terror, 1993 cites these: Chistyakovoy, V. (Neva, no.10): 20 million killed during the 1930s. Dyadkin, I.G. (Demograficheskaya statistika neyestestvennoy smertnosti v SSSR 1918-1956 ): 56 to 62 million "unnatural deaths" for the USSR overall, with 34 to 49 million under Stalin.
Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls - Necrometrics
Stalin had good sides, but that's weird to say because those good things were paid by millions of lives, often without any need for that.
His paranoia and bad decisions almost cost Soviet Union the war in 1941.
It's one thing to say he wasn't all bad, and another thing to say he was good. He wasn't good. Soviet Union was never good. Especially not during his rule.
For those saying that everyday life in the Soviet Union under Stalin was 100% complete shit all the time, look at this photo.
Tell me again about how you care about the deaths of innocent people, only if your ideological opponents cause them.
Does your historical knowledge prevent you from aknowledging the death the USA has caused?
It should be easy for someone with your credentials to collect data on your 34 violent interventions in foreign countries since WW2.
How many millions died?
Well, yes and no. Russia's transformation from essentially a failed state to the second superpower was remarkable, and a lot of this is due to Stalin's bringing the country under control. But you also have to remember that this occurred under a immense cost of human loss and suffering. It was not a good time living under Stalin's Russia, and while it was far from a complete "state of terror", it wasn't a utopia either.
There are some great biographies that came out that address these issues. Check out Stephen Kotkin's first volume and the brilliant one by Khlevniuk
>Stalin didn't do nuffin! he wuz a good boy!
And you're the descendant of Socrates right?
Stalin killed literally 60 million in the gulags.
DPRK was actually above South Korea in living standards until a few decades ago. It's a wonder that it's even still standing considering that 20-30% of its population died from US bombings in the early 50s and Pyongyang was almost burned to the ground.
>doesn't mention the millions of people killed in "peacetime" by the Soviets
Would be great if a family member of yours simply vanished one day and you never heard from them again
Stalin is a historical figure and should be examined as such, as should Hitler, Churchill and Roosevelt. Now tell me, why are you so blind to the death Team USA has caused since WW2?
The economic foundation of Stalinism was built on murder and enslavement of millions and built of glass. You can't expand that fast. Russia never exhibited real parity with the United States, that is totally unfounded. Their goods were never of the same quality and the living standards were pathetic in comparison. The only time they had real military parity with the United States was in the mid-70s, and that was based on more traditional armaments, not total military power. The importing of the nuclear bomb by the Rosenbergs and Oppenheimers is what caused the cold war. Ironically, the Jews protested the progression of the atomic bomb once the enemy transitioned from the Nazis to the Soviets.
Think about the loss to the Slavic gene pool when you go about killing every single person who has proven themselves on merit. If you're comparing the loss to the gene pool compared to income growth in the 40s then you've lost it. One of the great ironies of history is that Lenin's father entered into the aristocracy based on exemplary service to the tsar in school administration!
The only reason the Russians were successful in WW2 is because they shot anyone who fell back from the front lines with Trotsky's invent of "blocking units". Nothing "good" can be attributed to Stalin and if you're talking about the defeat of the Nazis, there's been a lot of interesting revisionism by world-class historians Manning etc. on how bad the Nazis really were and how much of their reputation was due to Jewish and Soviet propaganda.
>le commie joo conspeeruhsee!!!1!!
I didn't say the living standard were the same as in the US, but the evolution between 1926 and 1953 is still remarkable
>Nothing "good" can be attributed to Stalin
That's the shit I was talking about. He made some terrible things but the results were pretty good. You can't say he didn't make anything good when he turned the USSR into a superpower
The more accepted ACADEMIC estimate maybe.
Many great historians estimate it that high or higher Solzhenitsyn and Volkogonov come to mind.
The more accepted academic estimate of the Holocaust is 6 million, which is far greater than the real historical mark, correct? You're relying on dubious sources.
Don't bother, he has the intellectual capabilities of a nigger
>The soviet economy was entirely reliant on forced gulag labor. The standards of living were lower during the 1930s than in Tzarist times, and the rise in standards of living post WW2 can be attributed to the malthusian effect of losing more than 20 million people to support.
>HURR DURR BUT DEY WENT TO SPACE STALIN DINDU NUFFIN HE WUZ A GUD BOY
>anti-racism was the cause for looser immigration
>not motivated by economics
And you consider socialism economically illiterate?
>KGB funding leftism in the West
Is there any proof of that that isn't shit tier propaganda?
