What's the typical views on Stalin in Russia today?

What's the typical views on Stalin in Russia today?

Other urls found in this thread:

rt.com/politics/337183-sympathy-for-stalin-among-russians/
youtube.com/watch?v=wQCz5SglK3k
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism_and_the_National_Question
youtu.be/8IGbjPqFFvA
youtube.com/watch?v=2xC5drvBCC4
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Cult_of_Personality_and_Its_Consequences
radioaryan.com/2016/07/the-orthodox-nationalist-stalin-philo.html?utm_source=BP_featured
archive.org/download/TON071216/TON 071216.mp3
m.youtube.com/watch?v=7bSAB5OPkwQ
m.youtube.com/watch?v=C9xB3Crxx0Q
youtube.com/watch?v=NVqxoA52kjI
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_reform_in_Romania
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1907_Romanian_Peasants'_revolt
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_Dobrogeanu-Gherea
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Soviet_man
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

daddy af

People like him more than Gorbachov and Putin but not as much as Breshnev

>Cred Forums will never rise the ranks and because ruler of their country
Can you guys even compete?

Maybe you should ask your question when the Russians aren't sleeping.

Story that actually happened
Girlfriend and I are on a train to her Dacha
Poor Russians come on to the train to sell ice creams, books and vegetabke peelers
Young man comes into our carriage to play some cool music on his accordion
Old lady sitting in front of us and blasts him for 10 mins or so telling him Stalin would have given him a real job , Stalin would have given him pride Stalin this Stalin that
GF tells me that Stalin is popular with the older generations

well, the results he achieved were pretty impressive
but the price was too high, if you ask me
most of people here praise him and want him back because, i guess, they miss the times when their motherland used to be strong and respectable

He's adored by the Russians. Even though he killed millions of them, they still think he's a hero.

>During the poll conducted by the independent sociological service Levada-Center in mid-March, 54 percent of respondents described their attitude to Stalin as positive, 17 percent said their attitude was negative, 32 percent said they were indifferent about the late Soviet dictator and 14 percent could not give a definitive answer to this question.

rt.com/politics/337183-sympathy-for-stalin-among-russians/

I would love my leader too if he killed millions of liberals and revolutionist intellectual dipshits in my home country.

You'd love it if right wingers were put into death camps? All of Cred Forums would be shot under Stalin.

Different time, different world. We are all hardcore right wingers because it is a byproduct of our country - founded on extreme capitalism. If the other way were true, as it were in the USSR, then we would be extreme communists. The battle is against the jew led revolutionaries that attempt to bring down the system, regardless of which side you are on.

>"""""""independent"""""""

Fuck that snow nigger, ruined germany

>The battle is against the Jew

The communists WERE Jews! We would be the Whites. The same communists you praise subverted the USA in the 60s and gave us mass degeneracy.

Germany is doing fine ruining themselves right now. As a matter of fact, they ruin themselves about 3 times per century on average - trying harder and harder to ruin every country around them in the process each time. Germany are the true niggers of Europe, perhaps the entire world.

Russia will always have tyrannical rulers. The land is wild and vast,, and requires an iron grip. Stalin just continued the trend.

I agree with all you said, but the consensus among most of these people who support Stalin, is that he took this kike fueled system and took it into his own hands, trying to keep the jew hand out of the cookie jar, all while turning the Russian Empire from an agricultural shithole to an industrial powerhouse to rival the USA. He basically power leveled Russia through grinding with no cheat codes and no funding

Independent means non-governmental.

Maybe cause the ones that would hate him today aren't alive anymore.

Stop roseposting you little shit.

>implying it isn't financed by Western governments through different foundations or universities.

he took the country with a sickle and left it with a nuke

Murder and dictator.

>governments
no it's not financed by them
it's not like in our country, their's are run by corporations and the industrial complex, which are all private

I went to Russia on Victory Day a couple years ago and they had the modern Communist party marching in one of the parades with pictures of Soviet leaders. Was pretty surreal, and anytime I see people in Russia nonchalantly bringing up Communism I just think of how it's basically the complete opposite with Germany and Nazis.

You're a fucking idiot. USSR promoted heavy multiculturalism and have special right to minorities. It was a leftist government in every sense of leftism today.

Every conservative fights against leftism because we don't want to end up with the shithole that was stalin's russia.

Do you seriously expect an American to understand time zones?

How can he do that if he would be sleeping when the Russian is awake? Fucking idiot

There are 10 timezones in Russia so some of us shitpost on Cred Forums in any time of day.

You wouldn't even know how to type if it wasn't for him you worthless dog.
The Soviet party is shit just dengist bullcrap

From what I can tell, Russkies have a real nostalgia hard on for him. Most Russians actually miss the USSR.

>to rival the USA
Are you sure?

Only older generations. Most youth feel indifferent/agressive towards ussr and all commie stuff.

>you

Reminder he did nothing wrong.

>Most youth feel agressive
Because it is popular.

Luckily for liberals, The example of right wing extremism is on full display due to the nazis

Germany "lost", Russia "won"

We """"""""""""""""""won""""""""""""""""" too

it was multicultural but not mixed by force, it was pretty hard to leave Poland at all for example

and it was prudent, surely not oversexualized

>If the other way were true, as it were in the USSR, then we would be extreme communists.

HAHAHAHHHAHHAAAAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA. Why are always Americans that are the dumbest posters on Cred Forums?

Russian empire was full of minorities because they conquered many smaller nations during their expansion. But in Soviet Union, multiculturalism wasnt an issue. Your nationality was written in your passport and you were supposed to live in assigned area (for instance there were places for russians, for ukrainians, for georgians, for tatars etc). It was very hard to get living permit ourside of region assigned to your nationality. Basically like trying to emigrate abroad.

