Communists threw down the monarchy

...

>communists industrialized Russia from nothing
From an agrarian state with nearly no industry and absolutely no infrastructure, majority of the population of which were illiterate and impoverished, after a war that destroyed significant part of a workforse and economy.
>kulaks burned their own crops
Well, duh.
>holomodor didn't happen
It did happen. It was a hunger, typical for a backwater state such as Russia.
>people in the USSR had better living conditions than in the West
People in the West have always lived better than the Russians. During the Soviet times, however, they came closest to close the gap, and managed to get unique advantages in many fields: education, science, medicine, housing, nutrition, children wellbeing.

Holodomer and Kazakh famine best events in all of history tbqh

>From an agrarian state with nearly no industry and absolutely no infrastructure

Who was Sergey Witte and Stolypyn?

>Refute Basic historical facts
>Not pol gommies just suck muh

>Sergey Witte
A talented minister, whose (rather sensible) economic plan was derailed, just like any other attempt to reform or improve the Imperial Russia.
>Stolypyn
A prime minister, a mixed bag. A shitty guy overall, simply because he tolerated being overruled by Rasputin.

Overall, Witte's efforts resulted in minor and inconsequential results. The Communists did what was needed.

by 1914 Russia's industry was boomming and on track to becoming the World's most powerful country, fear of this was what cause Germany's jingoistic attitudes because they knew they had to break Russia now because in the future victory was impossible

Wow so you Telling me tsarist Russia had the most barebones level of industry that was shit tier compared to any other power how impressive

excellent post

still had bigger industry than Italy, Japan and USA, the only industry the Russian Empire was lacking was naval they were shit at that

>Japan no space for both industry and agriculture and no resorces for industry
>Italy much of the same expt add a small population and poor logistics
Russia had no excuse it was poor leadership and shitty serf culture

What is that comic?

This Godless Communism, it's well worth the read if only for it's subtle dialogue

>communists threw down the monarchy
Yeah, the february and october revolutions are different things.
>communists industrialized Russia from nothing
It wasn't from nothing, but the devastation in the war and revolutionary chaos was very significant. Moreover, the communists really did rapidly industrialoze Russia. Their education and infrastructure efforts were unparalleled in mass and scope.
>kulaks burned their own crops
Sounds like a lie.
>holomodor didn't happen
It did happen but didn't have the form of an intentional genocide on a national basis.
>people in the USSR had better living conditions than in the West
They didn't.

Never forget

fucking commies

>ukraine was imperialy reconquered
>ignoring that the ukranian peoples republic allied with poland to attack the RSFR

>only pol hates gommunism!
lol get fucked leftypol.

Is it true that sending all the problematics to Siberia was nothing new?
Was it really worse in the ussr? I mean yeah I get that the gulgag were a thing. it seems like an overall improvement from tsarist times

>It did happen but didn't have the form of an intentional genocide on a national basis.

The guy who came up with the word genocide, Raphael Lemkin, said it was a "classic example of Soviet genocide,"

uccla.ca/SOVIET_GENOCIDE_IN_THE_UKRAINE.pdf

We'll defeat them with prayer and caricatures don't worry

>they included "muppets most wanted" gulag into the picture

>nearly no industry and absolutely no infrastructure
This alone should disqualify you from having an opinion.

nazis BTFO!

Can you get some new images? I'm sick of the same 5 every time

I will when you actually get an argument other thank bitching about the nazi boogeyman

>communism works

>communists industrialized Russia from nothing

This one always gets me, especially after gommies talk about how big of role the working class played in the 1917 revolutions.

>slap offensive word on map of pro-Soviet country in ms paint
this is the power of far right...

Holy fuck, this is what Americ*ns actually believe...

the working class hardly existed outside of a few urban centers in the west like St Petersburg and Moscow so these aren't mutually exclusive, what sort of brainlet point are you trying to make? Do you think that Russia was as industrialized as the USSR was? That is retarded and ahistorical, Stalin's industrialization program is well documented, numerous westerners even took part in it and wrote books. Its objectively true that under Stalin the industrial output of the USSR increased exponentially. The Russian Empire was the most backwater country in Europe in 1917, but by the 50s the USSR was a nuclear armed superpower. How do you think this came about if not the industrialization of the country by the regime in power in the period between those years??? do you have some kind of mental deficiency?

Also pick a political philsophy to shit on. Syndicalism is nothing close to stalinism. It's not even gommunism ffs

I can understand their industry being bigger than Italy and Japan, which isn't exactly something to be proud of considering how small both are compared to Russia. But the fucking USA?

