| |
| Author | Message |
|---|
MisterRob
Joined: 21 Nov 2008
Posts: 79
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:06 pm Post subject: Was Stalin great? |
 |
| I am amazed to read in the Times (UK) that Stalin came 3rd in a recent Russian poll to find the greatest Russian of all time. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5409349.ece
I would be very interested to hear what people on this forum thought about this poll and their views on Stalin in particular.
С Новым Годом! | |
| Back to top | |
 |
alys
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 485
Location: Moscow, Russia
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 2:26 am Post subject: |
|
| Stalins theme is VEEERY complex.
No one could say that he was totally "black", or totally "white".
I dont think that Stalin is number one in russian or ussr history, but certainly he is very significant person.
there is a sentence - stalin took the russia with wooden plow, but left with A-bomb. | |
| Back to top | |
|
Hangernaid
Joined: 01 Jan 2009
Posts: 44
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
| In in the purges, Stalin had more Russians killed than Hitler.
It was the same in the French Revolution, the French killed off all of their aristo's.
There are better way of advancing a society than killing off your own people. | |
| Back to top | |
|
Elena
Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 23
Location: Russia
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
| I hope that statistics can a bit change your negative opinion about Stalin...
Initially USSR had 14% GDP per capita comparing to USA level. After 20 years just to the beginning of the 2nd World War it become 38%. Moreover the agricultural country was turned to industrial one. Then there was a steep decline due to war but in 10 years USSR returned to the pre-war level.
Speaking of killing people... some statistics again:
the max number of prisoners per 100,000 people was about 1400, very close to level for modern Louisiana, Texas and Mississippi 
I think that it's better to look at good points rather than negative ones... or you really think that the only thing Clinton did is sleeping with Belinsky? | |
| Back to top | |
|
whipback
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 133
Location: Nebraska, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
| | Elena wrote: | I hope that statistics can a bit change your negative opinion about Stalin...
Initially USSR had 14% GDP per capita comparing to USA level. After 20 years just to the beginning of the 2nd World War it become 38%. Moreover the agricultural country was turned to industrial one. Then there was a steep decline due to war but in 10 years USSR returned to the pre-war level.
Speaking of killing people... some statistics again:
the max number of prisoners per 100,000 people was about 1400, very close to level for modern Louisiana, Texas and Mississippi
I think that it's better to look at good points rather than negative ones... or you really think that the only thing Clinton did is sleeping with Belinsky? |
So you feel infidelity is comparable to killing and imprisioning millions or billions of people just for one's lust for power? | |
| Back to top | |
|
Elena
Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 23
Location: Russia
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
| | Quote: | | So you feel infidelity is comparable to killing and imprisioning millions or billions of people just for one's lust for power? |
To be fair I can tell that some people were really killed. My grandfather is an example. He was born in Austria but married a Russian girl and lived here. At the beginning of the 2nd World War the government ordered all foreigners to leave the country in a month time but my grandfather could not - his wife was very ill. So he was shot in a prison after 2 months. But other foreigners moved back to a country of origin unharmed.
But what billions you are talking about? The whole USSR population was 162 million people.
Oh, I understand...
You mean 37 million who died at the 2nd World War. It was really at the time when Stalin ruled the USSR.
By the way Stalin sent his only son to the war as a soldier. He was captured and Germany offered to exchange him for a German general. But Stalin rejected it saying: "I don't exchange soldiers for generals". His son died in German prison.
Will you tell me that it was just a politic trick to gain popularity?
What a pity that you judge without knowing real historical facts... | |
| Back to top | |
|
whipback
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 133
Location: Nebraska, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
| | Elena wrote: | | Quote: | | So you feel infidelity is comparable to killing and imprisioning millions or billions of people just for one's lust for power? |
To be fair I can tell that some people were really killed. My grandfather is an example. He was born in Austria but married a Russian girl and lived here. At the beginning of the 2nd World War the government ordered all foreigners to leave the country in a month time but my grandfather could not - his wife was very ill. So he was shot in a prison after 2 months. But other foreigners moved back to a country of origin unharmed.
But what billions you are talking about? The whole USSR population was 162 million people.
Oh, I understand...
You mean 37 million who died at the 2nd World War. It was really at the time when Stalin ruled the USSR.
By the way Stalin sent his only son to the war as a soldier. He was captured and Germany offered to exchange him for a German general. But Stalin rejected it saying: "I don't exchange soldiers for generals". His son died in German prison.
Will you tell me that it was just a politic trick to gain popularity?
What a pity that you judge without knowing real historical facts... |
Are you just turning your head from the fact that he killed more people than probably the most hated man in history? And what am I judging? I know he killed a significant amount of people (not just "some" as you put it) and all I was pointing out is how wrong it is of you to compare the lives of millions of humans to an unfaithful man. And what does the fact that Stalin woudn't accept that trade mean? Is the life of Stalin's son equal to all the lives Stalin killed? | |
| Back to top | |
|
Elena
Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 23
Location: Russia
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
| Sorry, I didn't read the Times article before...
