I really like Stalin but I don't know enough about his politics to call myself a Stalinist

I really like Stalin but I don't know enough about his politics to call myself a Stalinist.

Which books do I read to change that?

Other urls found in this thread:

marxism.halkcephesi.net/Ludo Martens/
stalinsocietypk.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/another-view-of-stalin1.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
marxists.org/archive/mattick-paul/1947/bolshevism-stalinism.htm
rationalwiki.org/wiki/Stalin_apologetics
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Then how the fuck can you like him if you don't know his politics?

kek, good work

Poo by James Daley is pretty illuminating

here wait, gimme a second

You should probably just kill yourself, my man!

Read some stuff by anti Stalinists
Read some stuff by Stalinists
Watch documentaries which call him a hero
Watch documentaries which call him a pig

Stalin did all he could do but power+illness ruined him and he started to pervert it. In his time though, he couldn't be more lenient without taking huge risks. He did what he had to do

this desu, and no one is a "Stalinist", the term is Leninist

>that jewish nose

Jesus Christ get a nosejob already

Another view of Stalin by Ludo Martens, absoultly buttdevastates liberals every time

marxism.halkcephesi.net/Ludo Martens/
stalinsocietypk.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/another-view-of-stalin1.pdf

I think you are trolling, OP, but in case you didn’t know Stalin was a mass-murderer. Just look for one of the great crimes for which he is responsible: the holodomor:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

Now, I am not saying that he is bad because he was a communist leader; I am not just being brainwashed by the American leaders (for I know very well that the U.S. supported several dictatorships around the world in the XX century, so they cant really pose as moral heroes). To be honest I even think that one should be aware that the term “communism” is many times used to vilify and demonize social programs that have nothing to do with authoritarian policies. So it is that a lot of times welfare and free Universities or free Healthcare are seen, by stupid people, as “Communism”, as if the political leaders who supported such programs would soon turn out to be new tyrants like Stalin or Kim Il-sung.

But you should know that Stalin was indeed a cruel man; I don’t think he can be an example to anyone (well, maybe he had some capabilities in administration and war and etc., but in the end he was a cruel and cold-hearted tyrant).

He just seems like a cool guy.

You can't be a soft cunt when you're lifting the first socialist country in the world out of the dark ages and making it a world power in a few decades, user. Got to break some eggs for that glorious omelette.

He was a fucking legend.

>Holodomor

Ayy lmao, literally nobody but a bunch of butthurt hohols believes in that shit.

The Gulag Archipelago by Alexander Solzhenitsyn.
Everything you need on the man.

Are you the kind of person to dismiss all of Hitler's work just because of a few camps?

Demons, by Dostoyevsky
ahead of its time

The Gulag Archipelago goes beyond just a few camps. It's a detailed analysis of the entire legal system and history of the Soviet criminal law.
I dismiss Hitler because his book is fucking retarded and Nazism is far too leftists for me.

>Got to break some eggs for that glorious omelette.

And what if you and your family are some of those eggs?

I've never read anywhere that he killed 60 million. If you take the holodomor at face value it was probably closer to 10.

>Every atrocity never happened
>Except Rwanda because niggers

marxists.org/archive/mattick-paul/1947/bolshevism-stalinism.htm

We would be model citizens.

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Stalin_apologetics

>rationalwiki

Excellent rebuttal.

Not him, but rationalwiki is a terribly written and very biased source. I would not consider it a good source of information.

for example, the Stalin article starts with
>"Stalin apologetics is actually a thing."

>terribly written
I linked to the article for the points it makes, not the quality of the writing.

>very biased
All sources are biased—rationalwiki is just open about it.

You should try their articles on Aquinas.

But modern liberals don't even like Marx, much less Lenin or Stalin - they're only slightly to the left of neocons.

...

This is the worst political chart I have ever seen. And that is saying something.

>Which books do I read to change that?

For the anti stailin view read works by Trotsky like "revolution betrayed"

For pro Stalin works read anything by Grover Furr who is probably the only decent academic who writes on him positively

trolled hard

>For pro Stalin works read anything by Grover Furr who is probably the only decent academic who writes on him positively
But do so in the full awareness that Furr's area of expertise is Medieval English literature and nothing else.

This is something to be aware of but it doesn't discredit his work.

someone should cut your tongue out and shoot you in the head

you don't deserve free speech, you don't deserve anything

You might be surprised how many idiots with no experience in politics actually take charts like that as being valid

calm down leon