Modern cultural maxism promotes multiculturalism only because it is their belief that marxist revolution in the west is impossible as long as the western culture stands, and they exploit racial tensions to attack the culture. it is their belief that if western culture falls, communism will be victorious. But during socialism in the easterne europe, nobody promoted any of this modern libtaard bullshit. It was more like nazism where the government wanted strong nation with strong industry, promoted family values etc., combined with propaganda from the earliest age to create loyality for the ruing party. because the commies wanted to hold their power or even conquer the west and they knew that weak numales wont be able to defend them

No, motherland just gave them kicks in the butt, so they had an idea of what to do tomorrow, they can't live without a strong hand ruling them.

based as fuck
>gave us Transylvania back
>reformed our military on Soviet model
>gave us the chance to develop our own brand of national communism
>(indirectly) ended the neo-serfdom of the Romanian countryside
>cured us of westernist mankurtization

youtube.com/watch?v=wQCz5SglK3k
May our people be forever brothers
With the liberator Soviet people
May Leninism be our lighthouse and force and momentum
We're following with faith our invincible Party
We're creating socialism on our country's land.

(Goes without saying that I would've supported a transition from Warsaw Pact to CIS instead of EU and NATO faggotry today.)

Really? They still remember Brezhnev?

I don't know. Russia may have botched it all in the end, but you guys gave us a good run for our money. Considering the odds were always against the Soviet Union it is incredible that we were legitimately competing with your country for 30 years.

Stalin murdered more Russians than any other man besides Hitler. They still haven't recovered. So yeah it makes since that Cred Forums would think he's the bee's knees, people on here admire North Korea too.

They did the same forced multiculturalism you see in Europe today in Estonia and Latvia. Instead of Muslims we got the dumbest Russians.

We experienced modern day Germany starting from 1950.

Jewish Georgian oppressor of stronk russia christians

>Stalin Where all those bolsheviks went
>?

Russian here.
From a province, not from Moscow.
From time to time I can see freaks with Stalin’s portrait on their T-shirts, and on the walls of their offices.
There are also some fans of Stalin, deliberately spreading propaganda, of how good Stalin was, in the Web.
As you want to hear about TYPICAL view of modern Russian commoners on Stalin and on his times, I can say the following:
Most people are ignorant idiots believing in the good leader and the bad deputies.
Many people are idiots enough to earnestly believe in HONEST distribution of wealth based on timely punishment of WRONG people.
Many people are inclined to support severe measures against corrupt people, and the corruption can be of different kinds: it is not always about stealing money from the state, it can be about WRONG views too.
I personally hate such stupidity, for people usually do not want to accept that if the repressions they want FOR COMMON GOOD really happen, they THEMSELVES will fall victims of the repressions sooner or later.
I am not a fan of Putin, and I think someone else should be elected instead of him, but I have to admit he is more liberal than I expected, compared to the Russian masses.
It is good he tries to be a liberal tsar).
You see, he is a TSAR in fact, but he tries to be as liberal as it is possible for a tsar.
I imagine with horror, how someone else in his position could play up to the Russian masses, inclined to love Stalin with his HONESTY and FAIR DISTRIBUTION, and TIMELY PUNISHMENT of WRONG people.

Hero who they will never be able to emulate again by achieveing global power status because they're a pathetic, backward people with an economy smaller than 'straya.
Thus they would rather get nostalgia feels for muh we wuz superpowa days whilst driving their country into the ground and loosing spheres of influence (I.e. Ukraine)

>multiculturalism
That word doesn't mean what you think it means, shprot fisherman user.

There was no multiculturalism in the modern sense of the word in the Soviet Union(and arguably in the Tsarist Empire). Ethnic identity was a subset of the Soviet identity. The only case of multiculturalism is in the case of post-SU states in which the nation state tries to distance itself from its multiethnicity and impose a single language and national (ethnic) identity. Russians born in the Estonian SSR during the Soviet Union rightfully perceive Estonia as their homeland(as part of the greater Union), but after your independence they suddenly found themselves as strangers within their own land, with the government excluding them from what constitutes a 'true' Estonian national.

You are the source of all your problems. By support the consolidation of a nation state, you are alienating the co-habiting Russians and forcing them into an "us vs them" narrative between ethnic Estonians and Russian Estonians and on a grander scale between Estonia and the Russian Federation.

>There was no multiculturalism in the modern sense of the word in the Soviet Union(and arguably in the Tsarist Empire).
Gypsy, please, it's actually was modern multiculturalism since Lenin russian people was portrayed, as chauvinistic oppressor, who shouldn't have any rights (that's why in federation we don't have any russian nationalistics region).

Bydlo, please, learn what modern multiculturalism means. All ethnic cultures were integrated into the Soviet culture. There was no interethnic culture war or conflict.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism_and_the_National_Question

Love u.

>All ethnic cultures were integrated into the Soviet culture.
Lol no, it was just bolsheviks wet dreams, but they failed to make it work IRL, that's why we had Chechnya Wars, Armenia-Azerbaijan war.
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism_and_the_National_Question
Nothing but theories.

He was based

Shprat was BTFOed - well said.

youtu.be/8IGbjPqFFvA

He seemed like a pretty decent guy here. Maybe some of his actions have been exaggerated by his enemies.

Regardless of the fuckery he did he still made Russia more powerful, and Stalinist type structures like pic related are better looking than the communist block style that came after with Khrushchev after they got rid of "overly complicated architecture".

This picture could have been the "communist standard" instead of the blocks everyone knows of.

Chechnya Wars
>Armenia-Azerbaijan war

The more you kill ruskies than more they love you

>Wars which were a result of the decay and subsequent dissolution of the Soviet Union
So idea (soviet nation) wasn't self-sufficient and died with USSR. How this isn't fail?
>blame Yelcin and Gorbachyov.
Why should I blame people who ruled in time when everything already were fuckers? No, I will blame people who build all these national republics.

Stalin's grave by the Kremlin wall.

No political idea is self-sufficient. It is the state and its elite that perpetuates the idea. The USSR failed not because of what it promoted, but because it lacked strong leadership after Stalin. Same thing happened with the "Autocracy, Orthodoxy, Nationality" idea of the late, post-Petrine Tsardom. Nicholas II's failures in a troubling period made the regime collapse and with it the idea died.
>No, I will blame people who build all these national republics.
The administrative divisions were symbolic at most, they didn't pose a threat as long as the Soviet leadership was strong. You blame the symptom instead of the cause.

Not as fancy, but Ceausescu's grave.

...

>No political idea is self-sufficient
Soviet nation supposed to be not just abstract idea, but also, as something real (all nation merged into one soviet nation), and it's failed.
>You blame the symptom instead of the cause.
So as you, because lack of "strong leaders" is symptome of system 's crysis.
Also, post-ww 2 USSR system was builded by Stalin.

