The Gulag

>less than a year into a Republican Administration
>4chanis already going back to being economically far-left

>the oppression of kulaks was pure propaganda!
>but they deserved the oppression they didn't receive!

>Keep in mind all the people the US has genocided over the years.
Such as?

No, I'm saying that "everyone went to the gulag" is bullshit. Kulaks should have been shot right in the head. Completely engineered famine.

Stalin... easy on sending people to the Gulags.

>Solzhenitsyn
>capitalist

He was basically purged in the West after he went after liberal capitalism just as harshly as he had come after Soviet communism.

He was a traditionalist Orthodox Christian who ended his life defending Putin.

>/pol/ rambles on about the Holocaust never happening
>also believes, without a doubt, that Stalin killed 60 million

Engineered by the Soviet government who deprived the producers of their means of production, and gave it to laypeople who didn't know how to farm. Lysenko wasn't a kulak.

>/leftypol/ rambles on about Stalin's death toll being exaggerated
>also believes, without a doubt, that Hitler gassed 11 million people

literally this

you got meme'd OP.

What is the best version? I've seen multiple versions on Amazon. Not sure which to get.

I've read the unabridged version. GA is very loosely out together and could benefit from a judicious abridgement.

That being said the other user is right that there are a lot of sketchy publishers on Amazon and other online consignment retailers, although it's nothing new. I once accidentally bought a version of a book that turned out to be only "Volume 1" of the complete work and printed on 8.5x11" paper.

Putin is a ZOG puppet, same Chabad Lubavitch handlers as Trump.

45 years later, the Soviet Union doesn't even exists anymore, and yet this book still makes leftists butthurt.

Nobody really gives a fuck about the Holocaust on /leftypol/, yet /pol/ is always parroting MUH VICTIMS OF COMMUNISM.

Cool. Got a recommended version?

/pol/ are ukranian bydlo and NATO catamites. like the jews, they will always try to extort you with their phony hollacost.

>cripple your entire nation's agriculture with collectivisation
>reduce the breadbasket of the east to the point where hol-hols have to eat each other

"I bet the kulaks did this"

Soviets tried to feed millions of people.

Kulaks burned and destroyed food that could've fed millions

This is the Soviets fault because???

>muh private property kulaks have the right to destroy tons of food because muh NAP!!!!

You need seriously re-evaluate your positions on morals and human ethics if you think causing millions of people to starve is acceptable behavior.

Because nobody should be forced to give their food and fruits of their labor away.

Nice conspiracy theory you fucking retard.

do you also believe in wide spread "industrial wrecking" from 1922-42?

not that it matter because you are just LARPing as a tankie for (you)s

The Kulaks forced other peasants to work for them following the Stolypin reform and even if they didn't it's okay to you to destroy enough food to feed millions while there's a fucking famine going on?

What are you a fucking child you dumb faggot? This isn't taking your ball and going home you dumb faggot, this causing mass starvation you dumb faggot. Stop being a dumb faggot and understand that your dumb faggot concept of morality is only for dumb faggots like you....because you're a dumb faggot.

>needing to feel superior to the USSR
>after its collapse

>have your entire livelihood taken away from you by people who don't know how to do your job
>a few of these uneducated peasants, responding to fact that their lives were destroyed, committed acts of "sabotage"
>Soviets use this as propaganda post hoc in order to justify the dekulakization that had already occurred

It's not a conspiracy theory it's undisputed history dumb faggots, the Kulaks destroyed most of their food dumb faggots. No one argues with this. Stop being such dumb faggots and google it because you won't read a book on it dumb faggot.

are you forgetting the native Americans and two atomic bombs?
Also the Indonesian mass killings if you try to meme your way out of the first two.

Actually the Kulaks took over the mir after other peasants had THEIR property seized and were forced into servitude. So Kulaks didn't exactly dindu nuffin.

Even if it was who cares? If the entire world was going to explode but all you had to do was steal a candy bar would you do it? Justify it. It violates the NAP, at which point does it become okay to break the NAP?

>tfw ywn experience glorious soviet motherland

youtube.com/watch?v=Vd7EjvDHwQw

The mass starvation wasn't the result of kulak sabotage, you fucking idiot. They sabotaged a small percentage of the crops. The problem was the horribly mishandled agricultural production that was being carried out by people who knew nothing about agriculture.

Also, Chile is doing better than it's ever done under its current neoliberal economy.

