/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>>2534203
I hate javascript

>>2534203

If this book is on the post war period, keep in mind the anti-Stalin paradigm is hyper focused on the 1930s; The post war era has some accusations against Stalin for sure, but nowhere near the same level as the 30s.

The underlying logic of the liberal & bourgeois narrative is that the centrally planned economy really came into being the 30s, and therefore that's where it must be most viciously attack by using Stalin & the Soviet via association.

By contrast, there are not many significant changes happing in terms of central planning happening after wwii, both because the ussr is mainly focused on post war recovery & the loss of the most communist & patriotic people in the country relatively limits the number of people concerned with consolidating and/or improving central planning.

I've enjoyed Volume I of his Stalin biography and it was even praised by people like Grover Furr. It's way more nuanced than the average lib book on Stalin. Kotkin however went totally anticommunist in the second one, almost like a different author. I don't know why that is. Heard someone here suggest that Kotkin was just trying to prove how Stalin was a genuine, dedicated communist to show how communism altogether is evil or something.

Kotkin should write a response to Furr's Waiting For The Truth.
>Kotkin: Delivering the Truth, 1929–1941.
<Grover: Delivering… More Lies! Exposing Every Attempted Coverup of Dishonesty in Stephen Kotkin's 'Delivering the Truth, 1929–1941'
>Kotkin: Refuting More Lies, 1929–1941.
<Furr: Refuting… The Anti-Stalin Paradigm! The Evidence Against Stephen Kotkin's Brazen Lies in His 'Refuting More Lies, 1929–1941.' (Plus, How the Anti-Stalin Paradigm Colors Soviet History Until the Present Day)
>Kotkin: Proving the Anti-Stalin Conclusion, 1929–1941.
<Furr: Proving the… Anti-Trotsky Conclusion! The Evidence that the 'Historical' Slander Against Joseph Stalin and the Soviet Government More Broadly in Stephen Kotkin's 'Proving the Anti-Stalin Conclusion, 1929–1941.' Stems From an Uncritical Acceptance of Baseless Lies Originating in the Trotskyite Press and Why Soviet Historiography Sticks By These Attacks Despite the Contradictions

>>2534253

That's the idea. The narrative that was at times useful during the cold war about how Stalin was not "a real communist", not only has no evidence to support it, not only has evidence against it since the opening up of Soviet archives, but is ultimately no longer useful, since the communist threat is so much radically weaker at the state level.

>>2534259

That's actually a very bad idea from the perspective of anti-communist historiography.

Its not even so much because people will see the "undeniable truth that Grover Furr is completely correct" or some liberal categorizations like that;

The mere exposure of alternative views and frameworks can encourage people to question, think & look elsewhere, and discover a huge range of different perspectives.

The biggest danger being the discovery the various Russian & post-soviet frameworks & interpretations.

It would be quite harmful over time for the weakening liberal ideological regimes if a lot of people outside Russian speaking regions discovered Yevgeny Spitsyn for instance, among others.

>>2534230
They claim that the Winter War was unprovoked, that Stalin gave up when Barbarossa occured for ~10 days, that Soviet generals shot every 4th man of their own armies to enforce discipline, that they fought with human wave attacks, that Stalingrad was only fought for because it had Stalin's name, that Soviets raped Berlin, that Soviets went against the rest of the allies in deporting the Germans from new Polish and Russian territories, that Soviets did Gegenmiao, that Soviets helped the Germans execute the Polish Home Army, that the Soviets occupied the Baltic, that the deportations were unjustified, that the Leningrad Affair was staged, that the Slansky Trial was staged, that the Mindszenty trial was staged, that the Soviets forced the West into NATO, that the Czechoslovak Communists were placed into power against the will of the people, that the Soviets caused the Tito-Stalin Split, that the Mongolian People's Republic independence referendum was rigged, that the Soviets crushed the Greek Revolution, etc.

>>2534333
All true

>>2534333

Is Kotkin's new book focused on WWII and the post war or just the post war?

Does Kotkin claim things like human wave tactics or deny the strategic value of keeping the naxi from capturing the Caucasus?

A lot of WWII era myths inherited from the germans have lost of lot of favour in academia (& to some degree popular consciousness recently).

The 'Ukranian' famine, the Moscow trials, the 'great purge', and other 30s phantasmagorical evils are still much more important to the anti-Stalin Paradigm imho.

Although to be fair wartime fairytales were quite important too, but the pushback from the people of the USSR and the Russian government itself means that some of these old tales have become unsustainable (Even one popular ancap youtuber who's name I forget debunked some of them a while ago if I am not mistaken).

>>2534272
Unfortunately for the anti-communist cocksuckers like Kotkin, the entire world is already developing a post-cold war re-evaluation of Stalin is happening.

Almost 100 years of Trotskyite-Neocon propaganda is falling in the eyes of the working masses and the anti-communists (trots/neocons) are seeking to get ahead of this new wave of information and new found respect for Stalin.

Academic Agent interviewed Grover Furr and is putting out videos like "everything you knew about Stalin was a lie".

In other words, the anticommunists can no longer contain their almost century long choke hold on Trotskyite disinformation so they're now going to recast and re-evaluate Stalin on a "more truthful" basis but in the most anticommunist way possible.

Kotkin is similar to Academic Agent (another bonified right winger who basically believes the British Empire should never have collapsed)

>>2534576
Kotkin wants to be George Kennan.

>>2534412
Liberal

>>2534259
How did you manage to capture Furr's relentless seething so well kek. Man is a total nutjob. We need a Tankie historian who isn't a maximalist who claims Stalin did nothing wrong ever. Even Kotkin is more nuanced.

>>2535213
His name was Domenico Losurdo.

Imagine your brain being so raped by bourgeois ideology that you rather read 3 vol work on the life of the great man rather than a single line by Marx.

>>2534747
>Kotkin wants to be George Kennan.
i understand that fucker a bit more now.

>>2534412
False nvke.

>>2534531
>Is Kotkin's new book focused on WWII and the post war or just the post war?
Volume 2 ends in 1941 so the new one will be from 1941 to his death in 1953. But it'll probably cover a lot of WW2, just like the first vol covered a lot of the Russian civil war.

>>2535454

Ah okay. I only realized after my post that the book isn't out yet.

I would imagine Kotkin will avoid some of the most outrageous and dated war myths from Nazi sources.

Instead he might try to inflame some of the post-war more obscure stuff (Like the Leningrad affair; Although people passing top secret information from gosplan to the british is obviously treason, so maybe he'll try to deny jt altogether?)

Still, I maintain that attacking the 30s is overwhelmingly more important overall for anti-communist & liberal historiography & ideology.

>>2534660

Yes I am expecting this as well. The old narratives were intended more for shock & thought terminating cliches; But because they were so over the the top and at times even logically incoherent, they are unsustainable.

To maintain the anti-Stalin paradigm, new interpretations which is more internally consistent and consistent with the evidence will be constructed by our various enemies & rivals.

Our job will be of course to still highlight the new inconsistencies where they emerge, but more importantly provide our own interpretation & natter the enemy by reminding everyone of the Robert Conquest tier nonsense they used to spout.

>>2535614

*batter

>>2535239
>i understand that fucker a bit more now.
I think Kotkin is a "CIA" historian, basically. Not a historian of the agency that is, but like an area studies consultant who does the kind of work the agency would value, analytically.

Also, see