Russia just sucks with transitioning between forms of government.

Russian Empire was firmly on the track to become a consitiutional monarchy, there was already a parliament, multiple projects of constitution, etc. However, internal traitors (largely from national minorities, aided and directed by foreign powers) did everything to ruin this process, and turned it into a catastrophic revolution instead.

USSR under Gorbachev was firmly on track to reorganize into a democratic federation. The law about the ruling role of Communist party was revoked. USSR of late 80s already had a multi-party political system, freedom of press, a mixed semi-capitalist economy. A USSR-wide referendum was held on the future of the country, and people overwhelmingly voted to keep the union, reforming it on democratic lines.

Then an August coup comes out of nowhere, with a fake "GKChP" "attempting to take over". They do nothing and are immediately arrested, Gorbachev is isolated, and regional party posses (Yeltsin in Russia, Kravchuk in Ukraine, etc) seize power and split the country into their own private domains to loot.

>freedom of press
as in you can write whatever you want but better run away because if you don't agree with us, you die like you have currently?

Pretty polarized as with almost everything else in our history.
Some view him as another one in the line of strong autocratic rulers like Ivan IV, Peter I and Catherine II that made Russia great again by wrecking their enemies and forcing the people to arbeit for the country. He "took over Russia when it had just a plough and left it with nuclear weapons" by turning a war-torn backwards mostly agrarian country into a superpower that was able to survive the first European chimp out, deter the second and rival half of the world.
>We are fifty or a hundred years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or they will crush us.
>Speech "The Tasks of Economic Executives" (4 February 1931) Stalin said this in 1931, at the beginning of the rapid industrialization campaign. Ten years later, Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union.

Some especially liberals buy the typical Western narrative and most people I'd say have a mixture of the two.

You don't know what you are talking about. KGB in 1990 was a joke.

>supposed to be not just abstract idea
Depends what you understand by abstract. All forms of patriotism and civic identity depend on the system perpetuating them. National identity(defined by ethnicity and language) was just as much of an abstract aberration before the Enlightenment.
>lack of "strong leaders" is symptome of system 's crysis.
Let me guess, you're an idealistic liberashka? Lack of strong leadership results in crisis. The Soviet system started declining ever since Stalin's death, starting with Hrushyov's liberal(in the context of the Soviet system) reforms, just like the tsarist system started declining with Peter the Great.
Continuing on the idea above, constitutional monarchy would've led to Russia's ruin. The revolution was a blessing in disguise, just as the dissolution is now(in the context of the degeneration of the Soviet system). I am not a fan of Putin, but Putin serves his historical function of reviving the autocratic system most suitable for the 'russkaya dusha'. The form this system takes might not be pleasant with all its modern subtleties and the crudeness of the modern oligarchs, but neither was the Soviet one pleasant for Ustryalov, yet he realized that it was the same essence in a different form and fetishizing the Tsarist form and continuing to support it on its deathbed would only harm Russia and its rebirth.

I understand where you are coming from, but you subscribe to progressivism(in this case perceiving both the progressive weakening of the Tsar's powers and the possibility of a democratization of the USSR as positive), while I subscribe to ciclicity and I perceive imperialism and autocracy as the highest form of government that undergoes a perpetual decay and rebirth.
youtube.com/watch?v=2xC5drvBCC4

I'm not disputing the advantages of strong centralized power for Russia, but that and constitutional monarchy are not mutually exclusive. It would have been limited in name only anyway. Still, Russian Empire was a civilized state, under rule of law. The revolution was essentially a takeover by ethnic mafias. Not to mention that it cost Russia WW1, which it was set to win with 100% certainty, with all historical benefits it would bring.

The death of Russian Empire was also the death of culture. It so historically happened that Russian culture is a culture of writers, how many great Soviet writers do you know? Or poets, composers, artists? We still exist in a cultural wasteland thanks to the revolution.

Too fat. Liar.

My dad is russian, and he see stalin as war hero, but the worst leader in soviet history

Constitutional monarchy could theoretically work if it took the path of something like the Shogunate in Japan in which the autocracy remains under a different institution, while the Tsar(as in the case of the Emperor of Japan before the Meiji Restoration) became a spiritual symbol that gave legitimacy to the state. But I think we could both agree that what would've most likely happened would've been akin to the UK's monarchy in which tsar or no tsar, it would've made no difference. I do believe that the autocracy could've been maintained under the tsar if only Aleksandr III lived for longer or had already taken measures to school his heir in matters of statecraft in cases of an untimely death. But otherwise? No. The Soviet(and Eastern Bloc in general) period allowed us to return to our roots through a cultural rebarbarization. I think Romania was worse in this regard, but you still had a lingering Francophilia and mankurtization through westernization of the elite, even if not as bad as during Peter and Catherine. The Soviet system did not last long enough in its stalinist form to give birth to a artistic golden age(although there are some artistic achievements such as Stalinist gothicism). But nowadays Russia seems to recover after being purified through Soviet fire. Without the Soviets to once more detach Russia from the West, there would be no blank slate from which authors like Vodolazkin or directors like Lungin(this also reminds me to mention that Soviet cinema certainly had its achievements as well).

from which [...] could be born.*

>how many great Soviet writers do you know? Or poets, composers, artists?
Just because the West has placed a cultural blockade on us and pretends that USSR had no culture or any other achievements, doesn't mean that you yourself should ignore and forget Soviet music, movies, cartoons and other art.

>was just as much of an abstract aberration before the Enlightenment.
It's actually wasn't abstract, it's just didn't exist.
>Let me guess, you're an idealistic liberashka?
Lol no, but I'am also not shitpants.
>The Soviet system, builded by Stalin, started declining ever since Stalin's death,
Fair fiix.
>starting with Hrushyov's liberal(in the context of the Soviet system) reforms
Yeah really, how he dare to build housing for people instead of monuments and more death camps.
>just like the tsarist system started declining with Peter the Great.
And that's a bad system if it couldn't functioning without it created.

>The death of Russian Empire was also the death of culture
BESOGON ETO TY?

>And that's a bad system if it couldn't functioning without system's creator

I wonder why. Khrushchev screwed up the economy and his successors didn't do better.