>jus google it

ultima ratio cinaedorum

lol is this a joke? You're kidding....you can't be this unaware of global events. The USA is the biggest terrorist in the world the rest of the world hates us and it's not "cuz we gots dem dere freedumbs and deys dont cletus"

>Native Americans
cultural genocide, but the number killed was actually quite small. Our founding fathers were fond of Natives, and wanted them to intermarry with whites.

>two atomic bombs
Act of war. Don't be ridiculous.

>Indonesian
We didn't carry it out, we basically just looked the other way while it happened.

bud.. lay off the Howard Zinn. The Iraq war was completely justified.

>The Iraq war was completely justified.
on a scale of 1 to 10, how jewish are you?

Not all neocons are Jewish, despite what /pol/ says

Is Veeky Forums basically just /leftypol/ now? I mean when people start denying the deaths of people in the soviet union you really have to wonder

>The Iraq war was completely justified.
How was it justified?

Saddam had control over too much oil, which meant that his murderous and expansionist regime couldn't be economically isolated like North Korea.

> In the first two months of 1930, peasants killed millions of cattle, horses, pigs, sheep, and goats,

Not a small percentage that's patently false. How did they mismanage it? Please tell me because when people say the Soviet Union failed because of "collectivization" and "muh socialism don't work" it's the equivalent of saying "my car doesn't work because it doesn't function properly and doesn't do what it is supposed to". You're not giving anyone an actual fucking answer because you don't have one. One of the problems with so called "mismanaging" the economy was poor weather conditions experienced fucking globally, also a massive population spike due to a drastic reduction in infant mortality and an increased life expectancy.

I have a feeling you're going to argue something like " derr yeah soviets failed because they mismanaged the fact that people were gonna live instead of die as much". The Soviet Union turned a fucking third world shithole with 99% illiteracy into one of the largest world super powers FUCKING TWICE in less than 40 years. When doing that kind of economic development of course you're going to have problems Jesus Christ they weren't perfect.

HAHAHHA he did his worst murdering while allied with the United States you dumb faggot. Are you seriously denying American genocides? That's like Holocaust Denial levels of stupidity. Hey everybody get a load of this dumb faggot and how fucking susceptible to propaganda he is HAHAHAHAHHAHA

>How did they mismanage it?
Lysenko

The fact that you can look at Stalin's promotion of his pseudo-science and not see that as mismanagement is a good indication that you aren't arguing in good faith.

>The Soviet Union turned a fucking third world shithole with 99% illiteracy into one of the largest world super powers
Neoliberal economies are doing a very good job of achieving that in the third world as we speak

the american empire must be destroyed

Lysenko wasn't in charge of the entire Soviet economy fucktard.

Neoliberalism has been a fucking disaster for the third world.

>he did his worst murdering while allied with the United States
I don't get this line of reasoning. Somehow we're not allowed to do something good because we once did something bad? We're not allowed to correct mistakes by breaking toxic alliances?

It's like the people who think they're smart by pointing out that America supported the Mujahideen, as if that was synonymous with supporting al Qaeda.

>cultural genocide, but the number killed was actually quite small. Our founding fathers were fond of Natives, and wanted them to intermarry with whites.
You're a special type of retard, aren't you?
>Act of war. Don't be ridiculou
An unnecessary act of extreme violence during a war that was practically over. For all the shit that gets flung over Dresden, there's still no debate on whether a quarter of a million civilians should have been wiped off the face of the earth or not.
>We didn't carry it out, we basically just looked the other way while it happened.
So America was just morally responsible for it, got it. What a wonderful nation.

>neoliberalism has been a disaster for the third world
You're a massive retard if you believe this

It wasn't correcting a mistake how naive are you? Saddam didn't do what the USA wanted and we took him out it's that simple. There wasn't anything noble about it stop being an apologist for the American Empire.

We're talking about agriculture here, and Lysenkoism dominated Soviet agriculture until the mid-60s. Soviets promoted this pseudoscience while executing literally thousands of real biologists who understood genetics and were able to ensure healthier yields.

>2017
>defending the irrelevant ideology of a collapsed state that now only edgy children adhere to

Why would anyone feel the need to do this?

>there's still no debate on whether a quarter of a million civilians should have been wiped off the face of the earth or not.
Literally the first debate I participated in school was on the ethics of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This issue is taught in American schools as being at best morally ambiguous.

>So America was just morally responsible for it, got it. What a wonderful nation.
So Churchill is morally responsible for Stalin's crimes because he begrudgingly used him as an ally against Nazism?