>The USSR supposedly was starving to death and the bureaucracy couldn't get anything done in time but somehow they managed to create a worldwide subversive movement that threatens the foundations of civilization
Into the trash it goes.
Also, Japan is suffering serious issues related to their reluctance to accept immigrants.
Oh yes, the fact that Jews dominate international banking, media, and politics is a conspiracy "theory" attributable to fedora-tippers while it is easily verifiable on Wikipedia.
Meanwhile, the Jewish patron saints Zinoviev, Lenin, and Trotsky and the first meeting of Comintern encouraged socialists worldwide to use existing parliaments as "tribunes for socialist agitation" and to all the while form "secret, underground societies" to achieve socialism worldwide. Take note that this meeting convened in emergency after the failed communist revolutions in Germany led by another Jewish patron saint Rosa Luxembourg and her Jewish cronies.
Back to Reddit or stick around to learn something.
You seem to be really knowledgeable about the subject. Any good books to recommend? Could be soviet history, or that revisionism you're talking about. I've read the black book of communism already.
Slightly more accurate. Not ALL the revolution leaders were Jewish.
I'm not. Stalin needs to be understood in his context like anyone else. It's also important to understand why he thinks and acts the way he does. And you can't paint him as an illogically cruel monster if you're going to do that.
That being said, to ignore the immense cost of Stalin's rule is ridiculous. You don't have to make Stalin a monster but you can't ignore the suffering communism and his 30 year rule caused.
Because the living situation in North Korea is comparable to the living situation in the Soviet Union during the famines, purges, and mass enslavement that dominated Stalin's rule. You may think its hyperbole but once you devote the time to studying the history you'll realize its not.
On Bernie Sanders do you think Americans are going willingly accept 90% taxation? Reparation payments? And when they don't what will be the reaction from state?
Don't be foolish enough to make assumptions on history. Do the investigation for yourself.
I'm not ignoring anything, but I doubt the average person today, with all the problems we are currently facing, cares about that.
For me, the way this issue is approached, is both as a distraction and a boogeyman, in a way like:
"Live in the current year, or Stalin! Hitler! and Mao! will all unleash their deathly curses on you".
Now, I personally find that an inexcusable argument, politically. Since this is a politics board, and not a history board, I am approaching this from the scope of propaganda.
commit suicide, frog
Will join forces with you this time, Sergei. Ignore the commies.
Look Achmed, it is generally considered bad to exterminate millions of your citizens for disagreeing with your policies. I know that is not how it works where you live with Sharia law.
Because it's a propaganda point for the Right, against any change.
Don't protest, you'll end up in gulags.
Don't question authority, the jews are behind it.
Our nation's capitalists are all patriotic and care for our feelings.
The leftists fault
>ideological conspiracies and not economics are the driving force of large scale social change
>fails to show population during and before
Much nastier story if you look at that and then consider the growth everywhere else had. He literally starved half of Ukraine to death
Im too drunk and tired to rant about commies tonight. Fuck off you communist subhumands, that one russian at the top of the thread is honorary human.
People left because they were finally allowed to after the Soviet Union fell you retard. It tends to help growth when it is almost impossible to leave a place and you lose no population
Shit that's a group graph sorry
Still though, they lost a shitton of teritory and production as a result and their government essentially blew up. That shouldn't be surprising. Also, doesn't show the real economic problems during the soviet time period, they were really struggling to stay afloat and maintain an arms race
>blaming two people for a war that had many causes
>grossly inflated Holodomor death toll and death tolls in general
Did you get this from Robert Conquest or the Black Book of Communism?
I've read the Soviet Experiment by Ronald Grigor Suny which is Oxford University Press textbook. Being from mainstream academia, it is too apologetic for the Soviet Union but no matter your ideology, no historian can escape from the abuses and horror of the Soviet rule. The guy is director of Eisenberg Institute for Historical Studies, so you do the math there. As a place to start, it's okay. Don't buy the garbage that Lenin would have somehow been better than Stalin. Stalin is both the logical and spiritual successor of Lenin, no serious Soviet historian can possibly deny this with all of the information made available since the collapse of the Soviet state.
I've read the Gulag Archipelago which is a great book. It will teach you firsthand of the reality of the enslavement of the Russian people and the totalitarianism of Soviet domination. I actually read 1984 during and after reading these two books. You will see the parallels between the Soviet Union and Oceania.
I'm reading Autopsy For an Empire right now by Volkogonov who was a General and eventual director of the Institute of Military History in the Soviet Union. He is an uncompromising voice on Soviet history and had access to all of the secret archives which give him an edge. It's a pretty good overview of the seven leaders. He did biographies of Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin that are very well-reviewed for the meager attention they get.
