He killed a bunch of people, but he was so obsessed with industrialization to the point of absurdity, that every other leader would have probably been crushed by Hitler.
He literally said 10 years before WW2, that "we need to industrialize in 10 years because we are 100 years behind the West, or we will be crushed". Without terror you can't have such a fast industrialization, and his terror was it that prevented a collapse in WW2, people who think they and their families will be exterminated if they revolt, will be quiet even if they disagree with the system.
>The Soviet people also benefited from a type of social liberalization. Women were to be given the same education as men and, at least legally speaking, obtained the same rights as men in the workplace. Although in practice these goals were not reached, the efforts to achieve them and the statement of theoretical equality led to a general improvement in the socio-economic status of women. Stalinist development also contributed to advances in healthcare, which marked a massive improvement over the Imperial era. Stalin's policies granted the Soviet people access to free healthcare and education. Widespread immunization programs created the first generation free from the fear of typhus and cholera. The occurrences of these diseases dropped to record-low numbers and infant mortality rates were substantially reduced, resulting in the life expectancy for both men and women to increase by over 20 years by the mid-to-late 1950s. Many of the more extreme social and political ideas that were fashionable in the 1920s such as anarchism, internationalism, and the belief that the nuclear family was a bourgeois concept, were abandoned. Schools began to teach a more nationalistic course with emphasis on Russian history and leaders, though Marxist underpinnings necessarily remained. Stalin also began to create a Lenin cult. During the 1930s, Soviet society assumed the basic form it would maintain until its collapse in 1991.
Source Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar
Juan Smith
Too bad after him only inbred peasants came to power who ruined everything.
Well except maybe Kruchev, after all he went into space, so I give him that.
Carson Morris
>that every other leader would have probably been crushed by Hitler Wrong, Stalin was the one responsible for the unprecedentedly heavy losses of USSR due to his unpreparedness despite literally hundreds of warnings from all top level army and intelligence community since late 1939
Bentley Hughes
He was beneficial for Russia in the short-term, but he fucked them over in the long-term.
Sebastian Ross
No and that goes for the rest of the bolshiveks. It's disingenous to claim credit for industrialization when
1. It was already in progress under the Tsar 2. You kill millions of the hardest working people of your country because they own something
Hitler would probably react VERY differently if Russia was still a monarchy.
Connor Brown
>education and healthcare he literally just continued policies that were originally put in place by lenin.
Ethan Lopez
He was not beneficial.
Father of my granny was sentenced to death for nothing.
Hitler started war with Poland after Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of "friendship and help" was signed.
-------------------- Come on guys, don't you see that he is evil?
Easton Thomas
The Red Army would have had fewer tanks and so on without his crazy push, but the soldiers would have been better prepared and led due to their best not being FUCKING SHOT all the time.
Brandon Gray
If not for Stalin I'm not sure if there would still be Russians.
He was a brutal dictator who was also incredibly effective at industrializing his country and defending it from imperialism.
Stalin did many bad things and many great things. Neither cancels out the other. However, we should recognize that he WAS successful at crushing Nazi Germany and making Russia a superpower. You can say a lot about Stalin, but you can't call him a failure.
Henry Gray
He failed at building a sustainable socialist system that would outlast his ideological descendants, culminating in his Empire collapsing fifty years after it was proclaimed
David Rogers
Not at all. He was vile.
Logan Robinson
Bullshit. The economy became unsustainable because Khrushchev-era forms made the USSR more dependent on Western trade.
There were elements of this in Stalin's time (the holodomor happened because he was using the sale of grain to fund industrialization) but their economic system was substantially more self-reliant, especially after gaining access to Chinese and Eastern European resources.
William Parker
>Source Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar i cant find that book online, i really want to read it
>Talmudic Jewish Atheism Isn't this a contradiction?
Sebastian Taylor
>Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of "friendship and help" was signed And Molotov-Ribbentrop was signed because Soviet union was politically isolated so aligning themselves with Hitler was literally the only option at the time outside of being isolationist. And isolationism doesn't work.
Sebastian Flores
>isolationist doesn't work America did well enough under isolationism
Chase Morales
After Lenin's ideas fucked up the country, Stalin was a kind of "relief" (in economic matters), I say yes
Christian Lewis
Not really, we've always been forced out of isolationism for one reason or another.
