I saw the movie 'Archangel' yesterday. In the movie you can see how people in Russia still see Stalin as a hero.

That got me wondering: how do you see Joseph Stalin? Hero or devil? As they say in the film: He inherited a country with wooden ploughs. When Stalin died, it was a superpower with nucliar weapons. He also defeated the nazis (with a little help from the allies) and ensured a fascist-free Europe.

Still, he has killed an estamated 5 - 20 million people. And though the nazis were gone, communism wasn't much better for the people in Eastern-Europe

So what is your oppinion?

Cya

Fritz

It is highly unlikely that most people in the former USSR had much idea about what was going on. As in the USA today, the media was completely gagged by the government. Indeed, in so far as there was no 'internet' available, there was no genuine chance even to hear an outside opinion.

So what your 'man in the street' thinks of Joe, you have to treat with caution.

Totalitarian government comes down to the same ends whether so called communist or so-called fascist. Let us just be glad that he is dead.

I agree with Malchik. If you think about it, fascism and communism aren't all that different. The policies a different, but the end result on the people is almost identical.

As for Joe, he was a murdering, socialist pig. I hate him.

Hero, role model, one of the greatest leaders of our time. The country was going through tough times from the aftermath of WWI, and he did what he had to do for the sake of his country.

Not really... But I'll play the devil's advocate here just to see where it goes.

Well, Stalin did what Hitler did in Germany in his early days. He brought order.
After World War 1, Germany had the highest inflation ever recorded in history. For a piece of bread, you had to literally pay a whole wagon filled with money. Hitler promised to fix this if his party was chosen (which he did).
Another example of what power Hitler gave to the german people was not only order, but also cooperation. When he was preparing Germany for war once again, he didn't order new ships the be built; he salvaged old warships that had sunk. It took about one or two weeks to make them fit for fight again, so to speak. Everyone worked together.
So, Hitler was not only crazy, he was also the best speaker in known history. No one has turned a broken country into a military superpower in such short time.

So in short, Hitler brought order (and united the people).

(In case you wonder, I'm NOT a nazi. I'm just interested of old military history )

Both of you are severely mistaken --- perhaps more so than those interviewed in the film the OP saw.

The principal leaders of Russia immediately after its withdrawal from World War I were Lenin and Trotsky. Stalin played no major role in any of the revolutions leading up to this event --- actually supporting the provisional government of 1917, which the October Revolution overthrew --- and was appointed to an officer position in the Red Army during the civil war that followed. He slowly gained power in the years thereafter, doing nothing remarkable with his newfound abilities except for the purpose of gaining popularity. Trotsky, meanwhile, led the October Revolution and commanded the Red Army during the civil war, serving alongside Lenin until his death in 1924. Upon Lenin's death, Stalin named himself the de facto leader of Russia and exiled Trotsky, whom he later had assassinated.

On the eve of World War II, Stalin ran frightened and tried desperately to arrange for the Marxists' traditional enemy, Britain, to defend Russia. When that brilliant plan failed, he then negotiated a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany. In accordance with the pact, Stalin invaded Poland along with Hitler, taking the eastern portions of the country for himself.

Deciding that his master plan for Communist-hating Germany and ostensibly-Communist Russia to be forever in peace and share a border would be a success, Stalin led the Red Army into Finland, effectively forcing himself to fight two unrelated wars on three fronts should Hitler decide to break said pact. (Luckily for him, however, Russia was in control of Finland before this event happened, although at great loss to the Red Army.) When Hitler inevitably broke said pact, Stalin proceeded to bravely sit with his proverbial thumb up his proverbial ass until Germany's military was quite literally at his doorstep. What did Stalin do to save the day? After such devastating defeats, how did the Red Army possibly manage to not only drive the German military out of Russia, but also take Berlin before the Americans? He gave up and let his generals control the Red Army; as per prior arrangements, of course, Joe took all credit for what happened afterward.

