あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]senorjohhnyDonetsk/Mt.Augusta 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (25子コメント)

implying stalin was bad

[–]novaceasarQueen of Kaiserin 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (23子コメント)

Implying he didn't kill millions of his own people

[–]DydomiteDirector of Haven | Wrote Spawnbook 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (21子コメント)

He's just being edgy

[–]senorjohhnyDonetsk/Mt.Augusta 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (19子コメント)

no so there was first deportation and ethnic cleansing which was not so cool, like 3 million people moved around the ussr. can't answer for that, that's just shitty. but they didn't all die, i think around 1.75 or 2 million lived.

then there's gulags, which ran through 15 million prisoners over 30 years. also not all of them died, most of them survived.

then there's the 1931 famine which cost the lives of 5 million and in 1947 was the last big one which cost the lives of 1 million.

adding all these up i get 7-8 million actually died as a result of his laws, 15 million worked through gulags.

it's not too bad, could be a lot worse. the famine shit was due to collectivization of agriculture, it was necessary for rapid industrialization. if any other country tried to industrialize at the same pace that russia did they'd feel roughly the same effects.

edit: i'd like to point out that everyone starts to circlejerk about stalin and is like "dae he killed like 40-60 million people". if you say shit like that, fuck you. go fucking read.

and it's not like this shit even affected the outside world. "we survived stalin" mfw

[–]DydomiteDirector of Haven | Wrote Spawnbook 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (2子コメント)

You didn't say 'Stalin isn't as bad as people think, a lot of deaths were due to economic inefficiencies instead of plain ill-intent' though, did you? You said 'Stalin did nothing wrong' like an edgy twat.

Also if you think the Holodomor was just an innocent by-product of poor economic policy then you're a fucking idiot. Stalin hated Ukrainians and their penchant for independence and he's got a long history of being as brutal as necessary to consolidate his own power. His enactment of "anti-terror" laws that allowed him to kill off potential opposition in the political and military spheres were alone 'something wrong' and it's idiotic to think that somehow this didn't apply to the threat of ukranian nationalism. That's exactly what happened in the trials for the supposed 'SVU' (which we know now didn't exist) where prominent Ukranian members of organizations out of direct government control (Academics, the Church, and rural co-ops) were tried under similar circumstances to hinder Ukraine's intelligencia and stop Ukrainization. It's pretty blatant given private communications and the word of other party members that have come out since then that he viewed the peasantry as the base of the nationalist movement and as such sought to abolish it.

Also don't forget that a lot of that 'famine' was due to his anti-ukranian policies targetting the kulaks in order to abolish them as a bourgeois class even though they made less money than most state-industry factory workers. Yeah no fucking shit there's going to be a famine when you systematically detain, deport, and overburden with taxes (like 84% of their annual salary was taxed, and the ruble had 1/6th the spending power in rural sectors) the entirety of the Ukrainian agricultural industry. And then once the actual famine was happening what did they do? They took away the passports of the kulaks and ukranian peasantry, to ensure they can't leave. They also not only completely denied the existence of the famine to the other nations but flat-out refused humanitarian aid to be delivered. They also took away what food they already had.

It's got nowhere near as much to do with industrialization as it does to do with Stalin's horrific totalitarian approach to managing the USSR. None of what happened in Ukraine was economic necessity, it was his own soviets stronk wet dream that caused him to prioritize power over the people above the actual people. An attitude that shows in many other aspects of stalin's policies.

I don't even know why it is that you unleashed your weird stalin apologist rant on me that shows your disdain for arguments I didn't even fucking make. If I had to wager a guess as to why though I'm thinking it's because you're some immature contrarian tweenaged ruski that likes to go around saying blatantly stupid shit so that once people call you out on it you can unleash upon them your vast collection of dumbed-down knowledge on Stalin's policies that you got from his wikipedia article. You go fucking read.