Jackson Lopez
>Kochba sounds like a way how would a kike read Koba
Jeremiah Parker
>It was already in progress under the Tsar
Please the Romanovs were retarded and even come 1918 like 90% of people were landless peasants. Russian progress was slowly happening in SPITE of the Tsar who at every opportunity undermined the modernists and the liberals in the Duma.
Stalin was brutal, but I would put him up with Lenin and Peter as the best actual ruler Russia ever had. It's sad Lenin died so early though because Lenin was like a savant tier tactician and political operator.
Bentley Scott
why do Kikes always pretend like Russia in 1918 was the same thing as Russia in early 1914?
Wyatt Baker
>and even come 1918 90% of the population were landless peasants And they had undertaken a policy of granting unused lands to the peasants in order to grow the middle class >russian progress was coming slowly they were actually industrializing extremely rapidly in the 1910's >lenin was a savant-tier tactician fucking kek
James Gonzalez
>And they had undertaken a policy of granting unused lands to the peasants in order to grow the middle class
Which in reality did jack shit because the land given to the peasants were too small for even substance farming. Most peasants were forced to sell up to larger land owners and become landless or be pushed into the urban areas where they worked in horrid sub industrial revolution tier conditions.
>they were actually industrializing extremely rapidly in the 1910's
While industralisation was happening IN SPITE of the Tsar and the right, it still wasn't happening fast enough and the vast majority of people were living in fucking outright famine level conditions. There is a reason the early 20th century of Russia is racked with mass revolts, riots and revolutions.
>fucking kek
What is wrong about that statement? Even the most right wing historian would admit Lenin was a fucking genius tactician and political operator who had an uncanny ability to always know when to strike. There is a reason the Bolsheviks with what,
>Father of my granny was sentenced to death for nothing. did he try not being a counter-revolutionary?
James Garcia
>What is wrong about that statement? Even the most right wing historian would admit Lenin was a fucking genius tactician and political operator who had an uncanny ability to always know when to strike. There is a reason the Bolsheviks with what,
Zachary Gutierrez
America was only isolationist in a time period where it had no real potential dangers.
Austin Watson
Nice logic you got there.
Russians did all these things and Russians worked hard to become a superpower.
Stalin even acknowledged that in one of his final speeches and was full of praise for Russians, not Soviets, Russians. It took winning the biggest war in existence to convince that fucking asshole that he lords over fine people who are worthy of his love.
Aaron Perez
The industrialization thing was good, but what wasn't was the fact that he was a paranoid power-hungry fucker who undermined his country in his attempts to solidify his power. The 1938 purges and his blatant disregard for the many people warning him of the impending German invasion more than make up for his modernization efforts when it came to preparation for the war.
Aiden Price
Did you ever consider they might have been better off under German rule?
Cameron Hernandez
>It took winning the biggest war in existence to convince that fucking asshole that he lords over fine people who are worthy of his love. Good. Many leaders praised their people for mediocrity
Chase Thompson
see below
"It took winning the biggest war in existence to convince that fucking asshole that he lords over fine people who are worthy of his love."
Not only that but this is after the purge of thousands of competent military officers who showed the slightest deviation in their politics. Stalin was an evil robot.
Jack Hall
>3697410 You should really read Stalin's speeches, they are quite nice. 100% logical, without any emotion. He says EXACTLY what needs to be said without saying even 1 word too much or not enough. He gets straight to the point. No appealing to emotions or unnecessary pathos like Hitler (which is not to say Hitler's speeches aren't brilliant in their own way). He realistically says how the situation is, how the situation could and must be and how to get from point A to point B. I can see why the allies trusted him. There are some on Youtube I believe.
People have this false image that he was a dumb brute who relied only on brutality like a caveman, but he was also quite intellectual and even wrote good-tier poetry in his youth.
The abuse of his father really fucked him up. Don't be so sure, that you wouldn't do the same if given absolute power. Your garden-variety psycho next doors could be even worse than Hitler if given the opportunity, the thing is almost nobody is.
The problem isn't so much Stalin, it is human nature. If you think you are god AND everyone treats you like a god, then the boundaries of normal morality disappear and the only boundary left is your imagination and of course you are always right, because you are god.
Read the book "Crowds and power". The secret why dictators kill their own people is simple: As long as their people allow themselves to be killed, it means they are obedient, as long as they are obedient the dictator can sleep nicely. It's like OCD.
Daniel Hill
>People have this false image that he was a dumb brute who relied only on brutality like a caveman, but he was also quite intellectual and even wrote good-tier poetry in his youth.