>>people in the USSR had better living conditions than in the West
no one claims that
but they definitely were better than under Imperial Russia after 1950

>the Russian Empire was the most backwater country in Europe in 1917

In 1913, Russia had the highest GDP of any European nation, higher than Britain, France, or Germany. Any reduction in GDP since then would have been a direct result of WW1 and the Civil War. It's true that Russia became more industrialized during Stalin's time in office, but the same results could have been achieved more quickly (and with a lot less bloodshed) if Lenin and Stalin hadn't dragged the country into a completely unnecessary civil war to begin with. Also, the point about nuclear weapons is fucking retarded. No country had nuclear weapons in 1917, so counting that against Russia is ludicrous.

so this...is the power...of gommunism

>Russian Empire had high export
>that means it wasn't literal shithole with most population being uneducated villagers who lived in poverty

The tsars might send someone unruly to a village in Siberia where they were free to live and move around, talk to the people, buy things, work jobs, and if you were from a decent social background you got an allowance. The security was so lax that you could simply walk back home, the entire idea was to remove you from places of influence like moscow and st. petersburg, the distance itself was the punishment.
The commies raped and murdered, slowly starved you out, worked you to death in labour camps, kept you confined and had ruthless guards to keep watch. Can't compare them.

What about per capita?

It had immense potential, the commies did nothing but cannabalize the country to build up industry that was not viable in anything but a closed and controlled market. Once communism was over the entire industrial effort went bankrupt over night.

>Walk back from Siberia
Once again Google is a far better place to ask for information than Veeky Forums
spartacus-educational.com/RUSsiberia.htm
They would send them to Siberia for something as small as panhandling without a permit, I read.

How the fuck is being an exporter a bad thing?

explain to me how Stalin had such a good time in Siberia and managed to just walk away 7 times in a row.

well too bad that loser tsar dragged Russia into European war and revolution happened, now you can only fantasize about what exactly would happen if X happened and not Y

I didn't say that?

I don't blame the Tzar, I blame Krenesky for not having enough of a spine to settle a peacedeal.

If you really want to know about USSR the CIA declassified many reports detailing the at most 8 to 10 person long sausage lines in Moscow and nonexistence of degeneracy.

Now compare the population of Russia to Germany and France in 1913. Proportionally Germany and France are performing better than Russia. I love reading on Russian economic development but Russia was still underdeveloped, roughly 3/4th of Russia's population was still agrarian, 50% of her industrial machinery had to be imported from outside and WW1 showed that Russia was fucked because it barely had any factories producing enough rifles and ammo.
Pic related, if we look at "industrial progress", Russia is laughably behind everyone, it was expanding greatly, yes, but it was still underdeveloped.

>It's Nicholas fault that Germany and Austria chimped out and invaded like 5 countries at once

I might as well dump a few things I've found while reading on Russia.

3/?

Someone actually screen capped my OG post. I feel honored.

This one's a nice one
4/?

Did he really have a good time?
Anyways I'm sure famous revolutionaries had alot of allies over there during those times. I don't honestly know about Stalins particular circumstances. I do know that what happened in the gulgag was nothing knew. That's not to say that I don't doubt that the magnitude of eviction to Siberia could have been stepped up under stalin. I'm sure that the systematic coldness of the red bureaucracy kept the gulags consistently shittier in Soviet times. As far as how bad it was I don't think that it got any worse under stalin. Just the scale was likely stepped up, don't really know that's an assumption.
Anyways i think the history of Russia is often down played as a factor in what made the Soviets such shitbags. It created the initial starting conditions for that totalitarian bureaucracy to give zero fucks about human rights.

I appear to have forgot to mention that most of Russia's exports were raw material or foodstuff, rather than something advanced like machine parts and of the sort but can't seem to find the fucking page right now. That's all I guess.

My point is that industralization would have occurred with or without Stalin. The idea that he was somehow necessary for Russia's economic development is simply wrong. Russia was already industrializing since the beginning of the 20th century, and this process would have continued just fine if it hadn't been interrupted by WW1 and the Civil War. There was no need to overthrow the government or install a dictator.

I agree but what seperates Bolshevik and Tsarist industrialisation is that Bolsheviks were more "interventionist" so to speak, Tsarist Russia tried to have this like "liberal" approach where they wanted to let it develop by herself with the help of protectionist policies and government investments which would allow Russian companies to become competitive later on (A complaint was that British folk were outcompeting the Russians). The Bolsheviks, I'd say, were not the reason why Russia industrialized , but from what I've gathered, they industrialized Russia faster than the Tsarists most likely would have due ot their incredibly aggressive and brutal approach of forcing villagers to do what they fucking want.
Also bear in mind Russia's industrialization was interrupted more than just by the civil war and WW1, you had the Russo-Japanese war, 1905 revolution and 1891 famine.

