Did Stalin do ANYTHING wrong?

Did Stalin do ANYTHING wrong?

back to /leftypol/ you autistic temporarily embarrassed people's Commissar

P.s. your memes are shit and always shoddily put together (commushits are lazy talentless hacks who can't even spend 15 minutes learning how to use photo who wudda think it)

He was a Bolshevik.

But if you simply consider him a fascist with lying socialist propaganda, just like how we consider Hitler and his National "Socialism" and volkism, Stalin by all means was an amazing dictator and empire builder, his only flaw was he did not establish a dynasty to ensure the long term continuation of his rule, like Alexander, and eventually we ended up with Gorbachev and [COLAPSE]

Idk. I mean, there are many ethical digs to be made at Stalin. I'm not gonna lie, I'm in awe of Stalin and I'm a right winger. He was that perfect storm of enlightenment ideals taken to such an extreme that no other result was imaginable. He didn't really do anything wrong, so much as he did as his ideology was destined to do.

>Stalin by all means was an amazing dictator and empire builder
not really considering the people were russian
its their destiny to live like shit :^)

You do realize the USSR was more than Russia, and he was actually Georgian, not Russian, just just managed to rule over Russia, unlike those guys like Napoleon and Hitler.

Not him, but the point is still moot. The USSR was smaller than the Russian Empire was. Stalin didn't build an empire so much as he inherited one.

>inb4 Eastern Europe COMBLOC
Nominally independent states

>nominally
>independent
>states

Romania, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Bulgaria and Albania were independent states, though they were heavily under Stalinist sway. They were independent states and there were multiple instances where they defied Stalin and got away with it. Honestly, Stalin was a little looser with the COMBLOC than say... Khrushchev was. Stalin didn't want to build the Berlin Wall, which is why it was built after his death. The intervention into the worker's revolt into East Germany was a request by the DDR. Stalin actually told Wilhelm Pieck to ease the fuck off so it wouldn't happen, but Pieck did was Pieck did. It's pretty amazing when you compare Khrushchev's rhetoric in the Secret Speech with what Stalin actually did and how Khrushchev was far more guilty of it than any other Soviet ruler.

>The USSR was smaller than the Russian empire
If we're to not count Russian European satellites as part of the USSR's "empire" then you shouldn't be counting the Russian Empire's protectorates and autonomous territories like Finland and Khiva as part of the Russian empire.

In which case the USSR would probably be the bigger state.

>Hungary
>Czechoslovakia
>Independent

>happened years after Stalin died

You have a point there.

The fact that Tito didn't get TANKED shows that much.

>fascism isn't a failure.

:^)

>uncle joe just wanted to have a stronk happy union.

Do you not understand what an empire is? You do realize empires can have kingdoms as part of their empires?

>The fact that Tito didn't get TANKED shows that much.
I'm sure that's because Stalin was feeling benevolent and not because Yugoslavia is essentially a Slavic Switzerland with literally over 9000 hours of gorilla warfare experience and a total lack of roads for tanks to traverse on in 1948.

Another interesting point is that Stalin told COMBLOC states to refuse Marshall Plan Aid and drafted his own plan. Yugoslavia is by far the most famous incident of refusal of that order, but Czechoslovakia initially balked and received some aid under the table as well before refusing the Marshall Plan later on. Stalin's rebuke? He yelled at the Czech Party Secretary for a few hours and then sent him home. Khrushchev would have tossed him from a fucking window. Stalin may not have been lenient with people inside the Soviet Union, but he was sympathetic to the states outside of it.

Empires do not have independent states within them. Non-Soyuz COMBLOC states were independent.

>Empires do not have independent states within them.

>
>
>

I don't see the relevance of that statement.

>
>
>

>Empire

>
>
>E M P I R E
>M
>P
>I
>R
>E

If Stalin really wanted to tanking Yugoslavia would haven't been much of a hassle.

The Germans did it not too long before and the partisans only liberated it with the red army's help.

Germans never really controlled shit and I'm sure USA would have more than happy to fund partisans against the USSR.

Fuck Titoist Yugoslavia didn't even get parts of rural Bosnia committed to a fascist resistance against the communist state under control until the late 40s.

