Best Leader of the Soviet Union
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 10:14:42 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Best Leader of the Soviet Union
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Poll
Question: Who was #1?
#1
Vladimir Lenin
 
#2
Joseph Stalin
 
#3
Nikita Khrushchev
 
#4
Leonid Brezhnev
 
#5
Yuri Andropov
 
#6
Konstantin Chernenko
 
#7
Mikhail Gorbachev
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 53

Author Topic: Best Leader of the Soviet Union  (Read 14641 times)
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,610
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: September 14, 2008, 04:03:34 PM »

And if you select Gorbachev, I'd ask for a reason other than "he listened to Reagan and tore down that wall."  It's not required, but encouraged.

     Glasnost & Perestroika were nice too.
Perestroika was actually an example of monumental incompetence, like a lot of what Gorby did. If he had followed the Chinese Model established by people like Deng, we'd still be talking about the Evil Empire. Of course that means we are probably very lucky he screwed up.

The writing had been on the wall for the Soviet Union for decades before Gorbachev took power. His actions speeded up the course of events somewhat and (hey, I'm feeling in a charitable mood right now) probably made them less bloody and painful than would otherwise have been the case.
Logged
NDN
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,495
Uganda


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: September 14, 2008, 04:43:55 PM »

And if you select Gorbachev, I'd ask for a reason other than "he listened to Reagan and tore down that wall."  It's not required, but encouraged.

     Glasnost & Perestroika were nice too.
Perestroika was actually an example of monumental incompetence, like a lot of what Gorby did. If he had followed the Chinese Model established by people like Deng, we'd still be talking about the Evil Empire. Of course that means we are probably very lucky he screwed up.

The writing had been on the wall for the Soviet Union for decades before Gorbachev took power.
No doubt, they were dependent on aid after all. However, it's very obvious that what Mikhail did was nowhere near what he set out to do.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Perhaps. I suppose we could have wound up with nukes winding up with renegade groups or full scale civil war.
Logged
GMantis
Dessie Potter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,948
Bulgaria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: September 16, 2008, 03:45:51 PM »

     I like how three people voted Khrushchev. Is there any redeeming features about him that I'm forgetting? I associate him with the Berlin Ultimatum & the Cuban Missile Crisis, which were not the USSR's finest hours.

You look from a typical blind western perspective. He did a lot of good things (the Secret Speech is one, as was the liquidization of Beria). As a protégé of Stalin, he was still an old-school Marxist, but he was the best one tere was.
He also attempted to improve Soviet living standarts and to imrove relations with the West. I think he got scared after the Hungarian revolution, which put an end to the promising developments in the early part of his rule. Still, when compared with someone who destroyed the Soviet Union in a bungling attempt to reform it and who was unable to prevent ethnic cleansing even with the control of the Soviet army, it's a bit unfair that he's so far behind and equal with Stalin.
Logged
jokerman
Cosmo Kramer
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,808
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: September 18, 2008, 09:47:11 PM »

Stalin, once he fully embraced collectivization, did wonders with the Soviet economy.  I don't see how anyone, communist or capitalist, cannot recognize some merit in the advancements made by the Soviets before and during World War II and their spectacular recovery afterwards.  Ultimately his autarkic policies stimied the ability of the Soviet Union to grow at the pace of the U.S., certainly, but that wasn't soley of his own doing.

Khrushchev was awful, though.  His agricultural programs were complete disasters.  It's not as if central planning in this area was doomed to failure; he simply ignored any consideration of environmental sustainability whatsoever.
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,448


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: September 20, 2008, 10:02:22 AM »

Stalinist Lysenkoism was hardly better than later agricultural policies.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,097
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: September 20, 2008, 12:45:55 PM »

..and you can't talk about Stalin without mentioning the millions he had killed.  I've noticed Stalin apologists like to ignore that part.
Logged
GMantis
Dessie Potter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,948
Bulgaria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: September 20, 2008, 02:37:21 PM »

There were certainly more humane ways to achieve industrialisation and as I've said before, he did far more harm than good. It was thanks to Stalin that the Soviet union almost lost the war.
Khrushchev had at least good intentions (mostly), though he was incompetent in carrying out many of them.
..and you can't talk about Stalin without mentioning the millions he had killed.  I've noticed Stalin apologists like to ignore that part.
Strange that we agree on a Russia related topic.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,097
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: September 20, 2008, 02:48:30 PM »

Neither of us like to see innocents suffer.

