"Lawsuit to defend Stalin divides Russia"

[JohannGE]

Not sure if this has been covered elswhere but:-


Lawsuit to defend Stalin divides Russia

MOSCOW – Both sides are hoping that a lawsuit that opened Tuesday in a Moscow court will turn into Russia’s trial of the century – of the last century, that is.

On first blush, it’s a simple libel case. Yevgeny Dzhugashvili, grandson of former Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, alleges that Russia’s leading opposition newspaper, Novaya Gazeta (http://features.csmonitor.com/globalnews/2009/04/15/medvedev-picks-politkovskayas-paper-for-first-interview/), falsely accused Mr. Stalin of signing “death lists” and committing “crimes against [his] own people” in an article last April by historian Anatoly Yablokov. He is suing for $300,000 in damages. Novaya Gazeta stands by its publication, and its editor, Dmitri Muratov says the paper is ready to take part in any legal action “because we are anti-Stalinists,” dedicated to establishing the historical truth.

Both sides say they are ready for a long and tough court battle. They believe any judgment rendered will have sweeping social repercussions, and be seen – rightly or wrongly – as an indication of where today’s Kremlin stands on this most sensitive of historical issues.

Stalin’s legacy: Golden age or nightmare?

Though Stalin died more than half a century ago, his legacy remains the focus of fierce controversy (http://features.csmonitor.com/globalnews/2009/09/01/putin-walks-a-fine-line-in-poland-avoiding-apology/), both in Russia and among its former Soviet-dominated neighbors.

Many Russians still view the Stalin years as a golden age, in which the USSR was transformed from a backward peasant nation into an industrial dynamo, defeated Nazi Germany, developed the A-bomb, and rose to become a global superpower.
Others associate Stalin’s rule with the horrors of collectivization (http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0505/p06s04-wogn.html), the gulag (http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0503/p17s01-altv.html) prison camps that swallowed up millions at their peak in the 1930s, mass executions (http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1010/p01s02-woeu.html) by the Soviet secret police, catastrophic mistakes (http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0214/p16s02-bogn.html) during World War II, and an authoritarian hangover that lingers in Russian political culture (http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0811/p06s07-woeu.html).

An early September poll released by the independent Levada Center in Moscow shows the public almost evenly divided on how to view the record of the man who iron-fistedly ruled the USSR for three decades, with 38 percent agreeing with the statement that Stalin was a “state criminal” and 44 percent disagreeing.

Some experts believe the dispute is rooted in a generation gap that will fade as elderly Russians, many of whom are nostalgic for the old days, pass away.
http://features.csmonitor.com/globalnews/2009/09/15/lawsuit-to-defend-stalin-divides-russia/


Libel Case Sparks New Focus On Stalin's Reputation

September 8, 2009 A Russian court has agreed to hear a libel case brought by Josef Stalin's grandson. Yevgeny Dzhugashvili says a newspaper commentary stating that Stalin ordered the killings of millions of his country's citizens damaged the dictator's reputation.

Historians and human rights activists say the case is yet another effort by the government to airbrush Stalin's image. With the fall of communism, the Russian government finally permitted historians and witnesses to publish searing accounts of Stalin's rule. Documents long hidden in closed archives were made available.

Leonid Zhura, a former trade official and devoted Stalinist, persuaded Stalin's grandson to file the lawsuit. Zhura, 62, is representing Dzhugashvili in court.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112642329

[narcomprom]

Novaya Gazette is one of the last independent sources in Russia and closing them down is, perhaps, one of the major issues for the ruling camp. Many of the famously murdered journalists worked for NG and all those who lost jobs when the oppositionary mass media where bluntly bought by loyalist Gazprom-Media the fired people settled for NG.

The issue at stake, I'd like to remind those few here who still worship Joe, is not his reputation, but that of his methods and of the cynical bureaucratic upper class, the siloviks, he created.

The courts in Russia aren't independent. The outlooks for ng are grim.