>I'm sure USA would have more than happy to fund partisans against the USSR.
This is probably the actual reason.
Having Tito be neutral isn't optimal but having another US ally right on your back door is to be avoided.

this

not to mention the countless attempts on Tito's life

>I'm sure USA would have more than happy to fund partisans against the USSR
Not him, but unlikely. The US always gave lip service to anti-communist revolts in Europe, but never intervened. Highly unlikely that the U.S. would cross the divide for Tito considering that Tito was a communist.

>inb4 Tito-Stalin split
The U.S. and Yugoslavia had no real diplomatic relations, outside of the Marshall Plan-like aid, until 1967.

>Can't tell if this is bait...

Given that the nature of the Communist regime in Russia during the 1920's - 1950's was stunningly dysfunctional, Stalin did the impossible and made the situation in Russia even worse after succeeding Lenin.

He exponentiated the amount of arrests, the number of gulags across Siberia also increased during his reign. Worse of all, he targeted those who were of the so called "intelligentsia" and killed those associated with the intellectual circles of society. This was done with the most bazaar and ridiculous of accusations. The Russian identity known to the whole world died during this reign of Communism.

Both Communism in Russia and Stalin as a pair are at the very least defective from proper governing and at a maximum the most horrid examples of rule in all of human history.

How is possible that the Nazis were outdone by the Russian Communist Regime with respect to the number of innocent deaths? It was not done with evil intent, but a lack of any intentions whatsoever.

>It is difficult to respect anyone that holds sympathies toward the USSR during the time of Lenin, Stalin, and to a slightly lesser extent Khrushchev, let alone blindly reads theories from Marx and takes it as the answer to all modern political and economic dilemmas.

>The fact that Tito didn't get TANKED shows that much.
wtf am I reading sfrj was shown the boot by stalin because tito was chimping out and funding Greek communists and arming them when stalin told him to stop

not to mention sfrj shot down two us airplanes in 1946

stalin saw Tito as a major liability

>wtf am I reading sfrj was shown the boot by stalin because tito was chimping out and funding Greek communists and arming them when stalin told him to stop
Had this happened under Khrushchev or Brezhnev, Tito would have been dragged through the streets by Sovi- I mean, "party loyalists that were supported by Soviet tanks."

He developed it to a degree not seen in any state before or sense, with the possible exception of postwar Germany and Japan

Funny, with my dad being a right wing ex-cop turned contractor, and my mom being leftist who used to work at a hospital before moving on to work for a large pharmaceutical company, them fucking hating each other and splitting up by the time I was two has really shaped the way I think of the political spectrum.

Hi. Krushev didn't TANK me the same reason Tito didn't get TANKED by Stalin. Because I'm the leader of a mountainous nation packed to the brim with mountain nigger Balkan savages with over 9000 years of gorilla war experience.

Forgot muh pic

Are you American? If so, want a fun way to piss your family off? Most Americans are economic determinists (money controls everything types) and have more in common with Marxists than most realize. Call them a Marxist, explain yourself, and watch them squirm.

>MUH FORTS
At least you got the savage part right.

Then was not the time for bunkers. That came later.

But I still don't understand. Do you really think the geography and tight knit nature of the inner parties forged during times of GORILLA warfare of Yugoslavia and Albania played no role in them not getting tanked?

I'm not the guy you were replying to, just memeing for the sake of memes. I will say this though: If there was any reason for Albania to not have been tanked, it had fuck all to do with the fact that Albanians are a bunch of feral monkeys and more to do with the fact they couldn't cross Yugoslavia to tank you.

I'm Danish, people here aren't really worked up about commies.

Kinda looks like he could be related to Obama.

The collapse was not really the fault of Gorbachev. There was a long period of economic stagnation before he came to power and his hands were somewhat tied.

The collapse definitely could have been avoided. It was just a matter of not being a useful idiot for the west and letting nationalist apes like Yeltsin take power.

>implying it wasn't party members who realized how rich they could get if they (((privatize)))

It could have been avoided if stronger reforms took place in the 70s but Brezhnev was an imbecile and surrounded himself with like-minded morons which effectively created a gerontocracy.

Purge them all.

It can be done as Stalin had proven.