Stalin's domestic policies very closely mirrored the haphazard and incompetent manner in which he directed the Russian wartime effort. Any portion of Lenin and Trotsky's industrialization strategy that Stalin chose to continue was facilitated directly by the resources of the Russian citizen due to Stalin's deluded, hopelessly nationalistic, and outright absurd economic policies. The conditions under which Russians lived --- Stalin and his newly-created class of bureaucrats excluded --- declined dramatically in the period between a few years before he took power to a few years after. Soviet Russia during and after Stalin could not be described as Fascist, and it certainly could not be described as Communist. It was simply an ad hoc arrangement of a deeply bureaucratic system of government, created by a cowardly, insecure, mentally defective, incompetent man who wanted nothing other than to be worshipped like a God by the largest nation in the world, no matter how many people had to suffer to make that happen. Every facet of Russian government and culture during this time was specifically engineered to provide this for him, and then to delay this house of cards from falling down for as long as possible.

Well, Stalin was after all paranoid. When his airplanes (the pilots, that is) saw the Germans in Russia, and reported this to Stalin, he had them all excecuted for "treachery", because "there was no germans in Russia" according to Joseph.

What's wrong with politicians these days (and before)?

The word you're looking for is "delusional." A paranoid person wouldn't --- in the span of one war --- try to ally himself with one of his enemies, trust another enemy absolutely, help that enemy invade a country that's en route to his own border, and then finally again attempt to ally himself with the same enemy that told him to get lost earlier (who is at that time also in league with another of his enemies).

Well, for me he will always be paranoid!

Wow... Thanks, I've learned a few things about Stalin from you... Until I saw Archangel, I've allways concentrated on the German army during WWI and WWII (and the political battles in the Interbellum)

@ Jonlissla: you're intrested in old military history too? What is your specialization? WWI? WWII? other?


So: thank you!

Cya

Fritz

Well, I've learned a few things as well.

I'm interested in all kind of military history. Though I'm not excactly good at it, it is nonetheless interesting to read and hear about it.

The same for me, although people call me an expert concerning the German army in WWII

Let me outline the difference between the two of them

In theory:
Facsist states are conservatives, they keep on reminding the people of the glory their nation HAD, and urge them to try to bring their nation to their former glory. They also tend to bring up religious values (not pointing an argument against religion). Then, what a fascist state would surely have, is a powerful military, enough to fight off "the enemy inside" which are mostly activists against the government and some other opposition.

Communists are liberals, they do not believe in the state, they believe that the people should all work as one, and then share the results among themselves. Here, it's what like Lenin said, Proletarian dictatorship, where the people rules the state, and not the other way around. In a communist state, a government only serves to represent the people as a state to the international world, this is due to the fact that all internal matters are, as was said, dealt by the people in collective.

Though in practice:
Communist states are run just like any other fascist state.

Anyways, back to the point of the debate itself:

of course, I see Stalin as a hero. What would happen if he hadn't been there to challenge Hitler on the eastern front? Stalingrad was one of Stalin's plan to destroy the advancing German forces when they were at their weakest. It was winter, and Stalin knew how it would significantly affect the German supplies, in addition, Stalin sent his own armies to encircle Stalingrad and cut off the German supply line.

Sure, as a General, Stalin was great, though I must confess, that as a dictator, he was not a good one...

A much more capable leader would've been in his place. Trotsky, perhaps.


Yes, that must be it. Boy that Stalin, he was incompetent like a fox!

What definition of 'great' are you using? During the Nazi assault on the Soviet Union, the main defensive tactic Stalin employed was retreat and hope the Nazis give up.

Well, for one, Stalin knew the inferiority of his forces compared to the Germans, so instead of going head to head, he decided to hold them all out in Stalingrad during the winter. Then, Stalin also sent his army to encircle Stalingrad, effectively closing all supply routes for the German forces save air-dropped supplies. Then finally, he just needed to wait till the German supplies run low, it was then, he decided to attack Stalingrad after a few weeks of withdrawing.

Even if it's simply retreat, and hope for the enemy to run out of supplies, it's still a tactic, rather than meet them all out and get defeated for sure.

So he was great, as in he could effectively use "strategies" to be honest, nearly no strategies he could use will gain him superiority over German forces, but then, he knew Russian winter. He knew that his best weapon is to hold out till winter, and of course (an example) you know why Napoleon retreated from Russia on his second campaign to Russia...

There is a very big difference between saving your troops for a more favorable battle and denying that the enemy is even in your country. The invasion of Russia was much more farce than glory, and it's silly to look for heroes there.

