Why is Stalin held as some particularly awful monster when history shows at least 100 tyrants as brutal as him...

Why is Stalin held as some particularly awful monster when history shows at least 100 tyrants as brutal as him? All he really did was order mass killings of dissenters, which was the norm for rulers since the beginning of recorded history.

This can be said for literally any ruler in history.

I like Hitler and I don't like Stalin, but it's not because he killed people. I also have a soft spot for Mao and Pol Pot (don't tell anyone)

Why don't you fuck off to /leftypol/

He's pretty awful.

He left his son to die just because it wouldn't serve the interests of Soviet Russia.

Holodomor happened, even though if Stalin really wanted to kill those Ukranians with starvation might be up to debate, although the evidence suggests that he totally wanted to starve the Ukranians dead.

That's only two off the top of my head though.

Because by all accounts he was ruthless, conniving, nefarious, totalitarian sociopath without an ounce of humanity whose regime has the blood of millions of innocents on its hands.

Stalin's greatest asset is that he's not Hitler.

>people can't be bad if other people are worse

/leftypol/ pls

>likes Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao
seriously why?

I'd really like if you could expand on why you're apologetic to Pol Pot.

(I'm a Maoist and he did nothing wrong, but Pol Pot fucked up pretty bad I think)

>Stalin was le crazzzzzy!

He might have gone a bit overboard but most of the people he purged genuinely needed to be gone if the revolution were to be seen through. Stalin was the USSR's last hope of actually achieving communism. His only mistake was that he didn't live longer.

>Mao did nothing wrong
>tries to kill all the sparrows thus creating mass starvation
>destroying thousands of historical artifacts
>nothing wrong

i supose all the genocides of different ethnic groups where needed too?

You're right. I mean more in terms of his actual goals. He truely was trying to make a better China and not just feeding his own power fantasies or bureaucratic interests. He just so happened to be really fucking bad at not inducing mass starvation in his own populace. Destroying artifacts from the old empire wasn't a big deal.

Given the fact that USSR literally collapsed because of nationalist uprisings, yes.

His biggest mistake was not protecting Beria enough for him to survive after Stalin died.

he could have created communist puppet states with those ethnic groups instead.
also the main reason those nationalistic upprisings did occur was because the soviets atempts on assimilating them.

>I mean more in terms of his actual goals
Isn't his end goal the same as pol pots?

Not really. Pot wanted to make some retarded agrarian society and thought that everyone with an education should be killed.

>he may have killed 70 million people but it's ok he was doing his best lol
god damn Maoists are fucked

>implying intellectuals wheren't persecuted under Mao too

Hell is paved with good intentions

>All he really did was order mass killings of dissenters, which was the norm for rulers since the beginning of recorded history.
I want Game of Thrones to leave.

Not necessarily intellectuals, just the ones that spoke out during the hundred flowers campaign. That was perfidious.

>the stalin cared about communism meme
lel

>used to blow cigar smoke on his toddler son and watch him cry for entertainment
nah he's a piece of shit human being

>although the evidence suggests that he totally wanted to starve the Ukranians dead.
debatable as you said since it also affected the Northern Caucasus, Volga region, Southern Urals and West Siberia, and Kazakhstan.

>talking bullshit
provide proofs or you're full of shit

But thats a fun thing to do.
fucking moral/normalfags

Because the west needed a justification for their arms race to force open Eastern European markets.

>tries to kill all the sparrows thus creating mass starvation
I can't imagine how dense you are, nigger.

>He left his son to die just because it wouldn't serve the interests of Soviet Russia.
That's not exactly what happened.

The Nazis offered to give him back in return for an important field marshall, Stalin obviously declined and then his son killed himself.

I don't know why he would like Hitler or Pol Pot but Mao did literally nothing wrong.

>tries to kill all the sparrows thus creating mass starvation
That's retarded.
>>destroying thousands of historical artifacts
The Cultural Revolution was a good thing.

>Stalin's attitude to Zhdanov - his favourite leader, heir apparent and "fellow intellectual" - meant he always asked for his view of the films first. The person invited to sit next to Stalin was protected.
>But it could also show Stalin's view of foreign policy: late in the war, some American generals and politicians were his guests but when it came to the cinema, Stalin summoned his old Georgian pal, Kavtaradze, deputy foreign minister, to sit next to him.
>"I can't," said Kavtaradze. "Why not?" asked Stalin. "You've guests!" Stalin, now the conqueror of most of eastern Europe, sneered drunkenly: "Fuck them!"

The stories of Stalin and his movie nights are pretty funny.

Are you insane? Stalin wasn't a revolutionary, he was an even bigger autocrat than Nicholas II or Louis XIV. A complete traitor to the revolution

> 100 tyrants as brutal as him
It doesn't matter if they are 1000 times more brutal and I believe they were. It is the scale if things that matters. Stalin won competition in mass killings at eyes of practically everyone, well, maybe not won, but he is there with people like Hitler and Mao.

>Revolution

He know that the Bolshevik was a mistake and hijacked by the Jewish 'intellectual' when Lenin invented the 'Vanguard Party' meme. He might as well goes all out and destroy the whole thing.

People don't understand that the state must commit the terror the people are afraid to do.

>stalin was like the god emperor
>nobody can understand him
> his sucessors fucked things up
> Putin is his rightfull decendant

Stalin planned the second rise of the soviet empire on 10 years frok now. The chaos after him is a lesson to remember that cucks dont have the right to govern the soviets

> Stalin wasn't a revolutionary
He literally was one of revolution main figures. The fact that he become autocrat doesn't deny that as this is common thing in revolutions.

> cucks dont have the right to govern the soviets
Well... They wouldn't if Stalin spared at least one competent communist. Imagine if there somehow was literally the Second Stalin in party. I bet First Stalin would purge him too.

>That's retarded
yes?
>The Cultural Revolution was a good thing.
How? Why is it a good thing to destroy historical artifacts? Literary ISIS-tier

>Stalin was the USSR's last hope of actually achieving communism.

>mfw people believe communism is an achievable goal

It would be archived years ago if only not sabotaged by capitalists, traitors. enemies of the state and basically everyone except true communists.

>commutards actually believe this

The Soviets had a good 23 years, from 1918 to 1941 with which to modernize Russia and implement communism. They chose the worst and most inefficient ways to 'modernize' (5 Year Plan), while Stalin purges everyone with a brain because he's a paranoid megalomaniac.

I think what happened here is that you are completely clueless when it comes to the topic, and since you didnt see the connection between sparrows being the only natural predator for pests which destroyed crops within china, you assumed your uninformed incorrect presumptions were correct.

What the fuck man this is not fucking Nero, it's Caracalla.

wow, you really are an edgy piece of shit
great job!

Who the fuck can like Pol Pot? His rule was not only brutal but also ridiculous to unimaginable levels.

You're delusional, kill yourself Berniecuck

I'm a dirty commie and even I think that's a bit ridiculous. Communism might be achievable after humanity reaches a technological level that would allow it to overcome scarcity of products and use AI for efficient managing the economy in the way that benefits the people. Right now it's little more than a dream for a better future, humans are too flawed to plan the economy in an efficient way.

Stalin was a georgian madman. He never deserved to be the leader of Russia, even in it's sad, distorted USSR form. The only rightful rulers of Russia are the Romanovs.