Was Stalin really that evil?

[Velociryx]

Stalin was l33t! He rulz allz and did no wrong.

God, you Stalinist cheerleaders sound like little pre-programmed robots. Do they have special camps you have to attend to get to that level of Stalin Hero worship?

-=Vel=-

EDIT: D'oh! That's right...they DO have special camps....

-V.

[Az]

Better trying capitalism than building a factory that costs more lives than the battle of Verdun.

Actually, The mass sendings to the camps started somewhat after the rapid rise in industrial output and GDP. I think that AH will agree on that.

Saying that the world would be better off under the domination of socialism is also 'pure speculation.'

well, I for once see that it is not doing very well under the domination of capitalism, and I try to make it better. just shutting your eyes and ears and saying "we can't do better than that" is not very productive, isn't it? the problem is that there is no way to truly test a different climate, since there are enormous powers that are opposed to this.

[molly bloom]

Stalin and his supporters argued that the victory of socialism could be achieved only as a result of the destruction of private agriculture- which they saw as constantly reproducing capitalism.

Collectivization was a catastrophe- production and consumption of nearly all agricultural products (with the exception of bread, taken off rationing in 1935 (!) ) remained lower on a per capita basis than before 1929, and before 1914. This is despite billions of dollars worth of investments having been ploughed into the agricultural sector.

Replacement of traditional settled Russian villages with the kolkhoz and sovkhoz was not successful- with one of the least successful implementations being in the Ukraine, where, in one of the Soviet Union's formerly most productive farming regions, famine occurred in 1932-1933, with a death toll running into millions. This figure is not simply an amount exaggerated by 'crypto-fascist' Ukrainian nationalists and collaborators, but one attested to by ethnic Russians.

The famine was not a 'natural' famine- there was no drought, no significant plant disease in 1932. Stalin should not receive sole blame- his deputy in the Ukraine, Postyshev should also be tarred with the same brush, as should Molotov and Kaganovich. There was also serious famine in Central Asia and Kuban region.

Look at the other disasters of Stalinist agricultural policy-cotton-growing begun in water poor regions, with water being diverted hundreds of miles to make up the shortfall, the Aral Sea gradually becoming a dustbowl, Lysenkoism slavishly adhered to... and this is without even looking at Stalin's record in persecuting 'cosmopolitans' (Jews, homosexuals, artists), ethnic minorities (Tartars, Chechens, Turks, Volga Germans) wiping out the Red Army's upper echelons....

Difficult to see why exactly Propaganda would want someone like that running affairs again- a strong hand at the tiller perhaps?- even if the pilot is steering you towards the maelstrom...

[Alexander's Horse]

True but the "strong leader" myth is very powerful in Russia.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
I think english speakers have a right to know what was said:

Traitor.
You don't have to translate my 'stookach' coment about your translation.

They are complete fools.

Pretty accurate translation of word "naivnyi"
I always thought it should be translated as "naive" not as "complete fools".

Generelly, easily fooled and lead by the nose, these people, the borgouise. In one word - enemies "

You forget the smile "" after those words, which mean that I was joking. And btw, 'borgouise' it's a slang word which means foreigner.

The director should have his legs torn for this rude %^$^."

I hope you don't believe that I suggest to commit such atrocity against this movie director. It's just a slang, which means... well, that his leags should be torned out for such crap.

[The Vagabond]

@ Siro's attempted translation of Serb.

By the way, Siro, the following part of your translation is blatantly incorrect:

Quote:

I vobshe menya ubivaet ih predvzyatost. Dostatochno kakim nibud otmorozkam pizdanut "genozid !!! Ubivayut!!!" I oni uzhe gorlanyat vo vse gorlo pro nashi zverstva. I im gluboko poebat chto eti otmorzki sami konchenie mudaki.

And anyhoo I can't handle their bias. You can't yell "genocide, murder" to any wimp, without them yelling about our massacares. They are complete fools.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Serb
I hope you don't believe that I suggest to commit such atrocity against this movie director. It's just a slang, which means... well, that his leags should be torned out for such crap.

Come on, Serb. What an apologetic tone! You should have said "podvesit' za yaytsa". It would have been more clear.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
There will always be those in Russia who will defend Stalin in spite of all his evil crimes.

The reason is there is a strong belief in Russia that only a strong ruler can make Russia strong. This belief is very old and goes back at least to the days of Ivan the Terrible who defeated the Tartars and the German Teutons and united the country by ruling with iron fist. This is the myth anyway.

