Opinion of Joseph Stalin

[The Free North]

I'm curious to see if anyone votes for the first option.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

HP (literally normal)

[Türkisblau]

HP (literally normal)

I don't think that you could ever be considered "normal."

[TNF]

Massive HP

[Rockefeller GOP]

Obviously an HP

[Oldiesfreak1854]

HP (sane).

[© tweed]

as Eric Hobsbawm put it, "the only hope we had for a future" in the interwar years, heading into WWII.

as that made-for-TV movie with Robert Duvall put it, "Our history required Stalin."

[they don't love you like i love you]

I'm curious to see if anyone votes for the first option.

Whenever polls like this come around people often like to protest vote for the FF option. Osama bin Laden got almost 40% FF in one poll because of this.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Massive Massive HP

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Although I agree with the basic idea of the gulags, I ultimately feel his purges went too far. Lean HP.

[DC Al Fine]

Better than Mao, worse than Hitler.

[TNF]

Better than Mao, worse than Hitler.

So I take it that you'd put it -

Hitler > Stalin > Mao?

Obviously I'd put Hitler at the bottom but I'm not sure about Stalin or Mao. Stalin was sh**t for a whole host of reasons (being the personification of the bureaucratic counterrevolution in the USSR, utterly insane adventurism in foreign policy followed by equally stupid conservatism, etc), but I don't know if that level of terrible outweighs the utter garbage that is Maoism. I would have to give Mao some credit for pursuing revolutionary politics abroad, but at the end of the day Maoism is still basically middle class radicalism and literally allied itself with Richard fucking Nixon against the USSR, which is pretty unconscionable from a socialist standpoint.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Better than Mao, worse than Hitler.

[DC Al Fine]

Better than Mao, worse than Hitler.

Genocide of the Ukranians, persecution of Christianity, and he persecuted his own people harshly as well.

[Cory]

Obviously I'd put Hitler at the bottom but I'm not sure about Stalin or Mao. Stalin was sh**t for a whole host of reasons (being the personification of the bureaucratic counterrevolution in the USSR, utterly insane adventurism in foreign policy followed by equally stupid conservatism, etc), but I don't know if that level of terrible outweighs the utter garbage that is Maoism. I would have to give Mao some credit for pursuing revolutionary politics abroad, but at the end of the day Maoism is still basically middle class radicalism and literally allied itself with Richard fucking Nixon against the USSR, which is pretty unconscionable from a socialist standpoint.

I'm no fan of Stalin for reasons much the same as yours. I commonly think about how much history would be better if Trotsky somehow won over over Stalin ( I don't think a military coup would work).

Trotsky would never have purged the military (obviously considering that was his base of support) or made deals with Hitler. I would almost say WWII in Europe as we know it doesn't happen in this scenario. Hitler and Trotsky were both True Believers in their respective opposing causes.

But that being said I think you're wrong about Stalin's foreign policy conduct. I would say Stalin was in fact very cautious and conservative in his foreign policy decision-making. During the lead up to WWII the USSR was very much "playing defense" diplomatically. The M-R Pact was only made after it was clear the UK/France had no serious offer. They wanted to get the Soviets to contribute to the defense of Poland (a country that hates them) and do basically all the fighting while they build up to the final blow.

Germany had a better, more realistic deal that offered the Soviets what they needed most: time. As for the invasion of Finland that was also done as part of the grand effort. The idea was to secure their Northern flank and put some distance between Finland and Leningrad. Also let's not forget that Germany outright gave them permission as part of the deal. Everything the Soviets did in the lead up to WWII was to get ready for the inevitable war with Germany.

As you might imagine the shockingly rapid collapse of France came as quite a surprise. Stalin was still convinced that Hitler wouldn't invade until 1942 after somehow bringing Britain to heel. By this time the Soviets will be ready, and every year after that the Soviets get only stronger and Germany get's weaker. Keep in mind the Soviet economy was poised to take off in the 1940's if it weren't for the invasion ruining their economy and trashing the work of the 1930's.