[pranabjyoti]

Well, when everything had happened, then questioning someones "method" is a very easy part. But, at that time, though I am not a Russian, but I personally think that there is no other alternative. And, moreover, why just Stalin, why not the imperial blockade, sabotage, counter-revolutionary war, are the main criminals behind the death of millions of Russian?
I think NG will get a some support of imperialism and its media in this regard and regarding the chances, I think the chance of NG is high enough. Why? Because no court in the world, like Russia, is independent and which judge, being nurtured by a capitalist country have the courage to give a judgment in favor of Stalin?

[Kwisatz Haderach]

As much as I dislike Stalin, I really hope the judgment comes down in his favour. It would be a severe blow to Western imperialist propaganda - at least within Russia, if not anywhere else.

[pranabjyoti]

But, in my opinion, the chances are slim. The judiciary too is a part of the state and at present, I don't think Russian bourgeoisie (though at present disillusioned with imperialism) have the courage and will to defend Stalin and the I have great doubt that the judiciary can have enough courage to establish the fact.

[narcomprom]

But, in my opinion, the chances are slim. The judiciary too is a part of the state and at present, I don't think Russian bourgeoisie (though at present disillusioned with imperialism) have the courage and will to defend Stalin and the I have great doubt that the judiciary can have enough courage to establish the fact.
Believe it or not but it is the Russian grand bourgeoisie, the oil and gas giants, who are at the forefront of Stalin's rehabilitation. During Putin alot symbolic stuff has been done in that direction. They restored the athemn, they restored one little Dsershinsky statue, they restored "Praised be Stalin who brought us up" on a public metro station (wasn't there since the 20th congress) and they reevalutated him in the history lessons.

They like them for rehabilitating of the church, for putting state reason over people, for purging minorities and for invading Finland. Lenin and Stalin swapped the roles they had in the manichean struggle portrayed in post-Khrushchov Soviet ideology. They placed Stalin in a line of great national leaders along with Peter, Catherine and Alexander. Putin is, of course, their heir.

Nevertheless the minor leftwing liberal intelligenzia paper won. They brought up 384 declassified documents containing name lists signed by Stalin and now they put it online at http://stalin.memo.ru/spiski/index.htm. They're genuine.

That's the Barbara Streisand effect in action. Nobody would have noticed the article without the outrage of Stalin Jr..

[pranabjyoti]

Believe it or not but it is the Russian grand bourgeoisie, the oil and gas giants, who are at the forefront of Stalin's rehabilitation. During Putin alot symbolic stuff has been done in that direction. They restored the athemn, they restored one little Dsershinsky statue, they restored "Praised be Stalin who brought us up" on a public metro station (wasn't there since the 20th congress) and they reevalutated him in the history lessons.
My thanks to the Russian bourgeoisie. In the long run, that will go against the capitalist imperialism.

[narcomprom]

Rejoice, pranabjyoti.
http://newsru.com/russia/23oct2009/kurskayastalin.html
Moscow head architect Vladimir Kuzmin suggest to restore a stalin monument on the kurskaya station.
jingoist leader cult 2 - capitalist imperialism 0.

[Outinleftfield]

Novaya Gazette is one of the last independent sources in Russia and closing them down is, perhaps, one of the major issues for the ruling camp. Many of the famously murdered journalists worked for NG and all those who lost jobs when the oppositionary mass media where bluntly bought by loyalist Gazprom-Media the fired people settled for NG.

The issue at stake, I'd like to remind those few here who still worship Joe, is not his reputation, but that of his methods and of the cynical bureaucratic upper class, the siloviks, he created.

The courts in Russia aren't independent. The outlooks for ng are grim.

Looks like Russia is headed towards "national bolshevism".

[Kayser_Soso]

The Russian state is also extremely anti-Communist though; they renamed a street after Alexander Solzhenitsyn, they are building a monument to the Muscovites purged in the terror near the Lyubyanka, and Patriarch Kirill once remarked that the purges of the Stalinist era were some kind of punishment from God because the Russians abandoned their church.

