The Stalin Thread 2: all discussion about Stalin (as a person) in this thread please

[evermilion]

Do you have any idea why this:

Not by hiding in my dacha until my toadies busted the door down begging for me to return because I killed literally every other halfway competent human being on that 1/8th of the globe.

sounds pretty crazy when preceding this:

And then by doing pretty much what Stalin did and hand the entire war over to the generals and staying the fuck out of it.

?

Was Stalin's staying out of his generals' way a bad thing or not?

[#FF0000]

Do you have any idea why this:



sounds pretty crazy when preceding this:



?

Was Stalin's staying out of his generals' way a bad thing or not?

Nope, it was a great thing but the point I'm trying to make here is that it's silly as heck to say "Stalin presided over the defeat of Hitler and Fascism" as if that means anything. He was in office, sure (except for that time where he just peaced without telling anyone where he was, like I said), but one can't credit the outcome of the war to him in any significant way.

I mean sure he made a good call mass-producing those T-34s but he fucked up a lot more than he didn't.

[evermilion]

Nope, it was a great thing but the point I'm trying to make here is that it's silly as heck to say "Stalin presided over the defeat of Hitler and Fascism" as if that means anything. He was in office, sure (except for that time where he just peaced without telling anyone where he was, like I said), but one can't credit the outcome of the war to him in any significant way.

I mean sure he made a good call mass-producing those T-34s but he fucked up a lot more than he didn't.

Conceded. Doesn't change any of my other points, though.

[Old Bolshie]

Stalin killing millions is not necessarily an evil act. The end justifies the means. If Stalin was killing reactionaries who stood in the way of freedom for a working people, then eliminating them is justified. However, I question that that is what Stalin was doing.

If Stalin had killed millions of anti-communists bourgeois fascists no one would blame him for it. Lenin was responsible for atrocities committed against the White Army and kulaks and you won't hear a word of condemnation of it here except from pacifists who are restricted.

The problem is precisely that the main target of Stalin killing were communists, former comrades of him and Lenin. He simply wanted to eliminate all the possible opposition to him. The result was a party total submitted to him.

Just to give you a small example of 1,996 party members present at the 17th Congress of the party in 1934, 1,108 were arrested, and about two thirds of those executed within three years. This Congress was the last time Stalin faced opposition from within the party.

[Vanguard1917]

Stalin, May 1945:

COMRADES! Permit me to propose one more, last toast.

I should like to propose a toast to the health of our Soviet people, and in the first place, the Russian people.

I drink in the first place to the health of the Russian people because it is the most outstanding nation of all the nations forming the Soviet Union.

I propose a toast to the health of the Russian people because it has won in this war universal recognition as the leading force of the Soviet Union among all the peoples of our country.

I propose a toast to the health of the Russian people not only because it is the leading people, but also because it possesses a clear mind, a staunch character, and patience.

Our Government made not a few errors, we experienced at moments a desperate situation in 1941-1942, when our Army was retreating, abandoning our own villages and towns of the Ukraine, Byelorussia, Moldavia, the Leningrad Region, the Baltic area and the Karelo-Finnish Republic, abandoning them because there was no other way out. A different people could have said to the Government: “You have failed to justify our expectations. Go away. We shall install another government which will conclude peace with Germany and assure us a quiet life.” The Russian people, however, did not take this path because it trusted the correctness of the policy of its Government, and it made sacrifices to ensure the rout of Germany. This confidence of the Russian people in the Soviet Government proved to be that decisive force which ensured the historic victory over the enemy of humanity—over fascism.

To the health of the Russian people!

Lenin, December 1922:

...the Great-Russian chauvinist, in substance a rascal and a tyrant, such as is the typical Russian bureaucrat.

Merged Another Stalin thread with Main Stalin Sticky - Rusty Shackleford

[Fourth Internationalist]

Stop Posting useless images in history threads. Count this as a verbal warning - Rusty Shackleford

[Goblin]

Stalin's flag:

Alot of russian nationalists, including the Nazbols, actually look up to Stalin

[Dropdead]

Stop Posting useless images in history threads. Count this as a verbal warning - Rusty Shackleford

[Invader Zim]

Not by hiding in my dacha until my toadies busted the door down begging for me to return because I killed literally every other halfway competent human being on that 1/8th of the globe.