I have no problems with Comrade Stalin.

Hehe.. You hate him, do you. Hm.. Wonder what it would be like.. To still be at war with the Nazis.. To see more and more people join their cause, because, let's face it, the governemt sucks and Anarchy is the only way, for me anyway.

Was it Stalin's intention to murder anyone? If that would be the case, why would he have played a major role against Hitler and the Nazi's? If he was truly evil, he could have joined.


As a Russian guy, i do not support his methods, but i do support his point of views. I could say the same thing about Hussein.

I don't see anything wrong with Comrade Stalin. Then again, i'm not a judgemental american.. WHOOPS!!! Sorry!! I didn't mean to let my true colours show that soon.

Err, remind me again why Stalin was the only one capable of winning against the Nazis? Last time I checked, Germany was doomed from the beginning, the only question was how long it would take for them to finally lose, and how many people would die in the process.

But of course you're an anarchist, so I shouldn't expect too much intelligence or historical knowledge from you. Compared to the ignorance of history required to think anarchy is a good idea, thinking Stalin was necessary for a Soviet victory is a pretty minor thing.




Err, what part of "insane dictator" is so hard to understand? This is really not complicated, Stalin didn't join with Hitler because Stalin wanted to conquer Germany. Why would he settle for being Hitler's pet when he can rule instead? Of course your ignorance of history shows again, Stalin did join Hitler, for a while, when it was convenient for his ambitions.

Here's a hint: in the real world, good and evil are not some black and white thing. There isn't some united "evil" side struggling against a united "good" side, evil people are perfectly capable of fighting against each other. Neither Stalin nor Hitler had a plan of "advance the cause of Evil", they both had their independent ideologies and goals. Insane, terrifyingly wrong goals, but still something beyond your comic book idea of morality.

But I see... Stalin just murdered millions of people by accident. I'll have to keep that excuse in mind next time I need to kill someone!



No, of course, nothing wrong. Killing millions of people is just fine, right?

And it has nothing to do with being an american... everyone with any sense of morality and a vague understanding of history thinks Stalin was a mass-murdering psycho. But then again, you're an anarchist, so the concepts of "empathy" and "knowledge of history" are completely alien to you.

Joseph Stalin was brutal, but he did what was necessary for the USSR, im sure. Fidel Castro probably would have done a better job in Stalin's place, though. He was a fantastic leader during war, Germany put up a tough fight, but Stalin had the nearly radical patriotism of his people. I wish I could inspire like those communists could.

HEAR, HEAR!!!

Devil,
Joseph Stalin was brute & a self centered bully, he did not have his country's best interest in mind, he had his. As been noted previously, he did shift his allegiances when it served him.
And yes he was paranoid, remember he had his teachers killed just because of the possibility they may have reveled something unflattering about him.
He got lucky with the Russian winter or they would have been overtaken.
The victories he won were by attrition & not superior military tactics.

I agree. But to me it's not even about wether or not Stalin was looking out for the countrys well-being or his own or if he was a skilled and brilliant military commander or a complete jackass. To me it's about the fact that he caused the death of millions and could order the deaths of others for no real reason whatsoever (per the example in the quote above). As far as i'm concerned there is absolutely no way to justify that, no matter how honorable or dishonorable his intentions might have been.

To summarize, In my OPINION no matter how brilliant a commander he was, no matter how much he may or may not have wanted to help his country, He still commited genocide and for that there can be absolutely no justification or redemption.

one of the top three mass murders=devil

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/tyrants.htm

You are absolutely, positively right!
Don't think for a minute that just because I didn't mention how much I hated his murdering actions that means I think he was a swell guy, far from it. You are preaching to the choir here brother!

My sincere apologies hoots, I honestly didn't mean to imply that you thought he was a cool guy or that the other things about Stalin you mentioned were more important than the genocide he commited. And in hindsight that is really what my comment seemed to suggest. For this, again, I am deeply sorry.

Hey JoJo Man,
No harm and no offense taken, it's cool.

I didn't read all the thread, but i surely vote for "devil", without any doubts. One of the worst brutal mass murderer in history.