Besides Gulag, I've had to pick up what is affordable and available to me but all three of these are highly informative. Books are always better than Youtube videos.
However, out of any book I've read in the past year, I'd recommend The Dispossessed Majority. Prophetic and prescient. Must-read for any serious American patriot.
He was garbage, your trips do not prove otherwise. Patton would've schooled him, and all of his useless troops, if the Jews had not taken over the US.
Yeah, when life expectancy reached the low 10s in Ukraine during the 1930s, I'm sure it was because of "war".
Planning on reading the gulag archipelago, but it's so fat. Did you read the full version or abridged?
Because he won the war and Russia needs to maintain some pride of its past in order to preserve some binding agent. When a people have no history, they have no future. But Stalin never had high "approval ratings" during his life and never would have won a democratic election. Not that anything would have been possible. Stalin killed all of his rivals and most of his accomplices including Zinoviev, Kamanev, and Bukharin. He even imprisoned or killed most of his immediate family members!
This guy was totally unfeeling. I've say that Lenin was an antichrist but Stalin was the devil himself.
He ruined the family. Did many of the same bad measures which are ruining families today. He made it so that divorce was easy and beneficial, and the state would look after the family.
It requires a much much larger proportional loss of life for anything like that to take place. An example would be the rise in living standards after the Black Plague wiped out nearly half of Europe.
The closest that article comes to mentioning anything like that is mention of Soviet support for American withdrawal from Vietnam.
And I'm very critical of some of Bernie's plans.
Most of the Russian Jews were atheists in religion. Lenin was an internationalist, as were Trotsky and Luxemburg. They weren't working for some sort of Jewish elite master plan for Jewish hegemony.
Nobody claimed they were. That is the single biggest fallacy against the idea of judeo-bolshevism.
There need not be a conspiracy. The jewish involvement in revolutionary causes (and their continued involvement in "progressive" causes today) can be seen as a consequence of their internalized hatred for western civilization.
North Korea is so bad also because of recurrent natural disasters, foreign sanctions, and the fact that they lost approximately three-quarters of their largest city so recently that old people remember it.
So let's wrap all things up.
Industrialise Soviet Union making it fully self suficient in all things including car, tv and other industries
Electified the nation
Invested in education and healthcare making it top tier
Created a big and powerfull empire.
True, and that was one of the leftovers from the loathsome Russian-hating Jew, Lenin. Eventually, in preparation and recovery of WW2 Stalin actually came to rely and propagandize the family (besides the ones who were torn apart) and Russian nationalism again when it became absolutely necessary. Ironically, Stalin glorified the Great Russian people who had previously been obfuscated in favor of Marxian class determiners. Just like our current overlords, CLASS is what determines behavior, not RACE.
It just points out the inescapable need for tradition and pragmatism no matter which ideological fanatic is in charge of the system.
Japan is a country located atop of a tectonic plate, was reduced to an ash heap and subject to two atomic bombs.
By the end of the 1950s it was back to being one of the wealthiest countries in the world.
North Korea is shit because it's a totalitarian country based on marxist-leninist economic policies. Not because of "natural disasters", lmfao.
probably the worst world leader in history, killed all his party affiliates and when his country was invaded and his action was needed the most he sat in his room sulking for days unresponsive and then reluctantly handed leadership to real generals which was probably the only good decision he ever made
I think its funny that him and mao are arguably the greatest winners of 20th century and both men had antisocial lives and grew up to be misanthropic killers and didn't give a fuck about fame or humanity just what they created.
The middle and upper classes were heavily targeted by his repressions. Moreover it was the rich peasantry (kulaks) who starved the most.
The stupid and inbred slavo-tatar mongrels who descended from the serfs eventually grew to make up the majority of the russian population. The Tolstoys and the Dostoevskys perished in a mass grave.
Got rid off anyone who didn´t think like him
Had more concentration camps than the nazis
Caused the disappearance of millions of people
Had an alliance with the Nazis before Hitler was dumbass enough to betray him, not before.
Yeah, a true good leader. If you like in 1984
north korea is a shithole because its a totaltarian monarchy under the guise of being for the people socialist state. Kim is king and thousands of high ranking military officials and their family are his nobility.
Japan was bombed pretty heavily and two large cities were ruined completely, but keep in mind that after the war they had copious assistance from superpowers in the West for rebuilding.
North Korea hasn't been Marxist Leninist for decades. It's ruled by Juche. And as for natural disasters, look up the droughts and flooding that have occurred there. It's no joke.
>According to this study the life expectancy for those born in 1933 sharply fell to 10.8 years for females and to 7.3 years for males and remained abnormally low for 1934 but, as commonly expected for the post-crisis peaked in 1935–36.