And then by doing pretty much what Stalin did and hand the entire war over to the generals and staying the fuck out of it (which is why I said "barely". Between hiding away for three days when Operation Barbarossa happened and then keeping out of the way, he really had almost nothing to do with it.)

EDIT: Oh I would have also not ignored my spy's report that the Germans were going to attack on 22 June.

I'd go further and suggest that the Soviet Union survived the war in spite of Stalin and certainly not because of him. Your point regarding his refusal to believe the vast amount of evidence, including the reports of his own intelligence operatives, is one of the most mind-blowingly poor decisions of the 20th century.

[Nevsky]

Stalin himself wasn't a nazbol, it's not his fault that russian nationalist idiots look up to him. He was the first one to criticize "national communist" ideas in Marxism and the National Question.

Here's what Stalin said about the USSR as a multi national state:

"The picture of the changes in the social life of the U.S.S.R. would be incomplete if a few words were not said about the changes in yet another sphere. I have in mind the sphere of national relationships in the U.S.S.R. As you know, within the Soviet Union there are about sixty nations, national groups and nationalities. The Soviet state is a multi-national state. Clearly, the question of the relations among the peoples of the U.S.S.R. cannot but be one of prime importance for us.

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, as you know, was formed in 1922, at the First Congress of Soviets of the U.S.S.R. It was formed on the principles of equality and the voluntary affiliation of the peoples of the U.S.S.R. The Constitution now in force, adopted in 1924, was the first Constitution of the U.S.S.R. That was the period when relations among the peoples had not yet been properly adjusted, when survivals of distrust towards the Great-Russians had not yet disappeared, and when centrifugal forces still continued to operate. Under those conditions it was necessary to establish fraternal cooperation among the peoples on the basis of economic, political, and military mutual aid by uniting them in a single federated, multi-national state. The Soviet government could not but see the difficulties of this task.

It had before it the unsuccessful experiments of multi-national states in bourgeois countries. It had before it the experiment of old Austria-Hungary, which ended in failure. Nevertheless, it resolved to make the experiment of creating a multi-national state, for it knew that a multi-national state which has arisen on the basis of Socialism is bound to stand every and any test.

Since then fourteen years have elapsed. A period long enough to test the experiment. And what do we find? This period has shown beyond a doubt that the experiment of forming a multi-national state based on Socialism has been completely successful. This is the undoubted victory of the Leninist national policy. (Prolonged applause.)

How is this victory to be explained?

The absence of exploiting classes, which are the principal organizers of strife between nations; the absence of exploitation, which cultivates mutual distrust and kindles nationalist passions; the fact that power is in the hands of the working class, which is the foe of all enslavement and the true vehicle of the ideas of internationalism; the actual practice of mutual aid among the peoples in all spheres of economic and social life; and, finally, the flourishing national culture of the peoples of the U.S.S.R., culture which is national in form and Socialist in content - all these and similar factors have brought about a radical change in the aspect of the peoples of the U.S.S.R.; their feeling of mutual distrust has disappeared, a feeling of mutual friendship has developed among them, and thus real fraternal cooperation among the peoples has been established within the system of a single federated state.

As a result, we now have a fully formed multinational Socialist state, which has stood all tests, and whose stability might well be envied by any national state in any part of the world. (Loud applause.)" (Stalin, On the Draft Constitution of the U.S.S.R, 1936).

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Not by hiding in my dacha until my toadies busted the door down begging for me to return because I killed literally every other halfway competent human being on that 1/8th of the globe.

And then by doing pretty much what Stalin did and hand the entire war over to the generals and staying the fuck out of it (which is why I said "barely". Between hiding away for three days when Operation Barbarossa happened and then keeping out of the way, he really had almost nothing to do with it.)

EDIT: Oh I would have also not ignored my spy's report that the Germans were going to attack on 22 June.

This was a myth propagated at Khrushchev secret speech that was debunked a while ago. A number of generals who served under Stalin at the time noted that the first thing Stalin did when he heard the news was run to the battle meetings. And it is worth noting that these generals wrote this account during the late 50's and early 60's, where saying kind things about Stalin was tantamount to heresy

[Rafiq]

Oh, I'm sorry. How would you have resisted Nazi invasion?

