Was Stalin really that bad

[caveman1917]

Stalin really loved the working class: {...}

That's funny, I could swear I actually just said literally this:

I never claimed he was. My story wasn't about Stalin but about a certain "Stalin fanboy".

 

[Elagabalus]

It's truly amazing, isn't it? The term "fascist" doesn't even occur in my post, but why let such simple facts stand in the way of some apparently random remarks, which also happen to be non-sequiturs as well.

And yes, Khrushchev didn't like Stalin, is there some point here?

Eh? I know U R, but what am I? Well, not in that specific post but in others. An example here:

...Most people are stupid.
You're not being called a right-winger because of that, you're being called a right-winger because of your use of far-right rhetoric about the "regressive left" and your never-ending support for capitalist (and fascist) imperialism...

In fact, your use of the term "fascist" seems a bit loose but generally seems to refer to someone critical of Stalin, which is why I included the Khrushchev coverage.

ETA: and there's no such thing as the Holodomor. Just because such claims were published in Völkischer Beobachter, at a time when it was well-respected among liberal intelligentsia in the West, doesn't mean it's true.

Just noticed this. Please produce any cite you can find that the "Völkischer Beobachter was well-respected among liberal intelligentsia in the West"

 

[caveman1917]

In fact, your use of the term "fascist" seems a bit loose but generally seems to refer to someone critical of Stalin, which is why I included the Khrushchev coverage.

Just noticed this. Please produce any cite you can find that the "Völkischer Beobachter was well-respected among liberal intelligentsia in the West"

No thanks, feel free to disregard that claim if you so choose.

 

[llwyd]

In some respects stalinism was even worse than nazism, more succesful, more lethal - I wrote these following comments about this fact some years ago (as modern revanchist and militaristic Russia along our Nordic borders keeps these memories rather fresh):

http://stockholmslender.blogspot.fi/2006/03/good-old-times-when-we-sang-horst.html

http://stockholmslender.blogspot.fi/2007/05/stalins-willing-executioners-pro.html

 

[jimbob]

He was also, from 1939 to 1941,the most effective ally Der Fuehrer ever had, something the Stalin fanboys hate to see brought up.

I did bring it up, apparently that was trumped by Munich.

No I don't follow the logic either.

 

[llwyd]

I did bring it up, apparently that was trumped by Munich.

No I don't follow the logic either.

But it's even worse: in the early 30's it was Britain and the US that were seen as the main enemy, not the Nazis. The Comintern was directed to attack and undermine German Social Democrats ("social fascists"), not Nazis. This changed when it was already too late. So, Stalin did much to enable the rise of Hitler, seeing him as a tool to weaken the Anglo-Saxon powers.

 

[Craig B]

I'm tired of repeating this, so I'm going to bold the important part: feel free to present any theory you like and back it up.

And I'm tired of reading it. I notice that when you have been asked for evidence you have replied

No thanks, feel free to disregard that claim if you so choose.

Now, you have agreed that

There was a famine in Ukraine
There was no famine in Romania or Germany, although as you say, the same natural environment for agriculture existed there. I have cited Muggeridge and quoted the very words of Gareth Jones, witnesses, and referred you to Eugene Lyons. The cause of the famine was therefore not the weather, or agricultural pests, as falsely claimed by Stalin apologists. The cause must therefore have been something that was happening in the USSR, but not in these other countries. That was the economic system introduced by Stalin in the years after 1929. Feel free to refute this logic.

I have also referred you to the article on the Soviet Census (1937)^WP. Go and consult these things and stop misdirecting us. We will then be able to discuss not only the famine of 1932-33, but the Terror of 1937-38, and the fabricated "show trials" of 1936 and subsequent years.

 

[caveman1917]

And I'm tired of reading it.

Well then feel free to present evidence for your claims and you won't have to read it anymore.

Now, you have agreed that

There was a famine in Ukraine

Not exactly. There was a famine in the USSR, including the Ukrainian SSR.

There was no famine in Romania or Germany

Possibly. How is this relevant?

The cause of the famine was therefore not the weather, or agricultural pests, as falsely claimed by Stalin apologists.

That doesn't follow.

The cause must therefore have been something that was happening in the USSR, but not in these other countries. That was the economic system introduced by Stalin in the years after 1929. Feel free to refute this logic.