Oh absolutely. Save for the few kikes at the top, most bolsheviks were absolute brutes recruited from the criminal elements of society, which would go on orgies of looting and rape.
And North Korea didn't receive copious assistance from the USSR and China perhaps?
The reason why North Korea sucks is because of its political system, not droughts. Juche is basically repackaged marxism-leninism.
>Source on any of that?
Open a fucking history book? The great purges didn't exactly target siberian peasants. They targeted the city intelligentsia. As for kulaks dying during collectivization, do you really need a source? Are you historically illiterate (or dishonest, I don't know) to the point that you require a source to back up that statement?
You mean you consider the 170,000 dead Iraqi civilians who were living in peace before you invaded them to have been terrorists?
Because the U.S. Army doesn't. Do you have more proof than them?
They made us believe he was a bad man in the same that Hitler was bad because of the 6 gorillion
And hippie leftist hate the fact that he was a strong authority figure and not some rasta shit
>muh officer purge
I wish this meme would stop. Tukhachevsky was a talentless hack and got what was coming to him for single-handedly destroying artillery as a fighting arm of the Red Army.
The rest weren't much better. If you pay attention, you'll notice that most of these dindu nuffins are your stereotypical 1920s commissars who recognize no method other than a gun in whatever they do.
People looking back at history see it differently than those who lived through it. My family fled the union when everyone around them was starving. He will always be remembered as an idiot to us.
>Got rid off anyone who didn´t think like him
Deepshits who had it comming.
>Had more concentration camps than the nazis
LoL. rehibiltation camps for nazis.
>Caused the disappearance of millions of people
>Had an alliance with the Nazis before Hitler was dumbass enough to betray him, not before.
Read intro paraghraph on Stalins i wiki page, Stalin made temporary aliance with Hitler to prepare for war
Russia was a force in Europe for centuries before gommunism. It had god tier art and culture and industrialization was already underway. Socialism only derailed its economic development.
>He definitely knew how to deal with international kikes.
He did import a lot of foreign material and expertise at a very high material and human cost (because the only thing USSR could export at the time was grain).
However, he still deserves credit for doing that instead of lining his and his cronies' pockets like every other tinpot dictator would have done.
Are you dumb? CUlture was vlourishing under Stalin. Awesome movies, awesome songs, awesome books. Russia empire had iliterate population living in mud. USA already had New York, Industry, millions of cars by the time of first world war broke up,while illiterate russian peasants were living in shit. Only thanks to Stalin Soviet Union managed to catch up and started competing with the Americans during the cold war.
Without the Allies, he would have gotten rekt by Adolf. Stalin daw the flaws in soviet communism, and used them to time all. So that's what he did. But he didn't have a plan or anything. He was in the right place at the right time, that's all.
>CUlture was vlourishing under Stalin.
That's... kinda debatable. While there certainly were gems like Eisenstein, Ilf and Petrov, Mayakovsky and Tolstoy, social realism was very heavy-handed in its censorship and propaganda really was taken too far. In fact, the entire 30's could be summed up with the words "taken too far". Collectivization, industrialization, counter-espionage, you name it, it's been done and overdone to the point where it started causing harm instead of good.
are you seriously fucking telling me that industrialization, massification of modern medicine, and eradication of illiteracy do not increase the standards of living meaningfully, and all of it was just a magical malthusian effect? even though the USSR retained the standard of living of an industrialized nation long after surpassing the population that existed during the stalin era by well over a hundred fucking million? you're stupid as hell.
yeah, it was definitely their hatred of western civilization that led them to participate in the communist revolution and not the fact the previous government actively murdered them via pogroms, you stupid fucking frog.
Probably not, and I hope not. Not because I'm opposed to the Soviet-style socialism, but because its establishment will once again involve turmoil, uncertainty and, most likely, bloodshed, as all revolutions do. There's been enough of that crap around here lately.
>That fucking book
I'm not an apologist for Stalin, or one of those people that thinks gulags were just
bourgeois propaganda, but the Black Book of Communism is maybe one of the worst books ever written.
Old joke: "How was the movie - good or soviet?"
Anyway, Lenin didn't hold his speeches exclusively in front of mud huts. A crucial factor in the revolution were the crowds of people already pouring to the urban centers for industrial jobs, same as it had happened in UK, Germany, France already.
But Soviet industrialization continued on completely different terms - without free competition and access to the global market, its enterprises were wasteful and redundant. They leeched on public subsidy for decades before the painful separation. The weak economic condition of Russia and the former Eastern Bloc is the direct result of that.