Yep, the interview with HG Wells shows Stalin was incredibly intelligent. The idea he was dumb also comes from the fact he had a thick Georgian accent which to Russians basically made him sound like a Southern Hillbilly.
Tyler Reed
>Not an argument Not an argument.
Wyatt Phillips
Hmm...I'll take a look on that book. I just think the reputation of Stalin is far overblown in comparison to the almost irreparable damage done to Russia.
If you think of the number of russian men killed in the last century, it's a genetic disaster that's still ongoing. Russia won't recover from the 20th century until the 22nd century. Unless they actively promote a breeding program that resonates enough to actually introduce new (white/european) blood.
Cooper Thomas
I agree. How ironic, that only eugenics can save Russia when they fought so vehemently against this shit in the 20th century. If you look at the 20th century you could really get the impression that it was a conspiracy to kill as many Russians as possible. Really, really grim, but maybe not the worst disaster this country faced. Napoleon, Poles standing in their fucking capital, Mongols, MAD... what didn't Russia experience?
The problem today? The moral foundation of the Russian nation. It is severely damaged. You are talking about a country where HIV,drug, pedo, suicide, murder,crime -rates are high for almost 2 decades and the trust in their fellow men and government low. Parenting in the Western sense is basically non-existent in Russia except in educated families, which is rare, not because Russians are dumb, but because educated people leave the country. There is a seriously disgusting cult of hedonism in Russia, which is even worse than in the West.
Only a good economy can convince the people to fuck like rabbits to save the motherland. Only way I can see is to re-awaken the patriotic feelings of WW2, but propaganda is probably already at a high and it does nothing. Also having a strong population could endanger the wealth of some oligarchs. That's where dictators and oligarchs differ. Dictators want a strong population, oligarchs want it to have as weak as possible, because the death of the nation will be wellt long after they're gone.
But back to the eugenics stuff. There are more than 1 billion chinks, more than 1 billion blacks, more than 1 billion indians, maybe 700 million Euros, but only 140 million Russians, if you substract muslims etc... it's maybe not even 100, and they have to protect the biggest territory on earth. It's insanity.
Even with a good economy, without controlled immigration Russia will die.
Logan Moore
>62 million dead >good
t.commie
Logan White
Imagine what all those people could have been. Russia’s culture was so rich in the 1800s. Tchaikovsky. Dostoevsky. Tolstoy. Imagine if it was allowed to progress on along with the rest of Europe. We’ve always been intertwined. Communism ruined that
Jacob Taylor
It might even have been 85 million.
Alexander Taylor
>Imagine what all those people could have been Fodder for Imperial Russia.
>Russia’s culture was so rich in the 1800s. Shame it became stagnant under in the 20th century.
>Imagine if it was allowed to progress on along with the rest of Europe. The Tsar refused to allow progress in the country.
>Communism ruined that Communism killed what was already in its death throes. Nothing could have changed that.
Nathaniel Peterson
It's 100 million.
Logan Brown
Yes, I'm sure Stalin killed 1/3 of the whole country. What a nonsense. Funny how Russia lost more people between 1989 and 2017 than between 1926 and 1959.
Oliver Sullivan
>Stalin killed everyone in the entire Soviet Union despite three major wars and census statistics showing an annual increase of 1.6% across his reign
Grayson Gutierrez
>Communism ruined that Good fucking way of saying Germans, you brain dead retard. Germans invented and even financed communism and they also invented NS. Both ideologies ended up killing more Russians than all other Russians died of unnatural causes combined in their 1000 year long-history. Anglos were never THAT evil, despite being Russias rival. Germany is pretty much the only reason why Russia's genepool was damaged like no other in human history.
Next time when you complain about Canada and wish for a better neighbor, wish fucking again, because there are neighbors which come straight out of fucking hell and they will bring hell right inside your country.
Charles Stewart
Sorry with "brain-dead retard". I overreacted. I agree with the rest of your comment.
Communism is good for turning a poor country into a military powerhouse. Literally the only thing it is good for, but there still no better solution. But Russia wouldn't even have needed to do that shit if Germany didn't try to wipe them out every time it got the chance.
Josiah Diaz
It's not amazing. I'd really recommend Khlevniuk's New Biography of the Dictator, which unlike Montefiore relies on evidence rather than hearsay and is an academic text rather than a pop non-fiction book.
You can find both on libgen.io I think
Landon Sanders
And Mao perhaps as many as 300 million according to this website I've read.