>there was already a parliament,
If you mean Duma, it wasn't real parlament.
>multiple projects of constitution,
Which was declined every time.

Commieboo was BTFOed - well said.

After the last pre-Soviet generation died, USSR had no great writers. No first-grade composers with the exception of Shostakovich. 99% of Soviet literature was complete rubbish, 99% of Soviet music - same. USSR produced some interesting bits of culture, in many cases due to a combination of freedom from commercial concerns and need to creatively work within and around the ideological restrictions, but it was not enough. Compared to the Russian culture of XIX and early XX centuries, USSR's cultural output and influence were laughable.

USSR benefitted from blocking out the poisonous American pop culture, but its own set of problems was even more grave.

That said, 1991 was still a crime of enormous scale.

>I didn't manage to unclog the toilet even though I tried twice
>Let's burn down the whole house and build a new one
Russia in a nutshell

Nice grave for a tyrant who was shot in a gutter like a rat.

>It's actually wasn't abstract, it's just didn't exist.
Which only furthers the point that values and identity are imposed by an elite upon the common man. Everything greater than a tribal society is already an arbitrary identity, so the form doesn't really matter beyond personal sensibilities.
>Yeah really, how he dare to build housing for people instead of monuments and more death camps.
That's a gross exaggeration and oversimplification. Stalin was extremely harsh because of the conditions the USSR was in, both internal and external, required it. Destalinization was not a process with the interests of the people in mind, but of the nomenklaturists. Just like the bourgeoisie and some hedonistic, mankurtized aristocrats supported the weakening of the tsarist autocracy with their own interests in mind.
>And that's a bad system if it couldn't functioning without it created.
It's not the fault of the system, but of the inevitable decay inherent to any system. Same thing happened with Peter - on one hand, he modernized Russia and brought it in line with the rest of the European Powers, but on the other hand he mankurtized the elite(and opening the way for Western greed and hedonism) and transformed both the nobility and the clergy(with the replacement of the Patriarch with his Governing Synod) into glorified bureaucrats and put an end to the byzantine autocracy started by Ivan the 'Terrible'.
With the help of Russian and Western spies and instigators. ;)

They had to act quickly, I'll give them that. Otherwise things would've only improved from them(given that we paid all our external debts and the austerity measures would've been eliminated, plus the Securitate was recovering from Pacepa's betrayal) and a foreign-induced coup would've been much harder to achieve.

improved from there*

Living in a capitalist paradise skews your views.

>But I think we could both agree that what would've most likely happened would've been akin to the UK's monarchy in which tsar or no tsar, it would've made no difference.
I don't see why Russia would adopt UK's system, when in most aspects these countries are complete opposites.

Honestly, I do think that a ceremonial monarchy is impossible in Russia, a monarch commands respect here because he is a ruler, not because he engages in some traditional rituals. Russia would probably still become some kind of republic, and Tsar would still abdicate. But not in the middle of world war, for God's sake.

Didn't your country people kill your communist dictator?

By UK's system, I was referring solely to the fact that the ''''Queen'''' is just a literal welfare queen with no power and no real say in anything. She just serves as a symbol for unity among plebs and as a tourist attraction.

>a monarch commands respect here because he is a ruler
And Russia needs a ruler. If Russia became democratic, it would've been just as bad and decadent as the West or maybe even worse with oligarchs that have neither someone to hold them in check nor any sort of interest in keeping 'appearances'.

1) Tyrant with hands covered in blood of innocents
2) Savior.
3) Tyrant with hands covered in blood of innocents and Savior.

May you die by a gypsy attack you leftard cuck
He is just dumb

Some did, backed by foreign agents and traitors in the nomenklatura. It was orchestrated from the getgo since a communist Romania was inconvenient for both the West and Gorbachyov. They also tried to pull a 'Yugoslavia' on us afterwards promoting ethnic conflict in Tg. Mures, but the army stopped it before it got out of hand.

Don't you have some fruits to gather in Spain or Italy, ROMAnian?

strong, yes.

basically this, OP, tbqh
Even commies admitted he was terribly wrong and wasted a lot of people
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Cult_of_Personality_and_Its_Consequences
however, despite the blame most people agree that things he achieved could hardly be achieved any other way, except those libs who are all clever and cool because they know they won't actually rule a country suffering from terrible management in the past, civil war and intervention, so they can say everything they won't

on average it's more of a disapproval and no one wants another stalin, however since it's history and hardly affects anything people at least show respect, like something they never show towards almost any other soviet leader

You wanna switch?
I'd take dumb Russians over shitskins any day.

>but of the nomenklaturists
Surprise, it was Stalin who create nomenclature.
>It's not the fault of the system, but of the inevitable decay inherent to any system.
Yeah, but if system starts dying right after death of creator it's a very bad system.

>it was Stalin who create nomenclature
The nomenclature is inherent to any communist system, just like a merchant class is inherent to any late feudal one. Stalin kept them in check, his followers did not, but on the contrary gave them even more privileges and free hand.
>if system starts dying right after
Correlation does not equal causation. Mao was even more brutal(and incompetent) than Stalin, yet his asian stalinism persisted and modernized. "What ifs" might be interesting to entertain, but we really can't know how history would've turned out had things gone different(if Stalin wasn't a bad familyman and schooled one of his sons to take his place, if Aleksandr III didn't die prematurely and managed to groom Nicholas II, if Alexey managed to outwit Peter and take control of Russia along with his reactionary sympathizers, if Pugachev was successful, or Kolchak, or Ungern... and the list goes on.)

>The nomenclature is inherent to any communist system, just like a merchant class is inherent to any late feudal one
First who make nomenclature the ruler class was Stalin.
>Mao was even more brutal(and incompetent) than Stalin, yet his asian stalinism persisted and modernized.
Lolwut? Since Mao's death China declined his system, there were no evolution, only replacement.

Most people think he wasn't so bad - won the war, made Russia great again etc. This seems to be the angle that the state media is taking, for the most part. Funnily, Putin himself always says that his crimes are not excusable.

A fun detail is that when speaking about the fact that you could have been sent to a Gulag based on a single denunciation, some people will say "Well, it's the fault of the one who made such denunciation, not of Stalin for establishing such a form of government".