Preston on the other hand.....
Logged
GMantis
Dessie Potter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,948
Bulgaria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: September 20, 2008, 03:22:29 PM »

A Russian poll had some interesting results:
http://www.rosbalt.ru/2007/04/25/294470.html
Basically, it asked respondents in which time period of the 20th century they would want to live. The current period received 39%, Brezhnev's time 31%, Stalin's rule 6% and the other less than that (Yeltsin's time, pre-Revolution and so on).
A second question asked about the opinion of the direction the direction the country was heading during all the rulers of Russia this century. Only Putin's time received generally positive marks. The opinion about Nicholas II, Lenin and Brezhenev was split 50/50 and for all other periods the direction of development was perceived negatively.
So, as expected, the Russians don't have positive feelings about Stalin, but it's surprising that the rule of a bumbling fool was so well thought of.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,610
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: September 20, 2008, 07:57:30 PM »

but it's surprising that the rule of a bumbling fool was so well thought of.

Consider the alternatives
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: September 21, 2008, 01:55:28 AM »

So, as expected, the Russians don't have positive feelings about Stalin, but it's surprising that the rule of a bumbling fool was so well thought of.

Considering all Russian leaders were bumbling fools, that really can't be used as part of the equation.
Logged
GMantis
Dessie Potter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,948
Bulgaria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: September 21, 2008, 02:16:40 AM »

So, as expected, the Russians don't have positive feelings about Stalin, but it's surprising that the rule of a bumbling fool was so well thought of.

Considering all Russian leaders were bumbling fools, that really can't be used as part of the equation.
No, Lenin, Stalin and Andropov were very smart (and Putin is today). Unfortunately Stalin was a murderous maniac, Andropov died too soon and Lenin died too soon and and had poor people skills.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,610
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: September 21, 2008, 05:58:52 AM »

So, as expected, the Russians don't have positive feelings about Stalin, but it's surprising that the rule of a bumbling fool was so well thought of.

Considering all Russian leaders were bumbling fools, that really can't be used as part of the equation.
No, Lenin, Stalin and Andropov were very smart (and Putin is today). Unfortunately Stalin was a murderous maniac, Andropov died too soon and Lenin died too soon and and had poor people skills.

And was a murderous maniac as well. Though not on quite the same scale as Stalin, obviously.
Logged
GMantis
Dessie Potter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,948
Bulgaria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: September 21, 2008, 02:09:06 PM »

So, as expected, the Russians don't have positive feelings about Stalin, but it's surprising that the rule of a bumbling fool was so well thought of.

Considering all Russian leaders were bumbling fools, that really can't be used as part of the equation.
No, Lenin, Stalin and Andropov were very smart (and Putin is today). Unfortunately Stalin was a murderous maniac, Andropov died too soon and Lenin died too soon and and had poor people skills.

And was a murderous maniac as well. Though not on quite the same scale as Stalin, obviously.
Not really. True, he was prepared to slaughter (and he did so) his opponents, but unlike Stalin he didn't believe in the benefit of repressions for their own sake. He also distinguished actions taken during war and during peacetime, a distinction Stalin disregarded. He also wasn't a maniac in the clinical sense, which Stalin was.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: September 21, 2008, 03:28:54 PM »

So, as expected, the Russians don't have positive feelings about Stalin, but it's surprising that the rule of a bumbling fool was so well thought of.

Considering all Russian leaders were bumbling fools, that really can't be used as part of the equation.
No, Lenin, Stalin and Andropov were very smart (and Putin is today). Unfortunately Stalin was a murderous maniac, Andropov died too soon and Lenin died too soon and and had poor people skills.

Stalin lost his touch after the mid-1930s, I think. The Great Purges crippled Russia militarily, and the war was nearly lost due to his paranoia.
Logged
pragmatic liberal
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 520


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 01, 2008, 05:11:28 PM »

Some sources (incl. Wikipedia) list Georgy Malenkov as Soviet Leader for one or two years as well.