I see the regime's "rehabilitation" of Stalin thusly: They know that many people believe that if Russia can be changed, it must be by some "great leader". They want the Communist opposition, the largest official opposition to the United Russia party, to have low morale because they don't have this Messianic great leader. In conversations with Communists, who generally don't fall for the "Russian mentality" bullshit, nearly all of them still lament the lack of "some great leader like Stalin". Thus by the elevation of the long dead personality cult, they actually neutralize those who are not anti-Stalin.

On the flipside, the cult also serves Putin/Medvedev's cult.

[Dimentio]

Novaya Gazette is one of the last independent sources in Russia and closing them down is, perhaps, one of the major issues for the ruling camp. Many of the famously murdered journalists worked for NG and all those who lost jobs when the oppositionary mass media where bluntly bought by loyalist Gazprom-Media the fired people settled for NG.

The issue at stake, I'd like to remind those few here who still worship Joe, is not his reputation, but that of his methods and of the cynical bureaucratic upper class, the siloviks, he created.

The courts in Russia aren't independent. The outlooks for ng are grim.

Yes, the Putinist regime is using Stalin as a symbol to cement its own vehemently reactionary political system. While Novaya Gazeta seems to be a liberal newspaper, political pluralism is necessary in order to have progress for the Russian working class.

[pranabjyoti]

Yes, the Putinist regime is using Stalin as a symbol to cement its own vehemently reactionary political system. While Novaya Gazeta seems to be a liberal newspaper, political pluralism is necessary in order to have progress for the Russian working class.
"Political pluralism" i.e. bourgeoisie democracy is necessary for advancement of Russian working Class!

[Kayser_Soso]

"Political pluralism" i.e. bourgeoisie democracy is necessary for advancement of Russian working Class!


Maybe you're being sarcastic, but as you know, liberal democracy is better than fascism, and the current regime is definitely fascist.

[pranabjyoti]

Maybe you're being sarcastic, but as you know, liberal democracy is better than fascism, and the current regime is definitely fascist.
History told us that "liberal democracy" will end n fascism, such as competition among capital will end in oligarchs.

[fidzboi]

History told us that "liberal democracy" will end n fascism

Your 'truth', if one could call it that, is nothing of the sort. Historically liberal democracy has led to fascism on just three occasions, in just three countries. If of course we define 'fascism' in the traditional Marxist sense, and not in the contemporary anything that's even remotely authoritarian sense. Alas if you choose to use that definition, then I suppose you could construct an argument like the one above, you could call the Thatcher government 'fascist', Pinochet's, Reagan's, De Gaule's, and so on. But that would obviously overlook the historical specificity of fascismo - what it is and why it happens.

The inability to see the objective differences between bourgeoisie governmental forms, leads to all manner of strange politics. Case in point, your seeming disdain at the concept of 'free speech', particularly with regards revolutionaries defending and upholding this. Revolutionaries defend democratic rights and freedoms even if we understand their limitations. Don't believe me, as a fellow called Marx...

[Random Precision]

Pogue, H&M, please don't make posts that don't say anything. :)

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Patriarch Kirill once remarked that the purges of the Stalinist era were some kind of punishment from God because the Russians abandoned their church.
Aha! Stalin was the hand of God, sent to punish the unbelievers! I knew it! :lol:

But seriously, thank you for letting us know about the attitudes of the Russian ruling class, comrade. We don't get nearly as much information about them as we should.


I see the regime's "rehabilitation" of Stalin thusly: They know that many people believe that if Russia can be changed, it must be by some "great leader". They want the Communist opposition, the largest official opposition to the United Russia party, to have low morale because they don't have this Messianic great leader. In conversations with Communists, who generally don't fall for the "Russian mentality" bullshit, nearly all of them still lament the lack of "some great leader like Stalin". Thus by the elevation of the long dead personality cult, they actually neutralize those who are not anti-Stalin.