[–]senorjohhnyDonetsk/Mt.Augusta 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You didn't say 'Stalin isn't as bad as people think, a lot of deaths were due to economic inefficiencies instead of plain ill-intent' though, did you? You said 'Stalin did nothing wrong' like an edgy twat.

mad

Also if you think the Holodomor was just an innocent by-product of poor economic policy then you're a fucking idiot. Stalin hated Ukrainians and their penchant for independence and he's got a long history of being as brutal as necessary to consolidate his own power. His enactment of "anti-terror" laws that allowed him to kill off potential opposition in the political and military spheres were alone 'something wrong' and it's idiotic to think that somehow this didn't apply to the threat of ukranian nationalism. That's exactly what happened in the trials for the supposed 'SVU' (which we know now didn't exist) where prominent Ukranian members of organizations out of direct government control (Academics, the Church, and rural co-ops) were tried under similar circumstances to hinder Ukraine's intelligencia and stop Ukrainization. It's pretty blatant given private communications and the word of other party members that have come out since then that he viewed the peasantry as the base of the nationalist movement and as such sought to abolish it.

Yeah, this was necessary for unification of the USSR and to make up a national identity. After this it was possible to develop rapid industrialization.

Also don't forget that a lot of that 'famine' was due to his anti-ukranian policies targetting the kulaks in order to abolish them as a bourgeois class even though they made less money than most state-industry factory workers. Yeah no fucking shit there's going to be a famine when you systematically detain, deport, and overburden with taxes (like 84% of their annual salary was taxed, and the ruble had 1/6th the spending power in rural sectors) the entirety of the Ukrainian agricultural industry. And then once the actual famine was happening what did they do? They took away the passports of the kulaks and ukranian peasantry, to ensure they can't leave. They also not only completely denied the existence of the famine to the other nations but flat-out refused humanitarian aid to be delivered. They also took away what food they already had.

If they actually refused aid that's fucked up, but I'm pretty sure that Stalin wasn't that crazy.

It's got nowhere near as much to do with industrialization as it does to do with Stalin's horrific totalitarian approach to managing the USSR. None of what happened in Ukraine was economic necessity, it was his own soviets stronk wet dream that caused him to prioritize power over the people above the actual people. An attitude that shows in many other aspects of stalin's policies.

Pretty sure industrialization was still the primary motivating factor.

I don't even know why it is that you unleashed your weird stalin apologist rant on me that shows your disdain for arguments I didn't even fucking make. If I had to wager a guess as to why though I'm thinking it's because you're some immature soviet-obsessive tweenaged ruski that likes to go around saying blatantly stupid shit so that once people call you out on it you can unleash upon them your vast collection of dumbed-down knowledge on Stalin's policies that you got from his wikipedia article. You go fucking read.

Because people nowadays are becoming more and more misinformed due to the growing anti-Rus bias. Everything becomes hyperbolized and blown out of proportion. My entire family and ancestry is Russian. My great grandparents lived through the purges and the gulags and collectivization, through the cold war, through the collapse, and it's fair to say that a personal, first-person viewpoint can weigh at least a little bit of merit over most others opinions. My great grandparents on my mother's mother's side were Ingermanlandian Finns, they suffered horrible atrocities. My father's grandparents lived through both of the Wars. A grandfather on my dad's side was a survivor of the Eastern Russian front against the Japanese in WW2 and survived land mines, another was a Ukrainian partisan for the USSR, others yet again Ukrainian and Belorussian farmers and mechanics, my grandmothers nurses, my grandparents scientists and civil servants, my aunts and uncles military officers and politicians, and my own parents scientists that lived through the biggest financial collapse that my people have ever seen, so don't go around fucking telling me that I need to go out and get learned. Privileged ass motherfucker.

[–]DydomiteDirector of Haven | Wrote Spawnbook 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, this was necessary for unification of the USSR and to make up a national identity. After this it was possible to develop rapid industrialization.

Not really, no. Plenty of places that do just fine without committing genocides against their own subjects. The Ukranization efforts were doing well before Stalin decided to go full oppressionist. He literally sacrificed a decent part of ukraine's economic efficiency to force cultural purity and outrageously tighten control over the area simply because that's how Stalin operates. He didn't make up a national identity, he just killed a bunch of people who didn't fit into it. Not enough to somehow make a national identity either - all that did was cause more tension with ukranians and terrorize them into submission to Stalin's rule.

If they actually refused aid that's fucked up, but I'm pretty sure that Stalin wasn't that crazy.

Yeah well it's true. I did some quick googling and here's a link I suppose. To quote:

"The Soviet Government refused to acknowledge to the international community the starvation in Ukraine and turned down the assistance offered by various countries and international relief organizations, including the International Committee of the Red Cross."

If that's too 'anti-RUS biased' for you and you need a truly credible source like Russia Today then just google Holodomor international aid or something.

Pretty sure industrialization was still the primary motivating factor.