Stalin saw himself as someone who sometimes was harshly ruling but always for the good of the country. He identified directly with Ivan the Terrible and other tough rulers of the Russian history.

He had Sergei Eisenstadt (sp?) make a film about the life of Ivan the Terrible during the nineteen thirties. This film was shown throughout the Soviet Union and was really Stalin's way of saying what he was doing was for the good of Russia. Many Russians still believe that.

In many ways Stalin saw himself more as a modern Tsar, an absolute monarch, than a communist.

Excellent analysis Horse I agree 100%.

Only a Russian could even ponder a question like this, which has an answer that is blatantly obvious to the rest of us.

[Serb]

Originally posted by The Vagabond
@ Siro's attempted translation of Serb.

By the way, Siro, the following part of your translation is blatantly incorrect:

Be merciful, Russian is not his native language, but his third language.

Come on, Serb. What an apologetic tone! You should have said "podvesit' za yaytsa". It would have been more clear.

Agreed. Lynch this bastard.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Only a Russian could even ponder a question like this, which has an answer that is blatantly obvious to the rest of us.

Yes, unlike you, a Russian would know that there are more than just black and white colors to history.

[Ted Striker]

What, red and white blood cells spilling all over the ground?

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Serb
Be merciful, Russian is not his native language, but his third language.

No, he should not forget the language of his ancestors!

Agreed. Lynch this bastard.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Only a Russian could even ponder a question like this, which has an answer that is blatantly obvious to the rest of us.

Yeah, sure. It is your ancestors who were killed during Stalin's purges not ours. Who should care about Russian opinion, what could they know about Stalin? The answer is blatantly obvious for the rest of you.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Serb
Be merciful, Russian is not his native language, but his third language.

Russian is Siro's native yazik, brat.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Russian is Siro's native yazik, brat.

By "brat", do you mean the English or the Russian meaning of the word?

[Serb]

I hope Russian.

[Serb]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Russian is Siro's native yazik, brat.

I was trying to joking, brat.

[The Mad Monk]

I'm fairly sure it's the English meaning -- it fits quite well.

[Az]

The famine was not a 'natural' famine- there was no drought, no significant plant disease in 1932. Stalin should not receive sole blame- his deputy in the Ukraine, Postyshev should also be tarred with the same brush, as should Molotov and Kaganovich. There was also serious famine in Central Asia and Kuban region.

very much correct, and a matter of deliberate evil policy, not of the inherent failures of a socialist govt.

I also agree on the fact that the Kolhozes were mismanaged, by not rewarding workers, and not making collective decisions, as it should've been. (like in Israel )

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Azazel

very much correct, and a matter of deliberate evil policy, not of the inherent failures of a socialist govt.

Socialist? No. Communist? Maybe.

The tune plays out too many times for the system to be seen as benign. Stalin. Mao. Pol Pot. The list is not exhausted.

The problem with socialism at the point of the bayonet has always been the leaders of those with the bayonets. That sort of power has never worn well on any human of any leaning, from right or left.

Now, Socialism by mandate is a bit of a different thing. Much of Northern Europe seems to be happy with that arrangement. Unless the Swedes engineer a liquidation of the Finns anytime soon.

[Az]

The problem with socialism at the point of the bayonet has always been the leaders of those with the bayonets. That sort of power has never worn well on any human of any leaning, from right or left.

so any sort of revolution is destined to fail?

The tune plays out too many times for the system to be seen as benign. Stalin. Mao. Pol Pot. The list is not exhausted.

we all know very well that there are plenty of capitalist leaders that can be compared with them. By capitalists I mean the upper class and their lackeys, whether free trade, or anti-free trade.

Now, Socialism by mandate is a bit of a different thing. Much of Northern Europe seems to be happy with that arrangement. Unless the Swedes engineer a liquidation of the Finns anytime soon.

I've thought about it alot, and came to the conlcusion that the Nordic states are not socialist, since neither the workers, nor their elected government doesn't control the means of production.They're welfare states.

[Serb]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
I'm fairly sure it's the English meaning -- it fits quite well.

Thank you very much for your so-predicatable coment.

[The Mad Monk]

You're welcome!

BTW, 'brat' only works when the person in question is both young, and shows emotional immaturity. As neither applies to chegitz, throwing it back at him just looks stupid.

[Serb]

BTW, 'brat' in Russian means 'brother'. Also it could be used as dude, buddy, comrade. Who's looks stupid now, consider that half of the Che's post cosisted of Russian words?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by The Vagabond
By "brat", do you mean the English or the Russian meaning of the word?

Ruksi yazik. Gavariti pa-ruski . . . ploxha.