What logic? There was no famine in Germany therefor the famine in the USSR was caused by Stalin, as claimed by right-wing ideologues? You call that logic? Oh, who am I kidding, of course you call that logic...

 

[caveman1917]

In some respects stalinism was even worse than nazism, more succesful, more lethal - I wrote these following comments about this fact some years ago (as modern revanchist and militaristic Russia along our Nordic borders keeps these memories rather fresh):

http://stockholmslender.blogspot.fi/2006/03/good-old-times-when-we-sang-horst.html

http://stockholmslender.blogspot.fi/2007/05/stalins-willing-executioners-pro.html

Nice anti-communist propaganda. So Stalin was responsible for the fact that two of the most brutal, oppressive and lethal political ideologies - liberalism and Nazism - combined their forces to repress left-wingers in 1930's Germany?

 

[Craig B]

Well then feel free to present evidence for your claims and you won't have to read it anymore.

I have, and so you're telling untruths. This constant repetition is your current preferred method of misdirection. That means you believe me when I stated that I am not impressed by provocation and insult. That's good.

There was a famine in the USSR, including the Ukrainian SSR.

That means there was a famine in Ukraine.

What logic? There was no famine in Germany therefor the famine in the USSR was caused by Stalin, as claimed by right-wing ideologues? You call that logic? Oh, who am I kidding, of course you call that logic...

This logic. Pests and bad weather don't stop at borders, as we agree. Germany had no famine. Romania had no famine. Therefore it wasn't caused by the pests and the bad weather when it happened in the USSR.

i call that logic. Right wing ideologues call it logic. Left wing ideologues call it logic. The only people who don't are unthinking apologists for Stalinism. Most of us thought that breed was extinct! But "living fossils" are occasionally found, like the coelacanths discovered quietly prowling the depths of the Indian Ocean, previously known to science only from their petrified remains.

 

[The Big Dog]

Nice anti-communist propaganda. So Stalin was responsible for the fact that two of the most brutal, oppressive and lethal political ideologies - liberalism and Nazism - combined their forces to repress left-wingers in 1930's Germany?

Rule of So.

I'm tired of repeating this, thus I'm going to bold the important part: feel free to present any theory you like but back it up.

 

[caveman1917]

I have, and so you're telling untruths.

No you haven't. All you've provided evidence of is that there is at least one journalist whose reports did not include any famine conditions in Germany. Without any sound argument as to how that would even relevant in the first place.

This logic. Pests and bad weather don't stop at borders, as we agree. Germany had no famine. Romania had no famine. Therefore it wasn't caused by the pests and the bad weather when it happened in the USSR.

i call that logic. Right wing ideologues call it logic.

I know you do, but that doesn't make it so. Rational people, on the other hand, call that a "non-sequitur".

If you want to claim that "economic system introduced by Stalin in the years after 1929" caused famine, then you are free to make a list of years from, say, 1850 to, say, 1980 and for each year mark whether the year had the "economic system introduced by Stalin in the years after 1929" and whether the year had "food shortage/famine", and then see how your two variables are related.

But of course you already know that the result is exactly the opposite of your claim[*], which is probably why you choose to take, frankly bizarre, lines of argument instead about how lack of famine in Germany is somehow supposed to prove that Soviet famine in 1932-33 was caused by the "economic system introduced by Stalin in the years after 1929."

Most of us thought

Now you're just pulling our legs

* Yay to Comrade Stalin for the collectivization and industrialization of agriculture!

 

[caveman1917]

Rule of So.

I'm tired of repeating this, thus I'm going to bold the important part: feel free to present any theory you like but back it up.

Stalin did so much himself to create that threat with the Comintern undermining all left-liberal forces in Germany during those fateful years of Hitler's rise and with Moscow stubbornly seeing the liberal-democratic West jus as bad, or for most of the time much worse enemy than Hitler.

Blaming Stalin for the German liberal support for the NSDAP repressing communists (among others). A bit like a "stop hitting yourself!" but then rather "stop deporting yourself to concentration camps!"

 

[The Big Dog]

Blaming Stalin for the German liberal support for the NSDAP repressing communists (among others). A bit like a "stop hitting yourself!" but then rather "stop deporting yourself to concentration camps!"

It is quite remarkable how profoundly you have missed the point that was made.

We refer to Stalin's concentration camps as the "gulag".

