this counting game only goes up to 51
― example (crüt), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:31 (seven years ago) link
the whole statement that set off the firestorm was that "every American President did things as bad as Stalin". that statement started any "counting games"
xxxpost lol dammit Shakey
― Neanderthal, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:31 (seven years ago) link
It's not entirely clear if Stalin was privy to all of Lenin's machinations (like the "secret" aspects of the Brest-Litvosk treaty), much less approved of them, but it does make me wonder if Stalin's blind spot for German aggression was informed by Lenin's miraculous ability to narrowly avert disaster in the previous war.
It's possible. Then again, Stalin wasn't fighting American-supported Mensheviks in Siberia or whatever either.
― the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:33 (seven years ago) link
OK, I saw that - but then how is J.D.'s "resulting number" stuff any different?
― xyzzzz__, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:36 (seven years ago) link
there are literally zero u.s. presidents who killed as many ppl as stalin did, even the ones who belong in the war criminal hall of fame like andrew jackson or nixon
admittedly i'm not using the globalresearch.ca method of pretending that battlefield casualties in a UN police action are comparable to the holocaust
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:37 (seven years ago) link
But like you said even if you counted that up its not like the US were there - they just supported one side, so that's ok.
― xyzzzz__, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:39 (seven years ago) link
Quite innocent to merely support a coup in Chile as the Chilean generals carried it out.
― xyzzzz__, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:41 (seven years ago) link
Dante had circles of hell in which the damned were punished according to the gravity of their sins, you know. Ugolino wasn't in the same circle as Brutus and Cassius.
― the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:45 (seven years ago) link
no one's absolving US presidents' of their crimes xyzzzz__, just noting that they are different both in nature and in scale to Stalin's.
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:47 (seven years ago) link
that's what bethune was trying to do anyway. by saying "american Presidents were just as bad", that forces you to get into a conversation about "degrees of bad" which is a bad look to many people and then the discussion just falls part (or at least that's the aim)
― Neanderthal, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:48 (seven years ago) link
my point isn't to absolve anyone or "pass over" any deaths, just to point out that these are all v. different situations and it's possibly more than a bit misleading to point to a half-century of foreign policy, much of which was atrocious or misguided, and say that it all adds up to "the u.s. has killed 20 million people," period.
fwiw i'm p critical of u.s. foreign policy in general, and find much to criticize in every postwar president, even the better ones.
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:49 (seven years ago) link
xyzzzz, get back to us on this as soon as someone starts arguing that Nixon was "innocent", or that any US president has not given orders that would be heinous crimes if they had not been committed "for reasons of state".
― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:50 (seven years ago) link
OK, tbh I haven't read enough of this thread (and LOL I don't know if I have the strenght). Some of the posts set me off.
My reason for the revival was that essay on Deustcher. That biog of Stalin could be...something. The deaths might not be a um, straight story.
This was true even when it came to Stalin, and it was perhaps one reason why many found his biography of Stalin so troubling. Stalin had ordered the murder of Trotsky, along with so many others, and in Deutscher’s hands, Stalin is a monster—but he is not simply a monster and Deutscher tried to understand Stalin’s motives. “It is not necessary to assume that he acted from sheer cruelty or lust for power,” Deutscher wrote in his biography. “He may be given the dubious credit of the sincere conviction that what he did served the interests of the revolution and that he alone interpreted those interests aright.”
― xyzzzz__, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 20:53 (seven years ago) link
I haven't read that one, just Montefiore (Court of the Red Tsar) and now on this Kotkin one. Fascinating figure from any angle.
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:07 (seven years ago) link
An excellent book about the "team" or "gang" dynamic of the inner circle of power within The Bolsheviks is Fitzpatrick's On Team Stalin, which I'll probably read again while waiting for the 2nd Kotkin volume - which he seems to be endlessly fucking about with.
― calzino, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:26 (seven years ago) link
I read her Russian Revolution book twice, because it is a classic.
― calzino, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:28 (seven years ago) link
in Deutscher’s hands, Stalin is a monster—but he is not simply a monster and Deutscher tried to understand Stalin’s motives. “It is not necessary to assume that he acted from sheer cruelty or lust for power,” Deutscher wrote in his biography. “He may be given the dubious credit of the sincere conviction that what he did served the interests of the revolution and that he alone interpreted those interests aright.”
ideology is the handmaiden to atrocity
― Mordy, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:35 (seven years ago) link
Autocrats act to strengthen their own position, in part by seeking to strengthen their nation's power and government's stability. The two aims, both the personal and national, become hopelessly entangled. Stalin's actions can be seen in either light and to a degree the resulting interpretations of his power-seeking and self-protection will be both correct and incorrect simultaneously.
The purges and show trials are a good example of this. They solidified his personal power, but because he and his inner circle were the government, they also solidified the government's power and stability. This unchallenged power was used to full effect during WWII.
― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:36 (seven years ago) link
it is pretty funny that during the military purge he told Marshal Budionny - who was a bit of an eejit, “Don’t worry: they’re only arresting the clever ones”
― calzino, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:42 (seven years ago) link
one of kotkin's insights produced by access to the soviet records is that behind closed doors stalin and lenin talked like they did to the public - they believed everything they said. it's pretty clear as well that terminating the NEP was entirely an ideological act and presumably if you are interested in strengthening a nation and stability you don't starve millions of people in a misguided pursuit of true communism. the nazis diverted support and money from the frontlines to the death camps late in the war; which isn't to say that they could've beaten the allies if they had their priorities in order but again ideology is what animates the greatest atrocities. to kill millions of people you have to believe in something that makes their deaths worthwhile.