>First who make nomenclature the ruler class was Stalin.
Yes, but as I've stated before, it is inherent to the system. It isn't a negative or a positive, it just is. Think of the way nomads that settled down gave birth to a nobility from amongst their leader and his generals, same shit with any revolutionary movement. Favoritism is inherent in establishing a new system, even if afterwards it continues being outright hereditary, nepotistic or meritocratic.
>Lolwut?
Read on the Sino-Soviet split(and although much less relevant, the Albano-Soviet split). The Soviet Union was condemned for betraying its (stalinist) roots.

Of course this all is about geopolitics more than ideology, but China certainly had a progression towards a more refined authoritarianism, while the Soviet Union took the path of liberalization.

>There was no interethnic culture war or conflict.
That's simply not true. There's a reason it blew up in so many places immediately after collapse. You can't believe that people were perfect and good and then in two years Gorbachev and Yeltsin corrupted them into angry nationalistic shitheads. Chechens, for example, they always remembered Stalin's deportation.

You do realize there were two revolutions in 1917? And Saint Martyr Nikolai seemed to dismantle Dumas every time they would try to actually act like a parliament and he rejected the constitutional monarchy.
>people overwhelmingly voted to keep the union, reforming it on democratic lines
The same thing that happened would happen: the power would be redistributed withing the Party and the KGB, army etc.

>There's a reason it blew up in so many places immediately after collapse.
Great revolutions and movements are always orchestrated and led by a few. The masses are drawn to those that appear stronger and in the case of the idiotic policies of the post-stalinist Soviet Union, Russia was on the way of becoming the new "Old Man of Europe".

Also, do you honestly believe that there were no foreign interests in exacerbating nationalist sentiment(and separatism as an end goal)? The dissolution of the Soviet Union could've ended much worse than it did.

>Chechens
Chechens are tribal savages. They have at best a proto-national identity, fact proven by both the fast co-option of the Chechen struggle to islamism and Kadyrov's ease in modeling his own pro-Russian, Sufist variant of Chechen identity.

>the autocratic system most suitable for the 'russkaya dusha'
Novgorod was a democracy you gypsy (probably not actually gypsy but I couldn't care less) cunt.

And Russia was made by Muscovy upon the basis of Kievan Rus and with the spirit of the Roman ('''Byzantine''') Empire. Fuck off with your merchant republic. Moscow - Third Rome, eternal capital, not Petrograd, not Novgorod.

>Kadyrov's ease in modeling his own pro-Russian, Sufist variant of Chechen identity.
Kadyrov didn't model shit, he controls Chechnya by force. If he (and his teip or whatever) lose power, well, the war will start again.

You're a crazy fedora warhammer cosplaying fuck jerking off to antiquated forms of government that died out a century ago, I wasted my time replying to you. At least you're stuck in Romania.

And I wasted my time replying to some American expat fapping to muh freedumbz and dimokrasi.

I actually live in Russia, unlike you.

hey russians explain to me, do you really love imperial russia (pre ww1) AND soviet russia? how on earth does it make sense, didn't the commies hated the kangz?

also bonus question: which you want to have have back? any politic parties that would want to bring the tsar back (because I already know that there are literal commie ones).

Flag says otherwise. Though it doesn't matter, you're as much of a Russian as the mankurtized aristocrats that spoke French in their own home a few centuries ago.
>muh democracy
>muh progressivism
>muh end of history

>Khrushchev screwed up the economy
Actually Khrusch planned to disband most of Red army and just use nukes, no tank blitzkriegs. Considering USSR spent 70% on military it could save our economy and prevent 1991.

>What's the typical views on Stalin in Russia today?

All the Americans barge in with their opinion.

I fucking HATE you guys so much.

>Even though he killed millions of them, they still think he's a hero
Well, first of all, he didn't kill millions of them. It wasn't even a million, actually. During the period from 1922 to 1953 death penalties received 800 thousands people. I bet you don't even know that USSR were the first country to abolish death penalty in 1947. Now that's a real tyranny, eh?

Irish American here, and I hate you too
IRA all day

You're a bullshitter, what about the GULAG? You weren't actually shot or executed but many died from overwork etc. I've read Sozhenitsyn I know what's up. You can't fool me.

> he controls Chechnya by force
>I actually live in Russia
Buryatka, please

>I've read Sozhenitsyn
kek Protip: Solzhenitsyn pulls pretty much everything out of his ass.

Everyone i know lost a relative in ww2
Nobody i know lost a relative in gulag.

A lot of jews and liberals from important families did die there so they whine about it loudly. Fuck them, it's not national tragedy.

You're not "Irish-American" when your grandfather was Irish, you fag, Why do you burgers always want to half European? No European says that he's "German-American".

The general idea is that "Our history was great, all of it, even the parts which contradict each other". Our """communist""" party leader makes a big deal of going to pray in church on every holiday.

>Flag says otherwise.
First day on the internet?

Чтo, пpocтитe?

You lose, dumbass. As outspoken as you are a leader like Stalin would have you shot, too, because you're uppity and might be.....might be....a threat later on.

>mah gulags
>mah Solzenitsyn

What exactly did Stalin "achieve?"

>I've read Sozhenitsyn I know what's up. You can't fool me.
That's the same guy who said that Soviet government directly and indirectly killed 110 millions people? That's actually explains how USSR population nearly doubled to 1989. Oh wait, it doesn't.

>how on earth does it make sense
It's all ancient history now. No need to take sides.
people care about ww2 still, but stuff before that? might as well be pyramids.

>i would love if my leader literally kill millions of my countrymen to enforce a kike ideology

Greatest ally...

He was a tyrant psychopath who only cared about his own personal gain.

Increasingly positive

What did he gain personally?

>USSR population nearly doubled
You mean by incorporating into itself everything around it and not murdering dissidents fast enough to compensate for the combined exponential population growth?

It's more about being a glorious empire than anything else.

Turned one of the most backwards and technologically decrepit nations on the planet into a super power through violence and intimidation.

Worthy of respect, not admiration.

Power, the only thing that really matters.

...

>by incorporating into itself everything around
Yeah no, pal, that were only 15-16 millions people right before WW2, which caused USSR almost as much casualties. So your arguments are kinda invalid.