On the flipside, the cult also serves Putin/Medvedev's cult.
That's a very interesting analysis. It sounds like the emphasis on Stalin may be a very clever way for the government to persuade its enemies (the communists) to idolize Stalin, and thus commit grave political mistakes.

On the other hand, according to the BBC, Medvedev just posted a video on his blog (!?) in which he virulently attacked Stalin:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8334009.stm

This is all very clever. He attacks Stalin on the internet, which is a medium largely populated by the liberal middle class, while turning a blind eye to the rehabilitation of Stalin in metro stations, where you will mostly find working class people.

Sounds like the Russian bourgeoisie wants to be both pro-Stalin and anti-Stalin, depending on the audience.

[Invader Zim]

As much as I dislike Stalin, I really hope the judgment comes down in his favour. It would be a severe blow to Western imperialist propaganda - at least within Russia, if not anywhere else.

Why? What is the 'western imperialist propaganda' is closer to the truth than the arguments defending Stalin? Surely the truth of the matter should be what counts here, and everything else comes a very distant second?

[Kayser_Soso]

Why? What is the 'western imperialist propaganda' is closer to the truth than the arguments defending Stalin? Surely the truth of the matter should be what counts here, and everything else comes a very distant second?


In this specific case, since it deals with the case of Katyn mainly, you could say it's "closer to the truth", but actually if we take the whole body of western propaganda against Stalin, as well as Lenin(it used to be pretty much the same accusations), it was far from the truth, and there has never been some kind of widescale admission of this. Instead authors tiptoe around the fact, making vague references to the "Soviet archives" without also pointing out how that evidence destroyed many of the previously accepted claims.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Why? What is the 'western imperialist propaganda' is closer to the truth than the arguments defending Stalin? Surely the truth of the matter should be what counts here, and everything else comes a very distant second?

Stalin the war leader is the one most hotly contested. The typical Western propaganda states that he was a military disaster even after the purges, while the Russian take is that he was a great military leader.

The truth is in fact somewhere in between, since he did have a positive logistical role that is underrated in the Western over-evaluation of Zhukov and co. in the General Staff.

[Kayser_Soso]

Stalin the war leader is the one most hotly contested. The typical Western propaganda states that he was a military disaster even after the purges, while the Russian take is that he was a great military leader.

The truth is in fact somewhere in between, since he did have a positive logistical role that is underrated in the Western over-evaluation of Zhukov and co. in the General Staff.

Actually I would say that the more positive view of Stalin has become more popular in mainstream literature since the fall of the USSR, particularly since the myth that he went missing for ten days was finally debunked in the West.

[pranabjyoti]

Without Stalin, our world would be different today. At least, we, people of the third world are largely grateful to him.

[Random Precision]

Without Stalin, our world would be different today. At least, we, people of the third world are largely grateful to him.

Funny considering how his Comintern held up anti-imperialist struggles for years and urged collaboration with the imperialist power in pretty much every colony of the day.

[pranabjyoti]

Funny considering how his Comintern held up anti-imperialist struggles for years and urged collaboration with the imperialist power in pretty much every colony of the day.
If the people of the colonies were sufficiently awake and stand beside the third international, it wouldn't have been dissolved. Marx and Engels themselves dissolved the first international, do you call them "reactionary" too.

[Random Precision]

If the people of the colonies were sufficiently awake and stand beside the third international, it wouldn't have been dissolved. Marx and Engels themselves dissolved the first international, do you call them "reactionary" too.

I'm not sure what you're talking about at all. I don't think the dissolution of the Comintern was a huge loss, though it does say a lot about Stalin's opportunism.

What do you have to say about the Comintern urging collaboration with imperialist powers during the Popular Front/Fourth Period?

[Ismail]

The Comintern article was written by Bill Bland. Although Bland was a good economist (note signature), he was... a bit too carried away when it came to "unmasking" revisionists. No one I know takes his work on Dimitrov and such too seriously (no Hoxhaists, either), although there's probably a kernel of truth to Dimitrov being a rightist. Bland was pretty much alone in that situation.