 

[trustbutverify]

If we are taking Pot shots at worst historical figure, then don't forget Pol!

The fraud Chomsky would really like to.

 

[trustbutverify]

What a pathetic display of intellectual dishonesty. I have never argued that people didn't die in the Ukrainian SSR because of famine and disease.[*] And I have never argued that the famine was Nazi propaganda. Yet you of course see no problem in pulling that post, which was in response to me, out of context (ie obvious straw-manning) into a new thread.

* and you even got your timeline wrong, the famine under consideration was 1932-33. But then I'd not expect you to be able to point to Ukraine on a map to be honest, so whatever.

Now, there's some irony.

 

[jimbob]

In some respects stalinism was even worse than nazism, more succesful, more lethal - I wrote these following comments about this fact some years ago (as modern revanchist and militaristic Russia along our Nordic borders keeps these memories rather fresh):

http://stockholmslender.blogspot.fi/2006/03/good-old-times-when-we-sang-horst.html

http://stockholmslender.blogspot.fi/2007/05/stalins-willing-executioners-pro.html

Nice anti-communist propaganda. So Stalin was responsible for the fact that two of the most brutal, oppressive and lethal political ideologies - liberalism and Nazism - combined their forces to repress left-wingers in 1930's Germany?

"So" implies that something follows. How does describing the atrocities of Stalin's regime against Estonia lead one to say anything about inter war Germany?

Why have you described liberalism in the same breath as Nazism?

I'm going to be controversial* here, but I think that liberalism, with it's basis in a fundamental respect for human rights (and over time, realising that more rights are important) is not oppressive compared to any autocratic ideology, let alone a totalitarian one like Stalinsim. Or do you mean something other than liberalism here?




*only controversial if you are a knave or a fool.

 

[Craig B]

No you haven't. All you've provided evidence of is that there is at least one journalist whose reports did not include any famine conditions in Germany. Without any sound argument as to how that would even relevant in the first place.



I know you do, but that doesn't make it so. Rational people, on the other hand, call that a "non-sequitur".

If you want to claim that "economic system introduced by Stalin in the years after 1929" caused famine, then you are free to make a list of years from, say, 1850 to, say, 1980 and for each year mark whether the year had the "economic system introduced by Stalin in the years after 1929" and whether the year had "food shortage/famine", and then see how your two variables are related.

If you want to spend time doing that rather than reading the exhaustive literature on the subject already composed by scholars, who have in the past performed such exercises, go ahead. Or read the works of these scholars.

Why don't you do that? Because the scholars are more or less unanimous that Stalin's economic reforms were the prime cause of the disaster.

But of course you already know that the result is exactly the opposite of your claim[*], which is probably why you choose to take, frankly bizarre, lines of argument instead about how lack of famine in Germany is somehow supposed to prove that Soviet famine in 1932-33 was caused by the "economic system introduced by Stalin in the years after 1929.

I have set down my reasoning. Over to you.

 

[caveman1917]

"So" implies that something follows. How does describing the atrocities of Stalin's regime against Estonia lead one to say anything about inter war Germany?

It doesn't.

Why have you described liberalism in the same breath as Nazism?

Because the liberals were quite supportive of the Nazis for their anti-communist work. It's understandable though, no problem, even if you're a liberal capitalist who doesn't like the "style" of the NSDAP you still can't deny the profit opportunities after the Nazi goons come up to beat up and drag away trade union leaders in your company.

I'm going to be controversial* here, but I think that liberalism {...}

I don't care.

 

[Craig B]

While we're at it.

One of the most serious crises before 1900 was the famine of 1891–92, which killed between 375,000 and 500,000 people, mainly due to famine-related diseases. Causes included a large Autumn drought resulting in crop failures. Attempts by the government to alleviate the situation generally failed which may have contributed to a lack of faith in the Czarist regime and later political instability ...

Major causes include the 1932–33 confiscations of grain and other food by the Soviet authorities which contributed to the famine and affected more than forty million people, especially in the south on the Don and Kuban areas and in Ukraine, where by various estimates millions starved to death or died due to famine related illness ...

Estimates of Soviet deaths attributable to the 1932–1933 famine vary wildly, but are typically given in the range of millions. Vallin et al. estimated that approximately 2.6 million deaths in Ukraine can be directly attributed to the famine. In addition, they estimated a shortfall of roughly 1 million in the birthrate ...​