>ignoring soviet expansion after WW2
>ignoring exponential population growth
>literally ignoring the argument and then claiming it's invalid

p. much

>backwards and technologically decrepit nations
Russian Empire wasn't amazing by any means, but it wasn't completely shit. Russia did undergo a modernization under Stalin, but that's something most countries had to do in the XX century. A lot of Stalin's modernization was "buy entire factories from America using gold".

she is DESIGNED for anal

>15-16 millions people right before WW2
SU had roughly 150 million people before WW2. You are a literal retard.

There are no bigger cucks on this planet than Russians who revere their kike communist overlords.

Practically being deified and worshipped by 100,000,000 people

w

>kike overlords
Read Radzinsky's biography of Stalin, m8.

>that mustache
orgasmo

>I've read Sozhenitsyn
He literally wrote by himself that his writing is are historical fiction.

...

Grain actually. And well, that was a pretty solid plan, from ruin to industrial superpower in 15 years.

These days amerifats got smarter and won't sell you whole factories, only products so you'd keep returning to buy more.

>if the characters are fictional, that means their circumstances are also fictional
>what's the difference between fiction and historical fiction?

>it was real in my mind
>flag
Checks out.

Before the revolution, it was a decently prosperous nation.

After the revolution, it was worse than a failed state. At least a failed state won't force you to collectivize and requisition 99% of your assets.

The fight between whites and reds was a clusterfuck of massive proportions. Industrial production dropped by at least 95% across the board. Drought, in addition to ridiculously shitty state policies of not allowing peasants to farm subsitently lead to tens of millions of deaths from famine. Famine, in the modern day an age. The US has never had an incidence of not being able to afford food, even for the poorest among us.

Stalin inherited one of the most fucked up countries to ever exist, and in the span of 25 years he turned it into one of the most politically influential and deadly nations in history.

It might be noted the Americans tried to help out with shipping thousands of tons of grain during the the famine, and helping out with lend-lease during the war. But objectively, that wouldn't have mattered. Stalin would have shrugged, calculated the lives lost as a cost or benefit and continued to rule his country with an iron fist. Motherfucer was scary.

You're fucking moron. These 15-16 millions are the "incorporating" people from Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine and other countries. Stupid fucking kike.

>wasting your time on kikes

This so much.

Hi Mr Rosenblat.

>strong and respectable
You weren't respected when you let Jews control your country from behind the scenes with 11/12 of your gulags run by kikes.

>Israeli flag
>JOO DETECTED

Jeez, you think?

>Unironiy defending commusism
Good goy

>Famine, in the modern day an age.
Didn't you actually have famine during Great Depression? Not as severe as USSR, sure, but some measure of.

And, well, Stalin was one of the people behind the revolution. I dunno if I can call a guy an amazing political leader if he fucks things up and then gradually unfucks them by throwing resources at them while also being fabulously oppressive to citizens.

>dat peasant dreams

they are different thanks to stockholm syndrome, public school "history" and old people who shit in the heads of their kids and grandchildren.
but the truth is he was psycho criminal maniac and worst "leader" in our history.

>I dindunuffin, this five years old girl were trying to seduce me.
>bolshevik and comissars are ebil
>my case are completly political.
Mr talking soap have you ever read this pile of bullshit?

+15

Supply outstripping demand is not a famine. Food was too cheap for anyone to make money off of, which is why there were instances of farmers killing their livestock. My great great grandfather went hungry for some days, but food was available. Thats present in any country at any time, I dare say there are people that gamble away their money and let their kids go hungry, that doesn't make it a famine.

In any rate, it was nothing in comparison to early soviet times where massive sections of the population starved.

What about Mao

I think Stalin was an evil, sociopathic cyborg.

He was the exact same as Lenin and Trotsky. The only reason he threw them out was becasue he wanted power over the party.

He "purged jews" because everyone in the party was a jew, so any purge would be a "purge of jews". He married jews, his children married jews and he surrounded himself with jews.

He wrote about the "problematic aspects of great russian chuvenism" and was verry anti russian. He worked intentionally to remove russians and incooperate strangers from other parts of the soviet empire in it's ruling.

Basicly he was a Philosemitic SJW internationalist.

>proof

Mathew Raphael Johnsson is a PHD in russian history and philosophy. In this podcast, from 23 minutes in, he cites sources and talks about Stalins jew-communism.

radioaryan.com/2016/07/the-orthodox-nationalist-stalin-philo.html?utm_source=BP_featured

archive.org/download/TON071216/TON 071216.mp3

>This is coming from the most imperialistic country of the human history.
>destroying the middle east since the 60's,so europe has to face the consequences
The German didn't destabilize every single regime down there,that doesn't want to give theier oil and shekles to the jewish overlords

>Stalin and Mao dindu muffin, they are innocent they are saints, Stalin fought the evil devil Adolf HITLER.
>The Gulags never existed, Stalin and Mao saved us from eviiiiiiiil.

Wow, the Russian propaganda is stronk, oyyyyy veeeeeyyyy

Not an argument. Also, Solzhenitsyn acknowledges in his writings that a disproportionate amount of those responsible for the Bolshevik oppression were Jews, so I'm not sure how crying "kike" helps your case.

first - sorry my english is bad
second - Person as Stalin always will be descripted by diffrent group of people(clan) with propaganda's purpose. And that figure out truth you should read as much as possible sourses and compare they.
third - after great "russians" oktober's revolution 1917 y. many skypes have got power. Of before they must live where they living according to law. but than the made clans and used goverment to enrich theyself. They holded their position and did nothing.
forth - have in mind above the wrote you can understand that in ussr ruled not only stalin but many clans and it's meaning that not only stalin is to blame.
In general that understand stalin u shoud read more historic books and articles.
Also, rate my english pls

Can you translate the meaning of that image for me please, I don't understand some letters.

you just got schooled by that jew Igor. Better put down that bottle of vodka and read a book

Чoт нe oчeнь, aнoн.

Nye xhoroscho

He was a bandit and an idiot - everyone love him to this day. We have another one as a president right now - he's loved too.

>Romanian gypsy cretin trying to be useful

brothers christian

don't you like this?