I don't think the dissolution of the Comintern was a huge loss, though it does say a lot about Stalin's opportunism.Why? The Comintern was a very interventionist organization in an age where mature and self-regulating CPs were on the rise. Its interventionism led to blunders in China, Germany, and France. Mao, Hoxha, and various other Communists were happy that the Comintern was dissolved because it outlived its purpose: to found Communist movements in all countries and to "guide" them to success.

You just said that it wasn't a "huge loss." It wasn't a loss at all IMO, it was a positive development and if anything should have happened about 15 years earlier.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Why the nationalism, Ismail? Workers have to organize beyond national constraints, especially in today's era, even if national and regional peculiarities are to be considered.

[Led Zeppelin]

Trashed off-topic flames, spam etc. (http://www.revleft.com/vb/off-topic-flames-t122130/index.html?) and issued Random Precision with a PM warning, and BR and socialist with a verbal warning.

[pranabjyoti]

The problem of Comintern at the time, when it was dissolved was that, the strongest parties in the Comintern are from European countries and they don't need Comintern for mutual exchange and help. Comintern may be helpful to Communist Parties of the third world specially from Asia, Africa and Latin America, but the real situation then was that most of the oppressed people, even the workers of these countries weren't awake up to the level to take help from Comintern. If they were awake and strong enough, they should form voluntary army to fight Nazism beside USSR.

[Ismail]

Why the nationalism, Ismail? Workers have to organize beyond national constraints, especially in today's era, even if national and regional peculiarities are to be considered.I don't oppose coordination/assistance-esque conferences and such. I support internationals like the ICMLPO. The Comintern, however, was too interventionist and only harmed socialism by trying to "internationalize" one solution for every situation.

[Die Neue Zeit]

You can have a proper transnational party and still have "horizontal" coordination amongst national and even regional sections. The problem with the Comintern (a mere international in the view of left-communists of the International Communist Current) was the top-down communication structure: French and Spanish comrades couldn't coordinate with each other, for example, but communicated only with the center (i.e., Moscow).

Interestingly, the biggest Trotskyist international, the Reunified Fourth International (colloquially "United Secretariat") has the exact same approach as the ICMLPO and even the Party of the European Left (EUL-NGL) in the European parliament.


Actually I would say that the more positive view of Stalin has become more popular in mainstream literature since the fall of the USSR, particularly since the myth that he went missing for ten days was finally debunked in the West.

It was debunked in the West? Source?

[lin biao fan club]

Here is a good article on this:




Trial to defend comrade Stalin
(monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com)

Stalin has lost in court in a much publicized libel case. Stalin’s grandson, Yevgeny Dzhugashvili, charged the paper Novaya Gazeta with libel. Last April, author Anatoly Yablokov accused Stalin of being a “bloodthirsty cannibal” that signed “death lists” and committed “crimes against his own people.” The paper’s editor, a self-described “anti-Stalinist,” was not surprised with the outcome.

The much-hyped trial has social repercussions because Stalin is controversial in Russia. Last year, Mikhail Gorbachev, who has often been voted one of the country’s most unpopular Russians in polls, denounced efforts to portray Stalin in a positive light. By contrast, over and over, polls demonstrate that Stalin is still very popular amongst the ex-Soviet peoples. For example, in a TV poll last year, Stalin was voted “third best Russian” even though he was an ethnic Georgian. Stalin supporters gathered with signs outside the courtroom. Dzhugashvili’s attorney stated:

“Stalin was a great leader who saved the country and led it to democracy. His constitution was the best ever written. Yes, many innocent people suffered and were killed, but Stalin was not responsible for this. Others were. It’s time to put the record straight.” (1) (2) (3)