All I can add is the reason and the consequence are somewhat confused in that article.
I mean "Stalin’s agricultural collectivisation alone led to the deaths of 14.5 million people"
They mean the Great Hunger of 1922-1923 years. Russia is a cold country and it happened very often before. Only one year of three gave a normal harvest and every 7th was a hungry year. Small separate farms very extremely ineffective. After the collectivisation was finished there were no hunger years any more. The collectivisation just coincided in time with the Great Hunger and this fact allowed Times to tell that the collectivisation is the reason for the hunger.
Sorry, I'm not a historian and can't tell about other accusations... moreover it became a bit boring, isn't it?
Unfortunately, it's always easier to attack than to defend.
Can I now tell feeling fully right that US president was a killer of US people during the Great Depression? Bloody killer, destroyer of the economy 
Sorry, I don't mean insulting anybody... I just repeat the Times' trick... | |
| Back to top | |
|
alys
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 485
Location: Moscow, Russia
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
| | Quote: | | They mean the Great Hunger of 1922-1923 years |
it is not a time of stalin's power. Stalin became the real leader at the end of 1920th.
the reason of Great Famine of 1933 are
1. objectively bad harvest of 1933(at 1933 famine was not only in ussr, but in Poland, Romania.)
2. brute collectivisation methods
3. expropriation of grain.
| Quote: | | Stalin’s agricultural collectivisation alone led to the deaths of 14.5 million people |
really nobody know this numbers. Independent last demographics calculations give 7 mln in total in the ussr.
14 mln - is a LIE of "rob konkvest" team. Moreover he said about ukraine! only.
next. most of victims were not of starvation itself, but of attendant deseases.
next. collectivisation starts at 1929, Famine was at 1933, and till current time (excluding ww2 and famine of 1948 (2 millions deaths)-the result of ww2 and by the way - iron curtain) we have not famines at all.
collectivisation is not bad idea. It brings agriculture and machines to the village, it brings schools and medicine, culture and civilisation. Russia is great and had not good infrastructure. Rural population was too isolated from center, from modern things, had anachronistic way of life and poor labour productivity and was really anti-progressive. Someone must gave them a kick.
It was the main problem of modernistic ussr - the great anti-progressive rural people masses at the time just before a-bomb invention. And kolhoz(collective farm) was a model of modern food factory. Why not?
Why collective labour is able in industry, but is so discussed in ussr agriculture?
So collectivisation and its steps in ussr is not so simple question, I think. | |
| Back to top | |
|
MisterRob
Joined: 21 Nov 2008
Posts: 79
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
| It's not just the Times that portrays Stalin as a murderous dictator. That is the view expressed by most independant newpapers, broadcasters and historians.
It would seem that he is portrayed in a quite different light in today's Russia. I would be very interest to hear the views of other forum members on this issue, paricularly those living in Russia and the former Soviet Union.
The following article in the Daily Telegraph expresses a commonly held view that Russia's authorities have sought to "rehabilite" Stalin in recent years for political reasons:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/4015983/The-sinister-resurrection-of-Stalin.html | |
| Back to top | |
|
alys
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 485
Location: Moscow, Russia
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 2:06 am Post subject: |
|
| misterRob. This article is for kids.
KGB never plays the role of main power in ussr , but always was under party control. It was like cia and fbi in usa.
| Quote: | | Putin once said that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the “biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century” |
putin said it because ussr region becames politically, economically, socially unstable, without clear perspective in the future. We had reginal wars, and a lot of victims and refugees, which we have not seen since ww2. We have absolutely NEW region configuration, never seen before. With potential conflicts, which usa can simply provoke. Look to georgia and ukraine now. Look to their leaders. Popularity of Ushenko is few percents(but he is usa-oriented firghter for democracy), Caakashvily - is simply an eastern dictator, who was weaponed by usa, ukraine and europe. | |
| Back to top | |
|
whipback
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 133
Location: Nebraska, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:37 am Post subject: |
|
| | Elena wrote: |
Can I now tell feeling fully right that US president was a killer of US people during the Great Depression? Bloody killer, destroyer of the economy
Sorry, I don't mean insulting anybody... I just repeat the Times' trick... |
Hoover? Were you joking or being serious? | |
| Back to top | |
|
Elena
Joined: 05 Jan 2009
Posts: 23
Location: Russia
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
| | Quote: | | Quote: | | They mean the Great Hunger of 1922-1923 years |
it is not a time of stalin's power. Stalin became the real leader at the end of 1920th.
the reason of Great Famine of 1933 are |
Sorry, my mistake. I meant 1932-1933 hunger...
1922 IS a time of Stalin's power (General Secretary in 1922-1953). Real leader at the end of 1920th?? If to follow your logic some presidents, kings, etc. have never had any power at all and we can easily exclude their names from the history. Official dated at least give some precise information.
| whipback wrote: | | Elena wrote: |
Can I now tell feeling fully right that US president was a killer of US people during the Great Depression? Bloody killer, destroyer of the economy
Sorry, I don't mean insulting anybody... I just repeat the Times' trick... |
Hoover? Were you joking or being serious? |
Of course I was joking...