The interviewer asked “What that comes down to is saying that had the radiant tomorrow actually been created, the loss of fifteen, twenty million people might have been justified?”Eric Hobsbawm, who died yesterday aged 95, replied instantly; “Yes”
Eric Hobsbawm, who died yesterday aged 95, replied instantly; “Yes”
― Mordy, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 21:45 (seven years ago) link
Lets never have ideology then. That's good.
― xyzzzz__, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:05 (seven years ago) link
Ideology created the government Stalin ruled and ideology gave it whatever legitimacy it had, so that starving millions of people in the name of that ideology can be seen as a perverse effect of a practical imperative: not to undermine the very ideological foundation the government stood upon. Our own liberal-democratic ideology condemns this as antithetical to good government, but we do not threaten our ideological underpinning by making this condemnation, whereas the Stalinist government would have seen major concessions to bourgeois liberalism as tantamount to overthrowing themselves.
― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:28 (seven years ago) link
whew who knew it was so easy
― Mordy, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:54 (seven years ago) link
and the world will be as one
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:56 (seven years ago) link
fp'd for mindcrime
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:56 (seven years ago) link
er thoughtcrime
shit
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:57 (seven years ago) link
^^^secret queensrÿche fan
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 4 April 2017 22:58 (seven years ago) link
Totting up deaths is pretty fucking gross u guys
― virginity simple (darraghmac), Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:07 (seven years ago) link
What u should do is work out the average worth of the dead in each group
― virginity simple (darraghmac), Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:08 (seven years ago) link
https://www.iraqbodycount.org/
there is an argument for sites like this though, but measuring the death tolls of atrocities like you are playing trump cards is bollocks.
― calzino, Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:11 (seven years ago) link
against each other*
― calzino, Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:12 (seven years ago) link
Nonetheless, defending Stalin is stupid.
― Bill Teeters (Tom D.), Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:20 (seven years ago) link
captain save-a-stalin over here
― officer sonny bonds, lytton pd (mayor jingleberries), Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:29 (seven years ago) link
Easy from over there tbf
― virginity simple (darraghmac), Wednesday, 5 April 2017 00:37 (seven years ago) link
on the one hand:
Ideology created the government Stalin ruled and ideology gave it whatever legitimacy it had, so that starving millions of people in the name of that ideology can be seen as a perverse effect of a practical imperative: not to undermine the very ideological foundation the government stood upon. Our own liberal-democratic ideology condemns this as antithetical to good government, but we do not threaten our ideological underpinning by making this condemnation, whereas the Stalinist government would have seen major concessions to bourgeois liberalism as tantamount to overthrowing themselves.― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― a little too mature to be cute (Aimless), Tuesday, 4 April 2017 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
on the other:
corbynbro @no_talent_shan Feb 14Replying to @investmntwankerpeace negotiations have stalled after I repeatedly asked "which one was Stalin? the hot one?" in a diplomatic meeting
peace negotiations have stalled after I repeatedly asked "which one was Stalin? the hot one?" in a diplomatic meeting
― xyzzzz__, Wednesday, 5 April 2017 20:23 (seven years ago) link
This is sorta interesting:
If you think Stalin was a "dictator" please read this thread on how he fought to democratize the government of the Soviet Union.— Chris Aaron☭ (@EternalBolshie) August 19, 2017
― xyzzzz__, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:14 (six years ago) link
i mean i buy that at one point in time he might've been interested in democratization but c'mon gmafb
― Mordy, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:19 (six years ago) link
What Mordy said.
― Le Bateau Ivre, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:21 (six years ago) link
From that thread its more than "at one point".
― xyzzzz__, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:23 (six years ago) link
buried the lede -
The purges were good and correct. Class traitors, careerists and double dealers have no business in a communist party. pic.twitter.com/1oC5Uteryy— Chris Aaron☭ (@EternalBolshie) August 19, 2017
― louie mensch (milo z), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:27 (six years ago) link
that thread literally has the poster defend the great purge in which estimates suggest 600,000 people were killed
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:27 (six years ago) link
i think it's important to balance what he actually did with cherry picked dalliances in speeches/texts since actions spoke louder than words. xxp
― Mordy, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:28 (six years ago) link
fucking quit it julio
― mark s, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:28 (six years ago) link
i guess it's useful to know who the tankies among us are tho since that's important context when discussing politics on other threads
― Mordy, Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:29 (six years ago) link
neo-stalinism boggles my mind. read a fucking book for christ sake.
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:29 (six years ago) link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOzYT4lcXuM
― the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:30 (six years ago) link
or like talk to someone who lived in the DDR or the Soviet Union or Yugoslavia, or Cuba. Jesus
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:30 (six years ago) link
we went through Cuba when El Jefe died.
― the Rain Man of nationalism. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:31 (six years ago) link
oh i recall, shouldn't have mentioned it haha
― -_- (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:32 (six years ago) link
The 20th century didn't invent propaganda, but it did expand the number of highly trained practitioners and the number of venues for delivering it by a couple orders of magnitude. Stalin had a small army of devoted propagandists to rationalize and justify his actions and transform them into shining virtues. There isn't an especially large market (or appetite) for that stuff today, but it still exists and for those who are susceptible, it still does its job.
― A is for (Aimless), Thursday, 24 August 2017 17:38 (six years ago) link