A tale of two body counts

Central to Dzhugashvili’s case was that the massacre of 22,000 Polish officers in the Katyn forests in World War II was not carried out by the Soviet Union. Contrary to the newspaper claims, Dzhugashvili’s attorney asserts that the documents that allegedly ordered the deaths of Polish prisoners of war are fakes. And, there is much evidence, including eyewitness accounts to suggest that the Nazis, not the Soviets were responsible. (4) (5) However, in 1990, after decades of denying responsibility and claiming that the massacre was carried out by Nazis, the revisionist Gorbachev administration acknowledged that the Soviets had executed the officers. However, many continue to maintain that the event was staged by the Nazi forces who “discovered” the bodies after further invading Poland. Many maintain that the massacre was staged as propaganda against the Soviet Union, socialism, and Stalin. They claim that the admission by Gorbachev was just a political maneuver by revisionists to discredit socialism. Since the death of Stalin there has been a continual re-writing of the historical narrative. Stalin has been demonized as a bloodthirsty tyrant by both the revisionists that succeeded him in the Soviet leadership and by Western propaganda. It is entirely possible that revisionists and others have forged archival materials in attempts to taint his legacy. After all, in order for the revisionists to legitimize their own claim to power, they have to discredit Stalin.

The alleged Katyn massacre is harped on as a way to discredit Stalin and socialism. Yet, deaths of Red Army prisoners of war aren’t given a second thought. For example, when Poland declared its independence from Russia in 1918, the Polish army under Pilsudski, with French support, invaded Russia in the hopes of crushing the new, revolutionary, Bolshevik regime. As a result of the war, imperialist Poland annexed parts of Belorussia (now Belarus) and Ukraine. What happened to Soviet prisoners of war in this earlier conflict? 165,550 went into captivity, and 75,699 were returned after the war in 1921. Between 1919 and 1921, Russian sources estimate that 60,000 Red Army soldiers died in Polish captivity. According to Polish sources, about 20,000 died. All sides agree that tens of thousands of Soviet prisoners died in Polish hands. There is a loud outcry over the alleged Katyn massacre yet silence over these undisputed Red Army deaths because the anti-communists are more concerned with smearing Stalin than for justice for the dead. (6)

Ultimately, whether or not the Soviets were responsible for the Katyn massacre is beside the point. What matters is the overall legacy of Stalin. Most criticisms of Stalin fail to take into account his historical context. Stalin took the reigns of power in the Soviet Union at an incredibly difficult time. When Lenin died, the Soviet Union was still backward in terms of its industrial development. Socialist construction had just begun under Lenin. On the whole, Stalin is the leader who carried out the socialization of the economy. Stalin was charged with the task of organizing the first modern and sustained socialist economy. Lasting socialism on a countrywide scale had never occurred. There was no model for Stalin to draw on.

Stalin’s legacy

It was under Stalin’s leadership that some of the greatest humanitarian victories of the last century were won. The Soviet Union was the first. Under Stalin’s leadership, the Soviet countries went from the backwater of Europe to surpassing it in many ways, becoming a modern superpower able to challenge imperialism on a worldwide scale.

Quality of life increased for the Soviet peoples under Stalin. Despite the austerity forced on the Soviet peoples by Stalin’s industrialization program and by World War 2, life generally improved. Public education and health care expanded under Stalin’s regime. Life expectancy doubled under the Stalin regime. (7) Life expectancy under Stalin was greater than it has been in recent times in Russia despite all of the technological advances in medicine. (8) It was under Stalin’s leadership that the majority of the population gained access to full rights as proletarian citizens. It was under his leadership that women, non-Russians, declassed and ex-peasants gained full access to work in the modern Soviet economy. This major social shift not only represented higher pay for the majority, but it also represented more autonomy in the private realm and more political power for the masses. Under Stalin greater numbers gained a voice in the Soviet system. (9)

Under Stalin, the Soviet Union was a beacon of hope to the world’s people. Harry Haywood, a Black communist leader, recounts an encounter with racism in the Soviet Union. In Stalin’s Soviet Union, racism was treated very differently than in was in the United States, which still had legally enforced White supremacy in the form of Jim Crow laws:

“In the Soviet Union, remnants of national and racial prejudice from the old society were attacked by education and law. It was a crime to give or receive direct or indirect privileges, or to exercise discrimination because of race or nationality. Any manifestation of racial or national superiority was punishable by law and was regarded as a serious political offense, a social crime.