If Germany doesn't invade by 1943 it's over. By 1945 (even if Germany beats the UK and forces them to make peace) the Soviets will invade Germany and smash them. The Soviets were playing the long game but the entire plan backfired with the German invasion coming earlier then expected.

The Berlin Blockade was probably the exception to this trend.

As for the second point I think the assertion that Maoism (real life Maoism) is "middle class radicalism" is incorrect. Maybe in America a lot of people identify as "Maoist" who are middle class people, but in the "real world" Maoists are the most radical of all really. They take it another step and focuses on Third Worldist ideology by whence the poor peasantry is the force of the Revolution.

The ting is that China didn't want to play a second fiddle role to the USSR and the Soviets were the main foreign threat to China by the latter half of the 1960's. It was realpolitik that Guided Mao to open up with Nixon. It's not like the Soviets didn't conspire against Mao's China with the Americans. They even wanted American consent to launch a pre-emptive strike against China's nuclear program/arsenal IIRC (it was in 1969 I think).

Voted HP.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Clearly a FF. Only Nazis and True Leftists would vote HP.

[The Mikado]

Banned abortion, so HP.

[Türkisblau]

Banned abortion, so HP.

Is that really why you voted HP? Not the whole host of other reasons? Jesus Christ.

[Sopranos Republican]

As The Trot I must vote HP. Though he was an extraordinarily interesting HP. He definitely had a certain type of unreplicated charisma that I'd argue even Hitler couldn't quite match. But regardless of how what a badass he was, massive HP for basically turning the USSR into a slavocratic hellhole.

[The Mikado]

Banned abortion, so HP.

Is that really why you voted HP? Not the whole host of other reasons? Jesus Christ.

(That's the joke)

[© tweed]

but I don't know if that level of terrible outweighs the utter garbage that is Maoism. I would have to give Mao some credit for pursuing revolutionary politics abroad, but at the end of the day Maoism is still basically middle class radicalism and literally allied itself with Richard fucking Nixon against the USSR, which is pretty unconscionable from a socialist standpoint.

I don't know if Mao should be held to judgment for what became of Western Maoism.  his world-historical role was as a military and then revolutionary-state leader.  he was not a theorist, not even at Stalin's puny level.

and, nearly all forms of contemporary nostalgia for 20th-Century Communism emanate from the middle class and above.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Better than Mao, worse than Hitler.

At least Stalin didn't work toward exterminating my people (along with many other nations and ethic groups), .... [Redacted by Torie as personal attack]

[TNF]

but I don't know if that level of terrible outweighs the utter garbage that is Maoism. I would have to give Mao some credit for pursuing revolutionary politics abroad, but at the end of the day Maoism is still basically middle class radicalism and literally allied itself with Richard fucking Nixon against the USSR, which is pretty unconscionable from a socialist standpoint.

I don't know if Mao should be held to judgment for what became of Western Maoism.  his world-historical role was as a military and then revolutionary-state leader.  he was not a theorist, not even at Stalin's puny level.

and, nearly all forms of contemporary nostalgia for 20th-Century Communism emanate from the middle class and above.

I pretty much agree with this whole post.

[Velasco]

Better than Mao, worse than Hitler.

Genocide of the Ukranians, persecution of Christianity, and he persecuted his own people harshly as well.

...because Hitler treated Ukrainians very nicely, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust_in_Ukraine

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[The Free North]

Better than Mao, worse than Hitler.

Genocide of the Ukranians, persecution of Christianity, and he persecuted his own people harshly as well.

...because Hitler treated Ukrainians very nicely, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust_in_Ukraine

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is really the key question. Who's worse, the person advocating ruthless genocide as a means of enacting a perverted ideology or a person using similar tactics in order to secure political power and achieve (absurd) political goals.