I read the Harper & Row 1974 unabridged version in three volumes translated by Thomas Whitney. It's the only version I've read and I have no familiarity with other versions or abridgements.

No Pax Americana means that another great nation will fill its seat and perpetuate its own values across the globe. What are the contenders? The EU is in shambles. We're looking at Russia or China. Good luck with that.

Hmmm so you mean it dominated during both the worst and best times of the Soviet Union......

really activates the almonds

> This issue is taught in American schools
>American schools

>This issue is taught in American schools as being at best morally ambiguous.
Oh wow, two nuclear bombs is okay then.
>So Churchill is morally responsible for Stalin's crimes because he begrudgingly used him as an ally against Nazism?
That's no equivalence considering the US government was in a position to easily intervene, chose not to, and chose instead to supply economic and military assistance for the sole purpose of continuing the genocide.

This still leaves the native american genocide, which was not simply "cultural" given the history of disastrous forced migrations and outright massacres purported by the US government.

What does that have to do with the fact the the US overthrows democratically elected officials all the time and replaces them with brutal dictators?

>For all the shit that gets flung over Dresden, there's still no debate on whether a quarter of a million civilians should have been wiped off the face of the earth or not

are you kidding? have you seen what the alternative plan was?

>Operation Downfall

a d-day style invasion of the home islands that was expected to cause up to 500,000 US casualties and would have likely included use of nuclear weapons against japanese troops if they dug in like they did at Manila(which was the stalingrad of the far east)

bare in mind the Battle of Okinawa(which is tiny compared with Japan proper) caused 14,009 Allied deaths and 77,417 Japanese deaths as well as killing nearly half the civilian population(149,000 killed out of roughly 300,000)

What does that have to do with the Kulaks? They still destroyed most of their fucking food.

Japan's legitimate means to continue the war was completely severed by US involvement, and economically isolating Japan would have led to its near immediate surrender or collapse. The US was pushing a swift and indescribably bloody end to the war to extend its newfound imperialistic goals in the far east before the Soviets could turn their attention to that front.

>only one person responds to op's question
>the other 70 posts is a proxy squabble between different camps of /pol/ colonizers

You underestimate the Japanese spirit, they still place some very high protections on their farmers to this day. Anyway, I think that the US could've at least announced that if Japan didn't surrender they'd be getting the nuke.

>Oh wow, two nuclear bombs is okay then.
I don't think it's okay. But it's not a black and white issue. You think Operation Downfall wouldn't have lead to unbelievable, Eastern-front levels of casualties? Be rational.

>That's no equivalence considering the US government was in a position to easily intervene
Churchill wasn't in a position to intervene when he decided to give in to Soviet pressure to repatriate the POWs? Of course he was, but he understood that the battle against Nazism and for European stability were more important concerns. America held a similar line that the battle contra Soviet domination was more important than anything else. It was mistaken, and it lead to being America willing to support anyone as long as they were anti-Soviet, but it's not the same as commuting the crimes yourself.

>which was not simply "cultural" given the history of disastrous forced migrations and outright massacres purported by the US government.
You do realize that Native Americans killed thousands of white Americans in raids, right? We talk about about the 150 Natives killed at Wounded Knee, but for some reason don't say much about the 800 white civilians killed by Indians during the Dakota War.

>economically isolating Japan would have led to its near immediate surrender or collapse

japan was already basically isolated from about late 43 onwards when 75% merchant fleet was destroyed with no replacement and the blockade around the home islands was almost total

american intelligence pointed at the necessity of Downfall. given the fight to the death imperial fanaticism seen from New Guinea to Okinawa it wasn't unreasonable to assume that soldiers on the mainland would hold out food and supplies be damned for as long as the emperor demanded(japanese troops on borneo etc. fought to the very last man even with no food and little ammo)

The famine lasted for so long because they couldn't grow food. They couldn't grow food because they killed their farmers and biologists in order to pursue some fantasy that denied the existence of genes.

Man you know what, you're right, instead of burning 20k Japs in nuclear hellfire in a few days, we should've just starved like a million of them.

fucking retard

>the Iraq War was completely justified
Oh fuck off, the Neocons are nothing more than the rearguard of the left, with their idiotic faith in universal implementation of democracy. Doesn't help that many of them are former leftists, too.