In terms of human rights, Gorbachev.

But in terms of making the Soviet Union strong, I'd have to say Stalin. He was a murderous bastard, but in terms of building up the state and making it strong, he was unparalleled. (Which isn't to say I think he was *good*).
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 01, 2008, 06:17:18 PM »

Ah, but Malenkov never had any real power.
Logged
Dr. Cynic
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,417
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.11, S: -6.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 15, 2008, 01:32:37 AM »

My friend who is in the Marines was obsessed with the Soviet Union. He thought Stalin was quite a figure... Khruschev was a ballsy bastard.

Gorby deserves some recognition because he did his best to reform the tattered USSR.

Overall, though, I think Lenin was the best.

Trotsky might've been interesting had he not lost his power struggle.
Logged
frihetsivrare
Volksliberalist
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 613


Political Matrix
E: 4.00, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: December 16, 2008, 02:58:56 AM »

Gorbachev, because his policies put the USSR out of its misery faster and more peacefully than hard-line communism would have.


That is not real surprising.  Brezhnev seemed to run the Soviet Union at its most prosperous, and Russians are more free now.  Though I am surprised that Khruschev was not mentioned.

Logged
GMantis
Dessie Potter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,948
Bulgaria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: December 16, 2008, 07:17:39 AM »

Gorbachev, because his policies put the USSR out of its misery faster and more peacefully than hard-line communism would have.


That is not real surprising.  Brezhnev seemed to run the Soviet Union at its most prosperous, and Russians are more free now.  Though I am surprised that Khruschev was not mentioned.


Khrushchev is remembered in Russia mainly as a bumbling fool.
Logged
Jacobtm
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,216


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: December 22, 2008, 08:40:28 PM »

Gorbachev was responsible for the collapse of the Soviet Union. Reagan helped it along, but if Gorbachev's radical reforms hadn't shaken up the whole foundation of governmental power in the USSR, it could've still hobbled along.

Prior to Gorbachev, all political power in the USSR was vertical, the only way to gain power was by gaining the favor of your superior. When actual elections started, and politicians needed to garner the favor of their constituents to hold on to power, the ridiculous structure of the Soviet Union, which helped almost nobody, couldn't hold together.

He was only the best because he provided that terrible empire with a mercy killing, whether or not you consider it to be accidental.
Logged
RosettaStoned
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,154
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.45, S: -5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: December 23, 2008, 12:32:04 AM »

Great Comrade Stalin.
Logged
GMantis
Dessie Potter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,948
Bulgaria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: December 23, 2008, 03:57:48 AM »

Gorbachev was responsible for the collapse of the Soviet Union. Reagan helped it along, but if Gorbachev's radical reforms hadn't shaken up the whole foundation of governmental power in the USSR, it could've still hobbled along.

Prior to Gorbachev, all political power in the USSR was vertical, the only way to gain power was by gaining the favor of your superior. When actual elections started, and politicians needed to garner the favor of their constituents to hold on to power, the ridiculous structure of the Soviet Union, which helped almost nobody, couldn't hold together.

He was only the best because he provided that terrible empire with a mercy killing, whether or not you consider it to be accidental.
Read up some history before you write such nonsense. As late as April 1991, most Soviet citizens wanted to keep the Union in some form. It was the August coup which brought the decisive change, and even then, the Ukraine was the only republic were there was actually a referendum on secession.
Gorbachev's idea was to create a democratic and prosperous Soviet Union. That instead of this there was a collapse, which led to nearly a dozen civil wars and that the economy of almost all republics collapsed into a depression from which many have yet to recover, shows just what a monumental failure he was.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: December 27, 2008, 11:23:10 PM »

Mikhail Gorbachev.


POST NUMBER 400
Logged
GMantis
Dessie Potter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,948
Bulgaria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: December 28, 2008, 01:50:05 PM »

I wonder how such a poll conducted in Russia would go. Probably a dead heat between Stalin and Brezhnev and Gorbachov last.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.06 seconds with 14 queries.