Than vote for №6 in (don't know somethin like old senate) and №3 in senate
Nazional-christianity party

m.youtube.com/watch?v=7bSAB5OPkwQ

Oyyyyy gevalttt shut it down
Nobody can make this shit up

Kind of bad, but you can get information across. Should practice some more with connectors and tenses(and some spelling).
"Christian brother, you don't like it? Then vote the 6th list in the CHAMBER and the 3rd list in the SENATE of the NATIONAL-CHRISTIAN PARTY with the straight line sign(straight path) CUZA - GOGA.
t. "50 cents have been deposited into your account"
Shoo, shoo, jidov.

My mother was Russian from some port place in the East and she always talked about how he wasn't even Russian and her grandfather fuckin hated the guy.

Guess that's why they're over here now.

their brains mate, they're fucked

Thank you bro.
Can you tell me what are those words (lupu, mihacache, madglaru) please

Trust me Vlad, I don't wanna get too close

Family names of politicians.

Also, 4u, we wuz nazis before it was cool.
>From 1921, the swastika became the distinctive symbol of Cuza's movement

Haaa that's why I can't translate them in google translate, thank you bro.

Jude, don't you have some shekels to count or gentiles to kill/enslave?
(Juden hate this)→ go in peace.
Maby we Europeans should move to Israel, some are moving right now.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=C9xB3Crxx0Q

You're a literal retard who can't grasp a simple argument. If you have 150 million people, and say a quarter of them reproduce at an average rate of 2 children per couple, you can kill 37 million people and still experience a 25% population growth overall. The fact that the Soviet murder machine couldn't keep up with the population growth resulting from it providing just enough to keep people alive doesn't mean jack shit. Also, half of the citizens of the USSR by 1989 weren't even Russians.

>you just got schooled
>kike bastard literally misunderstood me and started ad hominem
>somehow it make me get schooled
Than again, what do you expect from a jew?

...

>Soviet murder machine
A FUCKING KIKE

See :

...

Keep reading that Russian Propaganda comrade.

>Than again, what do you expect from a jew?
>Scientific discovery, success in life, effective democracy.
Shouldn't you be testing your vodka bottles for methanol?

>Hypothetically USSR could kill a lot of their own people
>Therefore, they actually did it
Wow, it's fucking nothing.

And abolished slavery of it's own people by 1970. Progressive.

Proff?

Israel is one of the most culturally diverse societies on earth, Alfonso, and I'd be happy for you to move here too.

>she

And when was the last time YOU make scientific discovery?
You say that as an anti-Soviet propaganda in US wasn't a thing.

>Stalin murdered more Russians than any other man
>They still haven't recovered
brainwashed goy

Russia is communist so it's people are still enslaved in 2016.

Maybe cause the ones that lived under him, or have parents that did, remember how it actually was?

Anti-Stalinism is not nationalism. I know that Anti-Stalinism have been made fabricated into (((American nationalism))) but it doesn't make you any more of a patriot.

The don't have any scientific discoveries in JIDF

I'm talking about litteral slavery by collective farms - not your wishy-washy bullshit.

>According to many surveys, Russia is approximately 15% Muslim
>Islam is the second largest religion in the Netherlands

I've discovered that both your countries are going to turn into shit (or in Russia's case, an ever bigger pile of shit)

Oy vei, that's not true.

>Collective farms
>Slavery

How do you think agriculture were operated before they stripped the Kulaks of their power?

What's Russia's opinion on Yevegny Dzhughashvili? Didn't he have his own political party? How was he as a politician?

By fucking slavery, soviets continued this shit till 70's.

So how would they run agriculture without slavery?

Everyone had their own little farm (like in Norway?)? Such a change of production would have caused many more millions to die than what died in the 30s.

Kill millions of innocent Russians by starving then to death, turn the entire country into a miserable poor shithole... somehow still love by the Russians.

Then again here in Brazil our facist dictator Getúlio Vargas is still respected by a lot of people, so I guess is not that surprising.

>leftist in every sense of the word today
*Revisionism intensifies*
>Every conservative fights against leftism because we don't want to end up with the shithole that was Stalin's Russia.
Literally a slippery slope fallacy.

>turn the entire country into a miserable poor shithole...
>Stalin
Jesus, reed some books you fag.

Reading (western) books about Stalin won't help though

>le multicultural
Not even close. He basically genecided the Kazakhs and replaced them with ethnic Russians. He actually preferred ethnic Russians even though he was Georgian.

I read, but since you are Russian, I imagine all your educacional system must be controled to romantize communism, don't worry, the same thing happens here to make our militar regime sounds worse then it actually was.

There is no if's in history. They kept slavery till the 70's, that's it.

Hahahaha let's enrich Israel and new York with millions of people who are culturally diverse full of vibrant diversity.
I know the nature of your (((women))), the most slutty and perverse. (((They))) are the best to fuck.
Oyyyyy veeeeyyyyy

He did his best in the circumstances he was in. Certainly more than most others could at his place.

>No ifs
Do you think with your feelings? Slavery is bad because it makes people unhappy. If abolishing slavery leads to the very same people being even more unhappy or dead, it would not be a good thing to abolish it.

But how was it any more slavery than say "wage slavery"?

No. If (((they))) treated Russians and external peoples well (((they))) would never had been attacked nor (((theire))) nations would not had famines.
What you are saying is just bullshit like a parrot

>I know the nature of your (((women)))
>Implying you've ever been with a woman
Fake it til you make it

Well, by your logic, why even organize a revolution? It led to many unneeded deaths.

>not riding to Dacha on Sputnik
What are you, poorfag? It costs only a little more, has wi-fy and no annoying peddlers.

No, the revolution industrialized the region, gave people education and health care, ended hunger etc

Makes you wonder how all the other countries managed to industrialize without bloody civil wars...

>if the soviet government killed 110 million people how did the population double over time?

>okay so they could have done it but this proves nothing! muh soviet fuhrer dindu nuffin

A slavshit who can't keep track of his own arguments...

Sure thing, it wasn't the spirit of the time(coz only commie countires got all that), but commie blessing. And if not for them we still be a resource appendance to the West. Oh, wait...

It does, but hadn't there been a revolution in the USSR, more people would have died in total. They industrialized in record time, and hadn't they managed to stop the Nazis, what do you think the region would have looked like then for the Non-Germanic people in the east?

80% of the Russian public is split between "Won us WWII and gave us nukes!" and "He personally murdered my great-great-uncle."