Anyway you were just asking the opinion about Stalin.
In my opinion if you ask Russians about Stalin in reality it would be thought as asking the opinion about communism. Maybe it sounds strange for you but if you ask a person with democratic views he would most probably be of a negative opinion about Stalin. On the contrary people who think positively about communism would probably be positive about Stalin as well. Stalin is just a representative of communism...
So a question about Stalin is a question of political views and not about real historical person. Moreover people prefer not to show their views and not to answer this question. If you didn't get many responses here it's probably because of that...
Of course there are many people who dislike both communists and democrats. They can not tell you about Stalin too because speaking negatively would be thought as they are for democrats, positively - they are for communists. | |
| Back to top | |
|
Hangernaid
Joined: 01 Jan 2009
Posts: 44
Location: Oklahoma City, OK
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
| Elana,
This is a complex subject and I think a person's views are based more on their perspective.
I KNOW some people that fled and survived Stalin's purges, and I know people who's family died under Stalin.
My Ex-wife was Polish, her mother was a 12 year old girl living in Vilno (It was Poland in 1939, not Lithuiania). Her father (Russian) fled Russia during the early Stalin years. While he was living in Russia, her father had a real estate business that was quite successful. When he fled Russia, he left behind everything. Then when the Germans invaded Poland, the Germans killed everyone in the family except for my mother-in-law and her brother. Her brother died in a POW camp in Siberia (he was captured by the Russians in 1939).
At the end of WW2, my ex-wife's mother had spent 6 years in force labor for the Nazi's, and could not return home because in Yalta, FDR and Churchill somehow thought they had the right to give Poland to the USSR.
I have sat around the Christmas dinner table and listened to the old Poles talk about Stalin and Russia. These stories were not what books printed, not what any state controlled press released, these were first hand, heavily accented stories from survivors, now very old people.
The Poles I know do not hate the Russians, they DO hate the Germans.
I am mostly pro-Russia, I am a histoy enthuiast. I would love to walk the battlefield at Kursk, and if I ever had the chance, I would like to fly a PO-2, the wood and fabric biplane that the Night Witches flew in WW2. There are many cities in Russia that I would like to see, not just Moscow and St. Petersburg. The flavor of a nation is not in the large cities, but in the small towns, the cities that grew up along the major rivers, and the ports.
But I doubt that I ever will. I thought the restrictions were eased against Americans. I do not want to visit a country where I feel threatened, and from what I have read on this forum, Russia is still a police state.
Back to Stalin, he is viewed as the father of the police state. Under Stalin, tens of thousands of people were hauled off to the Gulag. Millions were killed.
You have a pro-Russian, anti US/Ukraine bias, and that is because of your personal point of view. You live in the police state and you have your entire life. You cannot imagine how intimidating it is to anyone who has not lived in that kind of world. I am so used to being able to go where I want (limited by money, of course).
While I was in Ukraine, I first stayed in Gorlovka, then without asking the government's permission, I flew to Odessa. You are not happy with Ukraine, but I can tell you that they are happy being in a free country. So is Poland. So is the Czech Republic. And they fear Russia, Russia is the most potent military in the world, with more tanks than the US, England, Canada, and Germany combined. With 10,000 nuclear warheads, and more combat aircraft and attack helicopters than the next 3 largest nations combined. And the citizens of these countries remember being dominated by the USSR, and they are aware of the power just across the border in Russia.
So why would anyone outside Russia think that Stalin was not good? Because he is seen as the focus, the originator, of a system of government that was dominating, murderous, and denied people the right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.
And what I dislike about the whole stinking situtation, is that I LIKE the Russian people I've met, I love Russian history. But I fear the Russian government.
I do hope you have the change to travel, go to England, France, Australia, the US, Canada, Germany, Poland, Ukraine, or anywhere that is not so oppressed, and seek out other points of view. Most people view Stalin and Hitler as the same type of person.
Should you every come to the US, email me and I will take a week off work and show you some of the US. We can talk politics and history and not worry about being arrested. | |
| Back to top | |
|
alys
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 485
Location: Moscow, Russia
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
| | Quote: | | 1922 IS a time of Stalin's power (General Secretary in 1922-1953). Real leader at the end of 1920th?? If to follow your logic some presidents, kings, etc. have never had any power at all and we can easily exclude their names from the history. Official dated at least give some precise information. |
that was because at the beginning "the general secretary of the party" - was bureaucratic and mostly administrative position. Lenin, Bucharin, Trotcky, Zinoviev were real leaders of the party. Stalin - not. Only when Lenin has died, Bucharin, Zinoviev, Trotcky were repressed, Stalin became a leader.
Stalin became an absolute leader after murder of Kirov. | |
| Back to top | |
|
|