The purging of all the competent red army generals comes to mind, however this wasn't Stalin's doing. It was not the doing of a conscious man, but a logical continuation of a series of events, not historically inevitable but a historally expected. Occurance.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Conscript]

If Stalin had killed millions of anti-communists bourgeois fascists no one would blame him for it. Lenin was responsible for atrocities committed against the White Army and kulaks and you won't hear a word of condemnation of it here except from pacifists who are restricted.

The problem is precisely that the main target of Stalin killing were communists, former comrades of him and Lenin. He simply wanted to eliminate all the possible opposition to him. The result was a party total submitted to him.

Just to give you a small example of 1,996 party members present at the 17th Congress of the party in 1934, 1,108 were arrested, and about two thirds of those executed within three years. This Congress was the last time Stalin faced opposition from within the party.

This, and what's worse, Stalin's political positions were derived from (old or soon to be) opponents and allies. When they were dead/in prison/whatever and the smoke cleared, Stalin was carrying out Lenin's line or some bullshit and the USSR was socialist.

And then, on top of that, this socialist system destroyed itself, without a peep from the workers, and during the time heading towards such, Stalin was marginalized by his enemies similarly to how he did so to the old bolsheviks, and this happened again with Gorbachev.

Any guesses to how far we've been set back?

[evermilion]

Any guesses to how far we've been set back?

Given that, somehow, the left hasn't yet killed itself off in a masturbatory orgy of sectarianism and bourgeois rhetoric, I'd say we're actually not doing so bad.

[Conscript]

Sectarianism is a phenomenon that exists for a good reason. After Lenin, communist divides were fostered by states and their politics, we are now dealing with the impact and have tremendous amounts of analyzing, debating, and debunking to do. As a whole, the movement is confused on direction and history, owing to both the bourgeois ideologists and the conflicting official positions of major 'communist states'. Now that there is no revolution, no domineering party, all that is left are individuals who can only debate communism and its history.

Sectarianism isn't bad, it's the fact no one has won yet. I suppose it's because nobody is actually fighting, and the way the divisions were treated in the past, was with simple state power opposing you, so it hasn't really been done before either.

[Brutus]

Stalin still fucked up big time by giving the Germans raw materials to build their war machine! The only possitive way that Stalin helped the red army was through his disdain for human life, which allowed them to hold on to certain areas of importance

[Ismail]

Stalin, May 1945:

I fail to see how that's Russian chauvinism. Lenin likewise praised Russian culture while denouncing Great Russian chauvinism. See: http://www.marxists.org/archive/leni...14/dec/12a.htm

It was with the restoration of capitalism that national oppression became a fact in Soviet society: http://www.revolutionarydemocracy.or...ve/sovnatq.htm

Nope, it was a great thing but the point I'm trying to make here is that it's silly as heck to say "Stalin presided over the defeat of Hitler and Fascism" as if that means anything. He was in office, sure (except for that time where he just peaced without telling anyone where he was, like I said), but one can't credit the outcome of the war to him in any significant way.

This was a standard line of the Soviet revisionists who tried to denigrate Stalin's role in the war effort. Various works analyze his record, from Ian Grey's biography to more recent works like Geoffrey Roberts' Stalin's Wars.

Just to give you a small example of 1,996 party members present at the 17th Congress of the party in 1934, 1,108 were arrested, and about two thirds of those executed within three years. This Congress was the last time Stalin faced opposition from within the party.

The original source of this being Nikita Khrushchev, who in his speech also insinuated that Stalin had Kirov killed in relation to the Congress. And yet not even the revisionists' own commissions could establish Stalin's guilt, both under Khrushchev and under Gorbachev.

[ComradeOm]

On Stalin's role in the disastrous border battles of 1941, I'll quote from an old post. The four key reasons for what amounted to the annihilation of the Red Army were:

1) Lack of experienced officers. In 1941 most Red Army commanders were serving two ranks above their competency level. They were simply unable to adequately control the forces under their command. You had the bizarre situation where Stavka had to send out directives to commanders with instructions on how to carry out the most basic manoeuvres.

2) Organisational flux. After 1937 the Red Army threw out much of its highly developed operational doctrine and retreated to a more infantry orientated approach in a series of reforms. Another bout of reforms was undertaken after the Finland fiasco. In 1941 the Red Army was highly disorganised by these constant changes.

