USSR and Marxism-Leninism post-WWII

Hello, I am a bit curious about a topic that most don't seem to bring up often.
I have already started a thread about the Eastern Bloc and I have solidified my opinions on it from the Khruschev era/onward, as that is the main time period people seem to remember it.
However, this question is concerning the Eastern Bloc post-WWII/during Stalin's last years. Since we, as Marxist-Leninists, agree that Stalin was a good Socialist leader and led a good example of a successful Socialist Republic, what are your views on the Eastern Bloc in the short time when Stalin was still leader of the USSR. I am well aware that they had become revisionist once Khruschev took over, but what real difference was there when Stalin was alive?
Also,(I tend to get this from staunch anti-Communists) some seem to call Stalin's supposed forced installation of Marxism-Leninism into the Eastern European countries liberated from Germany by the Soviets as an "imperialist" move. What can I do/say to counter this argument?

EQ: What is the main Marxist-Leninist view of the DPRK around this time? I know Stalin and Kim Il-Sung were on good terms. But, when do most of us agree that the DPRK had become revisionist?

EQ2: What examples of Democracy existed in Marxist-Leninist states? I have knowledge of Maoist China(being one, myself) however, I am a bit fuzzy as to how things worked in the USSR under Stalin. Also, Stalin promised "free/fair elections" in the Eastern Bloc. Most westerners say that he never fulfilled his promise, but was it that he really didn't allow for any democracy, or was it because their system of democracy differed from Bourgeois democracy?

Thanks

Hello, I am a bit curious about a topic that most don't seem to bring up often.
I have already started a thread about the Eastern Bloc and I have solidified my opinions on it from the Khruschev era/onward, as that is the main time period people seem to remember it.
However, this question is concerning the Eastern Bloc post-WWII/during Stalin's last years. Since we, as Marxist-Leninists, agree that Stalin was a good Socialist leader and led a good example of a successful Socialist Republic, what are your views on the Eastern Bloc in the short time when Stalin was still leader of the USSR. I am well aware that they had become revisionist once Khruschev took over, but what real difference was there when Stalin was alive?
Also,(I tend to get this from staunch anti-Communists) some seem to call Stalin's supposed forced installation of Marxism-Leninism into the Eastern European countries liberated from Germany by the Soviets as an "imperialist" move. What can I do/say to counter this argument?

Most of us don't talk about Stalin after World War 2, as we see it as the low point in his power, unlike the west that see it as the height of power.

EQ: What is the main Marxist-Leninist view of the DPRK around this time? I know Stalin and Kim Il-Sung were on good terms. But, when do most of us agree that the DPRK had become revisionist?

There is a complex answer. For one the DPRK did get weapons and supply form the USSR, but no troops during the Korean war. Botht in the form of tanks and aircraft, but only China sent in troops when the DPRK was being over runned.

EQ2: What examples of Democracy existed in Marxist-Leninist states? I have knowledge of Maoist China(being one, myself) however, I am a bit fuzzy as to how things worked in the USSR under Stalin. Also, Stalin promised "free/fair elections" in the Eastern Bloc. Most westerners say that he never fulfilled his promise, but was it that he really didn't allow for any democracy, or was it because their system of democracy differed from Bourgeois democracy?

Thanks

They say that his elections are not free and fair as Stalin never let the west buy them off. Election to be free and fair in the west have to be on the free market so that the rich can buy thier way into power, and to them it is unfair for the poor guy to be on equal playing field with the rich guy.