Again, not really necessary. Also, not really enough to justify his actions even if it was.

Because people nowadays are becoming more and more misinformed due to the growing anti-Rus bias. Everything becomes hyperbolized and blown out of proportion.

Yes there's definitely anti-russian bias out there as is to be expected after the cold war and all. But they earned a lot of that through just doing shit things. Not going to say all of it, but you're literally defending the genocide of Ukranians right now. Looks a lot more like overly pro-russian bias on your part because you drink Russia's 'Everything the west says is propaganda!' cool-aid no different than how ISIS operates. When you start defending genocides that even most of modern Russia would be against (and hell even a lot of soviet russia - stalinism was terrible for shitloads of people) then maybe you ought to re-evaluate your own impartiality in this debate.

muh family is russia tho

Great, join the club. I'm of soviet descent too. Half the family from the eastern russian-speaking part of Ukraine (where I'm from as well) and the rest either in Russia or Belarus. Also all smart folks, served in the army, survived atrocities, and university educated. Had to live through the same shit your family probably did plus bonus points for still being in east Ukraine right now while Putin sticks his dick in it. Your heritage doesn't rewrite history and make defending horrific stalinist policies any better.

[–]immelol4Contact ChrisChrispie for enchanted Trade Deals 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (11子コメント)

The holocaust was greatly exaggerated, almost all deaths were due to typhus and the allies cutting off supply lines to the "death camps"

[–]RogueX7CFO of Hjaltland Enterprises 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Well you know those deaths could have been prevented if the holocaust never happened in the first place right? It's simple cause and effect In place here.

[–]immelol4Contact ChrisChrispie for enchanted Trade Deals 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (6子コメント)

The argument from the holocaust denying side would be that the death camps were all just labor/internment camps, which the allies used as well. Evidence of this would be that every camp liberated by the Americans was a labor/internment camp but every camp liberated by the soviets was alleged to be a death camp.

But I'm not actually making that argument, just think it's funny how people minimize or ignore tragedies that happened under systems that they want to believe worked but might be appalled at other people doing the same thing.

Why is a swastika more offensive than a hammer and sickle?

[–]ValehartMan of relatively no consequence. 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Why is a swastika more offensive than a hammer and sickle?

As a guess, perhaps because the swastika is associated more with systematic hatred of entire groups of people while the hammer and sickle is associated more with systematic oppression of just about everyone under the that particular system (sans those who ended up in the ruling elite I suppose).

[–]DydomiteDirector of Haven | Wrote Spawnbook 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Stalin and friends were nowhere near as vocal as Hitler when it came to denouncing certain minorities. Hitler pinned it on the Jews before his involvement in politics at all and the hatred was a lot more inspired by vengeance for Germany's economic tribulations before then. The soviets focused the blame on class divisions and systematic oppression of certain groups was still terrible but it wasn't an as cemented part of their rhetoric.

[–]FlaminiusMarcus_Flaminius | /r/MaesterAlliance 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why is a swastika more offensive than a hammer and sickle?

It really is a shame they aren't both considered equally offensive.

[–]SandFallsCentauri Triarch, Eastern Bloc Chair 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The swastika was/is mainly used by Nazis. The Hammer and Sickle is used currently by much more than Stalinists and his apologists.

[–]quicksilver991Poor reasoning is a pillar of the community -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Because of leftists.

[–]Glog_Frogmen/pol/itician, better now mods? 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You got redpilled by /pol/ man.

[–]immelol4Contact ChrisChrispie for enchanted Trade Deals 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I hate girls

[–]MarcAFKMaster of five hundred and ninety-seven ways to kill a lego-man. 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hitler wasn't a bad mad, he was just being edgy.

[–]LoginxGames☭"Yes, we get it. Stalin did bad shit" -Every Socialist Ever☭ 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I do hope you realize that shit like this is what gives most of the people on the server their hate of socialism. Please don't defend Stalin.

[–]Glog_Frogmen/pol/itician, better now mods? 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

He's pretty bad I guess, but he's not nearly as bad as you guys are saying!

[–]senorjohhnyDonetsk/Mt.Augusta 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

yeah pretty much

[–]Glog_Frogmen/pol/itician, better now mods? 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Still valid though. Misinformation is bad regardless the situation.

[–]Juz16🔒Now with less free speech! -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah dude, Stalin was pretty edgy.

[–]senorjohhnyDonetsk/Mt.Augusta 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

implying he did