Stalingrad Lives

http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130131/179149273.html

Edit: Just found a picture of a Stalin bus. I'm sure someone here owns one.

http://www.agoodtreaty.com/wp-conten.../stalinbus.jpg

The true bus of the proletariat shall guide us to victory.

pfff ain't got shit on Trotsky's train.

(oh yes i did)

BTW, the text on the bus is:

[The part above the windows] - "I'd like to raise a toast for the health of our Soviet people, and, first and foremost, Russian people!" - I. V. Stalin in Kremlin, 21th may 1945.

(He did really say that, in case you were wondering).

[Below the windows] - "Eternal glory to the victors!"

is it chauvinism that he is highlighting a population that is taking the greatest its in terms of the soviet union during the war?

i can easily see it as being chauvinistic, but at the same time, i can see it easily being twisted into chauvinism.

The only way I can see it not being interpreted as chauvinism, is if someone twists it into non-chauvinism; it goes well with his other nationalistic characteristics however.

Russia was the leading component of the USSR. Economically, culturally, socially, militarily, politically, etc. That's just how it was. And it sacrificed the most in the war while producing the fewest collaborators, traitors, and separatists.

Stalin isn't demeaning the efforts of the Ukrainian, Byelorusian, Georgian, etc. soldiers and partisans, or saying that Russians are superior, but lauding the heroism of the people like those of Moscow, Stalingrad, and Leningrad in refusing to give in to the enemy and being essential to halting the nazis in their tracks and running them back to Berlin. All Russian cities.

So I agree. The victory belonged to all the Soviet people, and to all of the people who resisted the Axis everywhere, especially the Russian people.

Ummm you don't think eastern europe in general was being genocided? This campaign is clearly nationalist, you have to be a dolt not to see that, so they're using WW2 propaganda for it, which was also soviet, specifically russian nationalist.

o boy let's romanticize the greatest massacre in human history
this is especially great since some of the gargantuan amount of soviet casualities could have been avoided if the military weren't structured so terribly ineffeciantely, which was stalin's fault

too bad the engine keeps stalin' :laugh::laugh: (i'll show myself out)

Yeah, considering all other tendencies during that time in the USSR, you'd have to twist Stalin's pronouncement as for it not to have a hint of Russian nationalism. The whole "post-Stalin revisionist USSR was social-Russian-chauvinist, as opposed to the 'Stalinist' one" thesis is demonstrably wrong, pretty much.

If I ever have a kid, he's getting a Stalinobus. So cool.

defend the motherland!

no wait, abolish all states.

But defend the motherland to glorious victory.

But communism?

Nah, not yet. We don't like states but we think the motherland is glorious:rolleyes:

Forgetting lesser evilism of choosing to protect "democracies" with non aggression pacts, leading to the demobilization of the mainstream communist movement.

lets just forget that marxism is not the infallible word of god an can never go wrong. Let us not forget that marxism is a method, like science, which must be applied and learned from. Let us also never forget that there is such a thing as material conditions/circumstance that reflect on the decisions of people world wide.

Let us not forget that Stalin was a backstabbing, nationalist, right-wing fucker who ordered anything to the left of himself that existed during the october revolution to be slaughtered and that no twisting of the facts into American Democratesque 'every leader makes his mistakes' nonsense by Marxist-Lenisists can distort this historical fact.

why are you mad though?


one could even say stalin was a bit of a centrist within the party. can i back it up? not very well, but i guess bukharin would be a good point.


as far as nationalism goes, if you mean georgian nationalist in the narrow sense, no. If you mean soviet nationalist i dont think the soviet union constituted a nation. (could be wrong though)

was he a chauvanist? more than likely on numerous occasions.

I don't quite think the point is where he is on the left-right scale, the point is he was a dictator (not in teh 'ZOMGZZZZ DICTATOR' sense, but in the literal sense!), on his watch whom so many revolutionary comrades were murdered for reasons of political power, which SHOULD be inexcusable but seemingly, amongst those who defend him, is not.


I don't understand why you do this? That's like saying because England is part of Great Britain/United Kingdom, you technically can't have an English Nationalist. You might be right, but we all know that there are loads of English Nationalists. Same story.


Conscious of the shitstorm that's gonna go down here, this is my last post in this thread and on this subject. It's just not very interesting.

i did not mean to blend georgian and soviet(like english/british). I think i see what you mean by it though. I guess my point is that the SU had dozens of nations within it that were probably more or less disjointed at times so the union of the nation states under one federal union is more of a political union of independent nations than a national union, though russian national hegemony still existed. Unike GB where a hand full of nations were conquered and assimilated, generally, into the english way thus moving closer to what a nation could be.


And yes, its a boring argument and arguments about stalin generally are atrocious.

Svyaschennaya Voinaaaaaaa!!!!