The other 20% have more nuanced and informed opinions. If you're looking for civilized and informed discussion on Stalin in the English-language internet, you won't find it. Large volumes of information on Stalin and his regime are in Russian or are photos of documents (which are also in Russian). Unless you're somehow able to read those, all you have to go on is what mass media and "independent researchers" feed you.

Nice pasta.

>Russian Empire was firmly on the track to become a consitiutional monarchy
>USSR under Gorbachev was firmly on track to reorganize into a democratic federation

My only question is which blog fed you that bullshit?

It would have taken a longer time. Russia before WW1 was FAR behind the West in industrialization. More people would have died.

"If we are backward and weak, we may be beaten and enslaved. But if we are powerful, people must beware of us. We are 50 to 100 years behind the advanced countries of the West. We must make up this gap in 10 years. Either we do this or they crush us."

>a thread on stalin
>fuck tonnes of kikes in this thread
checks out

>>Russian Empire was firmly on the track to become a consitiutional monarchy
>>USSR under Gorbachev was firmly on track to reorganize into a democratic federation
>
>My only question is which blog fed you that bullshit?
He is technically correct on both points, except that in both situations neither state could have sustained economically - be it with or without the revolution/desolution of USSR.

Alexander III was doing a lot to reform Russian Empire, and Nikolai was gutless and ready to handover power to whomever.

Under Gorbachev, the processes he mentioned indeed happened - but it lead to USSR machine roting from inside and things stagnatinc and corruption spread, so eventually it would fall apart anyway since was no proper power to help it through crisis.

Tsarists already had a plan to industrialize following the Japanese model. Russia could have been ahead by twenty or thirty years if (((anarchists))) hadn't kept bombing the Duma.

And look where it got us in the end. Glorious 300$ monthly salary, HIV and synthetic drug epidemic.

Typical Russians don't browse Cred Forums, user. And non-typical are not intrested in reporting correctly.

>Tsarists already had a plan
They probably had many plans (got any reading material on it?).
And Russia could have been ahead of whom?

It does not change the fact that they (the Communists) industrialized the country in record time. You could assume that without the rapid industrialization, many more people would have died.

youtube.com/watch?v=NVqxoA52kjI
So fast, that it shocked the Nazis.

No, it doesn't. They should be in Birobidzhan.

Father of the Nation, The Prince of Peace, The Bringer of Light.

ITT: people who unironically think Stalin's Russia was [pic related]

When Stalin died (and the revolutionaries), the bureaucrats took over, and progress started to slow down. With the collapse of the union and the Soviet "Socialism" even worse people took over. I believe Russia didn't catch up on life expectancy before in 2010?

Blame Stalin all you want for not being immortal

I blame others for keeping him alive along with Lenin and fucking West for supporting their shit.

It was NEVER EVER
>a decently prosperous nation

It was literally completely shit by any average metric. Most of the population was rural and lived in medieval conditions alike slavery.
Come on, personal slavery was abolished in Russia in fucking 1861, before that most of the population was rightless. And it wasn't abolished as is, former slaves who had no possessions behind them had to buy themselves from their owners, many weren't able to even in 50 years. And we're not even talking about 'industrial slaves', the conditions workers lived in.

I mean read literally any contemporary author of that time.

It seems for most people here that Russians were kinda stupid to support bolsheviks and revolution, while actually they had literally nothing to lose - no private property, no freedom, no rights, bolsheviks promised them at least something while the Emperor really didn't even seem to care.

Same shit in Romania, desu. Eastern European inclination towards communism is justified.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_reform_in_Romania
>In the late 19th century about 2,000 landowners controlled over half the land while peasants (with little representation in government as well as limited access to land and ownership rights) had just a third.
> First, too little land was assigned to too many candidates even though many farmers were excluded from the redistribution and went on working in semi-serfdom on the boyars' estates. Second, demographic increase caused devastating rural overpopulation. Third, inheritance practices based on equally divided portions led to deep property fragmentation. Thus, the new landowners quickly ran into debt and because of the inadequate banking system had to borrow from boyars, large tenants or usurers at exorbitant interest rates. Instead, some peasants transferred the land back to the former owners and continued working it essentially as before.[16] This new system of dependency prompted by the lack of arable land and pasture was dubbed "neo-serfdom" (neoiobăgie) by the Marxist theorist Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1907_Romanian_Peasants'_revolt
>The Romanian Army began firing on the peasants; thousands of peasants perished and more than 10,000 were arrested.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_Dobrogeanu-Gherea
>"All the contradictions of the social and political life of Rumania: the bondage of the peasants, judicially repealed but resurrected by the logic of economic relations; the parliamentary regime set up on the basis of Asiatic agrarianism; "British" freedoms in the cities, the old style Turkish despotism in the countryside -all these phenomena are subjected in Gherea’s great book to a truly masterly analysis where clarity and simplicity go hand in hand with a genuine Marxist profundity."

Is this recording genuine? Somehow I have doubts.

B-but muh October Manifesto that based Saint Tsar granted to his humble undeserving servants. Nevermind the fact that it didn't lead anywhere.

Wasn't Russia trying to modernise in last year's of the Empire? I'm not keen on Russian History, though, all I know is that Nicky ruled as an autocrat most of the time

by sane russians or by majority?

we had a common massacre of factory workers' peaceful demonstration in 1905
Nicky didn't rule
like, at all
the most pathetic Tsar who never had a will to accomplish anything
and without a decent heir

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Soviet_man
Add international marriages by your taste.
Didn't you have that in Poland?

>It was very hard to get living permit ourside of region assigned to your nationality. Basically like trying to emigrate abroad.
Baikal–Amur Mainline.
Virgin Lands Campaign
Kaliningrad\Baltics\Ukraine """"new"""" colonization..

He destroyed all progress Lenin worked to create.
sage

>which you want to have have back
None.
Russia was shit, is shit and will be shit.

Gib pretty kurwa and apples, and I don't mind about greater Polsk.

Well

He slaughtered millions
Sent them off to death camps called gulags
Millions disappeared
Received billions from US during ww 2
Sent human waves at Germans
Basically drowned nazis in his own soldiers blood
Took away all liberty, freedom of speech and thought

And they are Russians
So he's probably seen as a hero

I mean hell Putin is dictator for life and has stolen hundreds of billions and they love him

Was Salazar good?

Why are you so enlightened?