But let me say another thing or two: It's wrong to compare communism and nazi-fascism as the same thing. I'm not talking about the men who led these dictatorships, but about the ideologies. The communism comes from a social and philosophical doctrine, which tried to imagine a society with no conflicts, and the revolution in Russia in early 900 saved an entire people from hunger and oppression. No one of these things fit in the nazi fascist theory. Racial laws came out in germany and italy almost at the same time, and it caused the death of millions people in the horrible way that we all know.

Sure, the same thing happened in russia, and it was no less brutal than the nazifascist way, but it came after. The planned extermination of millions people in the gulags wasn't in the purpose of the revolution, or am i wrong?

I agree. Communism was concieved with the aims of creating a very 'brotherly love where all are equal' kind of society. Fascism on the other-hand serves to protect the well-being of the state and ONLY the state.

Hello all! Thats an interesting tread so im gonna say some words about that. I'm russian by the way so u could learn a common russian guys's opinion about Stalin. I sure vote for devil, dont be surprised! And i completely disagree with the guys who said that Stalin was a great leader(general) during the war. Im telling u he was not. The general whom u should refer as a great general was Jukov. So in fact he and his team won the war, not stalin. After the war Stalin was afraid of Jukov's influence so he made him a governer of far away province. Stalin really was paranoid!

P.S.: im really sorry for all my mistakes =)

Good to hear your opinion & your English Is 1000 times better than my Russian, (I think I only know about 5 words).

Bad guy, ... really really bad guy -- (there can be only one Devil ... and he has no chance at forgiveness ...Stalin COULD have changed but seems to have never chosen to do so )

i'm sure those who benefited from his changes, those who were on the inside, feel positively about him ...

those who had family murdered, or those who escaped to the US and else where because of his pogroms, more than likely feel negatively

As far as the russian people that still love stalin, i robably consider them charly manson lovers also, ( in a sense you know what i mean ) People are not stupid. Somebody who killed roughly 10 million ( the numbers will never actually be known.) because they were political dissedents ( or were just accused of ), or just didnt agree with his policy's is certainaly not liked by his goverment.

Stalin was enshrined after his death ( not sure where ) and when the fall of communist russia came to be, the people desicrated his shrine. and did something with his body ( cant remeber exactly as it has been awhile since this stuff interested me ). Lenin on the other hand, who was one of the founders of MARXISM not communism is still a russian historic figure to the people. Stalin was Lenins pupil during the Bolshevic thingy. Stalin actually was sent to siberia on a few occasions do to his paranoia, after lenins rise stalin even attempted assassinations ( not himself but some say he commanded it ) upon lenin.

Anyway stalin i think was all of the above, paranoid, Delusioned, power hungry, had a god complex, and was another charsmatic leader that destroyed millions of lives. Seems to me we traded in hitler for stalin, which to me is tradin in one evil for another.

By all means communism isnt bad in theory, all it does is cut out the "corporate" aspect of the economy, equalizes all people in the workforce and splits everything equally among the working class. The problem with communism is the corruption it stews. Leaders get greedy, people get greedy, then paranoid thn things mess up. The only truly succseful communist goverment in the world is china, but even then, they have no freedoms like those in the democratized nations of the world do.

Also they renamed stalingrad to another name, ( on tip of my toungue ).

There was a point in history where many of the united states Goverment officials aqgreed that if aliens came and asked take us to there leader, they would have sent them to russia. ( namely Gorbechov )

If my spelling sucks thats cause i am tired.


Which gives me an idea for this forum........

Sorry double clicked computer malfunction.

Hmmm... Interesting topic...

Honestly, I would have to say that Stalin is NOT a hero.

I wouldn't necessarily call him "The Devil," though. He probably could have been a great leader if he'd changed his ways... It's like Hitler. "A good leader, but the wrong ideas."

and in the end...its all a punch and judy show that we call "history" Communism, Fascism, evil in all its varieties thoughout "History". Same whore, different gown. Who cares?
Any ideology that does not hold peace and love and compassion as its highest ideal is evil and should not be supported by anyone. But as we know, the devil/satan loves to create divisions and get us all fighting one another over stupid petty labels and ideologies and even religion. Pfft. the blindness and stupidity some people have. so obvious.