I don't think operation downfall would have ever taken place.
> It was mistaken, and it lead to being America willing to support anyone as long as they were anti-Soviet, but it's not the same as commuting the crimes yourself.
Even when you are supplying military training and economic assistance in order to continue a genocide program?
You think it would have gotten to that point, double nigger?

Saddam wasn't exactly democratically elected, bud.

Yes, it would've.

The allies were seeking unconditional surrender and the Japanese weren't gonna let that happen. The 1 million number is probably a little exaggerated but it would've most likely been at least double the number of people killed in hiroshima and nagasaki.

Ah, so one tribe of natives killing white people justifies up to 25,000 dying in a single forced migration alone. Got it, friend.

Trail of Tears death tolls range from 800-4000. 25,000 is a made up number.

Saddam was a patriot and a hero to his people. Like Gaddhafi's, Saddam's only real crime was standing up against the Rotschild controlled federal reserve petro dollar world order, which is of course a Jewish World Order

So how many people in this thread have actually read the book?

25,000 is drawn from disparities in population reports.The lowest legitimate estimate I've seen is 2,000.

Not defending our actions in Indonesia, i'm simply drawing a moral distinction between supporting an awful regime in order to repel the expanding influence of another awful regime, and the act of genocide per se.

>it would've most likely been at least double the number of people killed in hiroshima and nagasaki.

most likely

the liberation of Manila killed 100,000 flip civilians and every single japanese defender

now imagine Tokyo, Yokohama and Kyoto

Which Ward Churchill book did you get your numbers from?

The Indonesian communist party was a valid political party, and the coup attempt, although blamed on the communists, was conducted by a group within the Indonesian armed forces. There is no distinction because there was a conscious acknowledgment of genocide, and a willingness to participate in said genocide through various means of support.

You are speaking of hypothetical. Downfall was a completely hypothetical scenario that was still in its planning stages by the time the war was over. That still doesn't justify two atomic bombs; especially considering the draining effect of ongoing firebombing campaigns (which are questionable in their own right), just on the premise that it might have been worse. The fact that the Postdam declaration was even considered at all by the top brass is a testament to Japan's position at that point. The argument of stiff resistance at Okinawa proving some type of resolve is negligible considering the Japanese strategy at Okinawa was to use it as a "sacrificial stone" to stave off Allied ideas of invasion. The Imperial government did not care for Okinawan civilians, Ryukyuin people, as much as they did those on the home island.
Rather than "it definitely would have happened", I think there is significant doubt that Downfall would have occurred at all had the atomic bombs not have been dropped. Again, it was a race against the soviets for influence in the area that led to such extreme ignorance of human life.

The PKI were a Soviet-style absolutist party. They weren't arguing for plurality and liberalism, they wanted to overthrow the government. They had reasons for wanting to do so, but they weren't freedom fighters.

>There is no distinction because there was a conscious acknowledgment of genocide
Nice moral absolutism. You people commit the worst forms of equivocation when it comes to Soviet crimes, but then apply an ethical standard to America that no other powerful nation in the history of the world has been able to abide by.

...

Because its old enough for commies to palm it off as make believe and revise the history of communism as though it wasn't even bad.

I understood this reference. Ebin meme user XD

>Communist intellectuals.

>Stalin only murdered some of the people that are attributed to him!
>The Soviet Union was only moderately oppressive!
Holy shit this is embarrassing

My favorite one is when they push lower death estimates as some kind of victory.

>Historians working during the Cold War, without access to Soviet archives, estimate 10 million deads during the height of Stalinism
>a few archives are opened after the fall of the Soviet Union and there are 3 million deaths recorded (and that's from the archives that were opened, the KGB archives, the most interesting ones, weren't and will probably never be)

CHECK MATE PORKY, STALIN ONLY KILLED 3 MILLION PEOPLE, NOT 10 MILLIONS, THAT MEANS HE DINDU NUFFIN

And then they go on to complain about some South American junta that executed a few thousand seasoned guerrilla fighters.

Commies are fucking demented.

Everything they say is revisionism. Solzhenitsyn was pretty passionately a Marxist for most of his life until the experience in the gulags.

>The vast majority would have been hardcore criminals.

Just revise my shit up please.

The thing is, this isn't just the commie subreddit. There was a post either on r/history or r/philosophy expressing a similar sentiment and was upvoted by like 10 people. And these are the ostensibly academic boards.

I feel like becoming an unironic eurasian fifth columnist just to spite the neocons. i like that orthodox industrial endtimes aesthetic

youtube.com/watch?v=v5fw4hMGHFA