During my entire stay in the Soviet Union, I encountered only one incident of racial hostility. It was on a Moscow streetcar. Several of us Black students had boarded the car on our way to spend an evening with out friend MacCloud. It was after rush hour and the car was only about half filled with Russian passengers. As usual, we were subjects of friendly curiosity. At one stop, a drunken Russian staggered aboard. Seeing us, he muttered (but loud enough for the whole car to hear) something about ‘Black devils in our country.’

A group of outraged Russian passengers thereupon seized him and ordered the motorman to stop the car. It was a citizen’s arrest, the first I had ever witnessed. ‘How dare you, you scum, insult people who are guests in our country!’…

‘No, citizens,’ said a young man (who had done most of the talking), ‘drunk or not, we don’t allow this sort of thing in our country…’” (10)

In addition to fighting racism and national oppression in the Soviet Union, Stalin used his influenced to combat White chauvinism within North America. It was Stalin who forced the Communist Party USA to embrace the Black Belt thesis, the thesis that the states of the Southeast U.S. constitute a separate, Black national homeland. Thus, Stalin was one of the first Black nationalists. Stalin’s theory is still upheld by some Black national liberation forces today.

The leadership in the Stalin era faced a dilemma. Stalin famously said that the Soviet peoples must industrialize or face annihilation. Stalin’s austerity programs, breakneck industrialization and collectivization, and modernization programs may have been hard to bear, but they were necessary. Stalin’s prediction proved true in 1941 when Nazi forces invaded the Soviet Union. The Nazi invasion cost the lives of 27 million Soviet people. Had Stalin not wielded a heavy hand, then many more lives would have been lost and Hitler’s tanks would have rolled all the way to the Pacific Ocean. Because of Stalin’s policies, the Soviet Union had the industrial base to defeat the Nazi onslaught. Stalin was the most important leader in saving the world from fascism in World War 2.

At every turn, the capitalists try to misrepresent the true record of socialism. There is a long history of distortion and fraud perpetuated by the capitalists. (11) The verdict of this trial is part of a long history of lies. Communists do not buy into the sensational lies and distortions of the capitalists. Communists also do not dogmatically defend every error or excess that may have occurred. Rather, communists take a balanced and critical view of our own history. Communists defend what is correct and abandon what is not. This is the scientific approach.

All of his life Stalin fought for socialism. In his earlier days as a revolutionary, he put himself in the line of fire as a guerrilla, robbing banks in order to fund the revolution. Later, he waged struggle against all kinds of revisionism, especially Trotskyism. Stalin led the Soviet Union through very difficult times. The times were hard and called for tough measures. Even in this context, Stalin was able to carry out significant social revolution. As Mao pointed out, Stalin made significant errors, but they are our errors. They are errors that communists take responsibility for. His errors are part of the inevitable trial and error, the zigzag path, of socialist construction.

[Kayser_Soso]

It was debunked in the West? Source?

It was actually debunked in Zhukov's own memoirs; he wrote them when it was politically safe to do so, after Khruschev had been removed from power. Since then, it has been found that Zhukov's story is corroborated by the Kremlin's registry. This is mentioned in virtually every post-Cold War book on the war, for example Stalin's Wars by Geoffery Roberts, Absolute War by Chris Bellamy, and many others.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I am indeed aware of Stalin's Wars (and have read some of it myself, in fact), but I didn't know that this re-evaluative book on Stalin as war leader had much more credibility among Western historians.

[Drace]

When is the case going to start? Im interested to see what happens.