3) Terrible deployments. Napoleon is reported to have once accused his generals of 'wanting to stop smugglers, not defend France' after they presented him with a defence plan that lined their armies up along the border. In 1941 the Soviet deployments saw the majority of the active formations arrayed within 30 miles of the border. This makes absolutely no sense given that the Red Army was supposed to be a mechanised counter-attacking force and it gifted the Germans with a perfect opportunity to encircle and destroy the linear Soviet forces on a massive scale.

4) Complete strategic and tactical surprise. There is no excuse for this. Despite constant warnings from the frontline and intelligence, the Soviet command refused to believe that an invasion was imminent until it was too late. Even worse, Moscow insisted on a series of restrictive directives that hampered the ability of frontline commanders to move to battle readiness. The Red Army was simply caught hopelessly off guard for a war that it knew was coming.

And of course all the above reasons come down to one man: Stalin. The first two are direct products of the Purges while Stalin played a personal role in the deployment and rules of engagement that led to the latter two. Had he listened to his generals (and some, such as Kirponos, did put up a good fight against the invaders by covertly ignoring Moscow's directives) instead of killing them then the Soviet Union would not be placed at the disadvantage of losing over three million men in a matter of weeks.

What is true is that the story of Stalin panicking is a myth; his appoint log for the days following the invasion were packed and he had dozens of meetings over these days. Bellamy in Absolute War does suggest that there was a slump/depression following the fall of Minsk (26 June)

[Ismail]

4) Complete strategic and tactical surprise. There is no excuse for this. Despite constant warnings from the frontline and intelligence, the Soviet command refused to believe that an invasion was imminent until it was too late. Even worse, Moscow insisted on a series of restrictive directives that hampered the ability of frontline commanders to move to battle readiness. The Red Army was simply caught hopelessly off guard for a war that it knew was coming.

Molotov did recall decades later that the Soviet leadership was afraid to respond to any possible provocations by the Germans, which Hitler could then cite as a Soviet "invasion" in an effort to undermine cooperation between the West and the USSR against Nazism. Besides this, Molotov noted that the Soviets did miscalculate: they expected the Germans to attack a year later than they did.

1) Lack of experienced officers. In 1941 most Red Army commanders were serving two ranks above their competency level. They were simply unable to adequately control the forces under their command. You had the bizarre situation where Stavka had to send out directives to commanders with instructions on how to carry out the most basic manoeuvres.

It is also worth noting that, notwithstanding the Soviet revisionists who spoke of Stalin's "suspicions" and his "departure from socialist legality," the Soviets did have materials given to them by the Czechoslovaks declaring Tukachevsky involved in a conspiracy. That's why many bourgeois historians claim Stalin was "duped" by the Nazis (who supposedly forged said materials) in having him and others executed. Both Churchill (in his postwar memoirs) and, obviously, Beneš took the materials seriously.

In fact fears of a military coup were the most substantive part of the Great Purges. Various sources noted the possibility of some sort of plot existing within the military, if not one actually connected to the testimonies of the Moscow Trials.

[ComradeOm]

Molotov did recall decades later that the Soviet leadership was afraid to respond to any possible provocations by the Germans, which Hitler could then cite as a Soviet "invasion" in an effort to undermine cooperation between the West and the USSR against Nazism

"Provocations" such as a stream of scouting incursions (both aerial and on the ground) into Soviet territory and the movement of German formations into attack positions. Even as late as the opening hours of the invasion Moscow was still telling commanders not to open fire on 'German provocations'... such as air raids and artillery barrages.

Stalin, and Molotov, got it badly wrong. And not just in failing to predict the invasion (despite the mounting evidence) but in actively hindering preparations for the defence. They bet the house on Hitler's good faith and millions died as a consequence.

In fact fears of a military coup were the most substantive part of the Great Purges. Various sources noted the possibility of some sort of plot existing within the military, if not one actually connected to the testimonies of the Moscow Trials.

A military conspiracy involving the entire top brass and some 30,000 officers is as likely as the existence of a paramilitary and widespread Polish anti-Soviet paramilitary network that required the deportation and/or execution of hundreds of thousands of Poles. Oh wait...