According to this industrial products made up only 8% of total exports, while food and food products alone made up 76%.
What book(s) did you get those pictures from?

Apparently the soviet gulags were actually quite friendly and humane to start with, prisoners and guards would fraternize, the food was alright, and the workload not paralyzing.
Stalin learned a lot from his trips to Siberia. His punishment was barely monitored by guards, they would talk and fraternize, visit the villages, they could write and eat and enjoy themselves. He did everything he could to dehumanize the gulags, to drain any last sliver of hope and pleasantness out of the system. People were fed in and broken down, when they reentered society if they survived their sentence they were too scared and weak to speak up or protest.
So you are definitely right about the okhrana and other tsarist agencies and methods laying the groundwork for later soviet terror, but they were refined into something unrecognizable.

>According to this industrial products made up only 8% of total export
...Yes, that was the point I was making. I said Russia's main exports were foodstuffs and raw materials, I even explicitly state:
>rather than something advanced like machine parts and of the sort
Now the specific books is joggy but the books I recall reading are:
"Russian economic development from Peter the Great to Stalin" - Blackwell
"Economic Development of Russia 1905-14" M. Miller
"Tsarist Economy 1850-1917" P. Gatrell
And the last book has faded but it had "Economic", "Soviet Union" and "2nd ed." in the title.

I think the last book I mentioned was "Soviet Economic Development 2nd ed." by Raymond Hutchings.

>...Yes, that was the point I was making. I said Russia's main exports were foodstuffs and raw materials, I even explicitly state:
I know, I was trying to back you up.
Thanks for the books.

Ah sorry, I thought you had misunderstood me. Fair enough, no problem for the books, if I can remember any more books I've read I will recommend. If you want to read about Foreigners and their effects on Russian economy I recommend "Studies in the Russian Economy before 1914" by Olga Crisp, it focuses more on the French and what they did with Russia's industry.
"Tsarist Economy" I'd say is the book you should start with, but if you can get your hands on "Economic Development of Russia 1905-1914" by M.Miller then that's a good start too, has a lot of statistical evidence, but it's stupidly expensive.
"Russia enters the twentieth century, 1894-1917" by Katkov is also a very fun read.

>holodomor didnt happen
You fucking jews are unbelievably evil. Is telling the truth to a nonjew simply impossible for your brain?

Besides Russia was fine.

In 1917, it wasn't really possible for Russia to make peace with Germany without also making huge territorial concessions. During the Bolshevik-German peace talks in Brest-Litovsk, Germany ended up making outrageous demands. Under the terms of this treaty, Russia would give up Poland, Finland, Belarus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukraine, all of which would become vassal states for the German Empire, ruled by German aristocrats appointed by the Kaiser. This territory constituted 25% of the Russian Empire's population. There is no reason to believe that the Provisional Government would have received terms any less harsh if they had initiated the peace process instead of the Bolsheviks.

That was probably because of the huge population. Most of the country still worked in agriculture.

The East was poorer even before communism.

Conditions improved vastly after 1956.

Czechoslovakia was richer than Austria in 1948.

And Czechoslovakia was richer than Portugal in 1938, 1948, 1989 and now

Yeah but Portugal is on the other side of the continent. Austria is a better comparison because they shared history and culture with Bohemia and Moravia for centuries and were more or less the same economically until communism happened. West and East Germany, or Finland and Estonia are good examples too.

spbp

>the nazi boogeyman
do you know what this word means? nazi savagery is well documented, no amount of edgy bluster will take that away

how does this change the fact that they were conquered and occupied?

>Tsarist Russia tried to have this like "liberal" approach
not in siberia it wasn't. nor was their financial wizardry (like most developing countries) and trade policy "liberal"

yeah. interestingly though I've read that the Russian Civil War truly broke out because of Brest Litovsk and the huge conservative nationalist chimp out when the treaty was made public. I wonder whether Kerensky signing a peace would have led to a similar crisis. In hindsight it might have benefitted him because the conservatives would become a boogieman for him to attack and redirect discontent against. alternatively, it might turn into a "stab in the back" myth that the nationalists could use to seize power if not immediately, then in the future like the Nazis did.

imagine unnironicaly bealiving this

Believing what?