Why is Solzhenitsyn considered to be reliable source?

>500% of GULAG population died in them

No need to be genius to get the point, if you will able to understand what wrong here, you'll understand what wrong with Solzhenitsyn

Oh look another tankie shitpost thread

Comrade Stalin did nothing wrong Solzhenitsyn is a fraud and never went to gulag lying kulak bullshit the USSR never hurt anyone

As opposed to the not dubious at all Soviet archives, amirite?

No one denies the USSR hurt people, but the people who were hurt deserved it

There is no such passage in 'GULag Archipelago I-VII', '200 years together', in any knot of the 'Red wheel', 'First circle', 'Cancer ward' or in 'Ivan Denisovits' and he never publicly said anything like that. Just stating obvious here, because 88% of Veeky Forums and /pol/ have never read a single book.

Nobody have said Solzenitsyn to be a 'reliable source' and Arhipelago is no academic history, but an oral history of the camps. For academic history of the camps, there is Applebaums' work and as one can find, there is very little difference between two in general.

If telling the truth is considered to be 'anticommunist' (and that logic commies do indeed follow), then he was one.

Varlam Tihinovits not getting attention? When the book was first released officially (not in samizdat) in Russian (or USSR) in 1989, Ivans bought multiple copies of it remembering what happened to Solzenitsyns' 'Ivan Denisovits'. (it was pulled from sale and from libraries, it 'ceased to exist' in Soviet Union)

Why do you think governments create archives? Dumb dumb

Yes I'm sure the tens of millions of people who were imprisoned and killed by the Soviet regime all deserved it and were greedy kulaks amirite

No false imprisonment or execution of innocents there nope, the gommies were good boys and only punished the guilty

As opposed to basic math and logic in having real informations in top secret archives, amirite?

Fuck off kulak scum. You're the reason the few have all and the many suffer!

>soviet archives are dubious
Soviet archives are full of dirt on them.
They were never meant to be seen by public eyes
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazino_affair
Why didn't soviets just erase this from archives? Why does the data on military purge, on shitty population census exist?
Why do we know that they faked some of the WW2 heroes? That Stakhanovite movement was artificial and orchestrated?

It's all in the fucking archives. Sometimes it's not in the open but historians are working on reconstructing the complete picture by comparing dozens of memos and internal documents.

I am interested in fictions role for study of real history. Do you have any opinion in that

>SOVIETS DINDU NUFFIN!

Soviets did a lot of fucked up shit but that doesn't make Solzhenitsyn a serious source.

Why is he not a serious source?

I sincerely wish that lefties would just admit that they don't have any problems with murdering the bourgeoisie or their political enemies, instead of whining about the validity of the sources that right-wing people use against them.

I wish they would leave this board, along with /pol/. The only purpose they serve is counteracting each other's cancer.

I agree tbqh.

I don't know.

The guy's figures are literally all false when compared with actual primary source documentation.

>redistribute the land equally
>some people turn out to be harder and smarter workers and end up richer than the rest
>use their profit to hire help
>get killed as kulaks
This literally happened

the same reason kikes were source of holohoax claims, their supporters will believe the most insane things if it's about their enemies

I agree, anarchists and social Democrats deserve to be shot or worked to death

Why would he be?
He had absolutely no soviet documents or any reliable data available to him at the time he wrote his stuff. That didn't stop him from coming up with numbers and some absolutely wild claims. His stuff is filled with "they say/I believe" source and math.
Outside of his personal experiences of prison life he can't be taken seriously on anything and even then it's questionable how much he dramatized since there are pieces here and there that don't make too much sense.

You think it is anecdotal nonsense that applies to the whole book?

>Why would he be?
He lived it.

>Outside of his personal experiences of prison life he can't be taken seriously on anything and even then it's questionable how much he dramatized since there are pieces here and there that don't make too much sense.
Clarify.

If there's one thing I've learned from studying the Cold War, all you need to do to be loved by the West is oppose Communism, regardless of whatever else you do.

You do realize that governments have plenty of reasons to falsify statistics, right?

>He lived it.
Which would mean he has evidence of specific incidents, not of the statistical big picture.

>He lived it.
My grandparents lived in soviet union and had a strong opinion of it being a perfect place but I'm rather fucking doubtful of it.

Just being there doesn't automatically means everything you say is true. Shalamov was there as well and thought Solzhenitsyn was a piece of shit and was trying to cash in on the subject.

He lived it, i guess he should be trusted 100%.

>Clarify.
Solzhenitsyn has spent most of his conviction in a comfort of research facilities and skipped all the actually brutal years of gulags.
Scenarios like this don't mesh with reality all that well:
>Mы нaкaляли дpyг дpyгa тaким нacтpoeниeм - и жapкoй нoчью в Oмcкe, кoгдa нac, pacпapeннoe, иcпoтeвшee мяco, мecили и впихивaли в вopoнoк, мы кpичaли нaдзиpaтeлям из глyбины: "Пoдoждитe, гaды! Бyдeт нa вac Tpyмэн! Бpocят вaм aтoмнyю бoмбy нa гoлoвy!.." И тaк yж мы избoлeлиcь пo пpaвдe, чтo нe жaль былo и caмим cгopeть пoд oднoй бoмбoй c пaлaчaми"
Why wouldn't prisoners get fucked up for chanting death to USSR? Why wouldn't they get increased punishment and sentences if the system was so brutal? How did they gain knowledge of nuclear programs when soviets tried to keep it under wraps for years?

He claims to be working as a snitch but not snitching. How?

The entire text is very heavily emotionally charged in Russian and smells of romanticism.

>You do realize that governments have plenty of reasons to falsify statistics, right?
When people are missing they are missing.
For example a good chunk of Stalin's military purge was not documented as "we are shooing x number of people today". In fact the purge part of the paper trail is fairly limited. But at the same time when a good number of people disappear or are dismissed in short period of time and then arrested separately that leaves a trail.
Work with soviet archives doesn't involve just taking the numbers for granted but a good amount of comparing official documents, memos, family registers and searching for missing links.

LMao what the fuck? a bunch of anonymous users being grouped together? /pol/ isn't a group of people, this isn't Reddit and there aren't "/pol/" tags on an user's post. Eat shit

>but the people who were hurt deserved it

Acknowledging Solzhenitsyn was a fanatic nationalist and Zarist who advocated for the return of a theocracy constantly invented figures doesn't make Stalinism better, one thing doesn't exclude the other, are people here retarded?

Kys leftie shill.

...