[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new on Mondays : /meta/
New /roulette/ topic: /AK-47/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war. - New board: /draw/


File: 1637587890987.png (138.32 KB, 320x180, ClipboardImage.png)

 No.611847[Last 50 Posts]

In history class today we learnt Soviet military casualties were particularly high, 20-27 million for soldiers and another 20 million for civilians. No source was provided but it was accepted as factual.
I want to hear where these 20-27 million figures came from, because as far as I remember most deaths were civilian due to the Germans attempting to genocide their population?

 No.611848

not russian in particular, but all of the red army as a whole

 No.611853

7-10 million soldiers and roughly 17-20 million for civilians, where tf did you bet 20 million for military?

 No.611858

>>611853
Do you have a source for that figure

 No.611859

>>611858
Not on hand, on the shitter, no
But that’s the figure I’ve always read

 No.611904

>>611847
7 million total, military and civilian. Special Commission established in 1942 and onwards reported this figure to Nuremberg, and it was the official figure until Khruschev called for rewriting of history in his speech.

>I want to hear where these 20-27 million figures came from


Khruschev did demographics balance method onto the war, i.e. 196 million people in 1940 was supposed to become 216 million in 1950s, it didn't become this much, so "losses" are 20 millions. They presented this figure as direct losses instead of demographic ones, so in the population census in 1950s they drew a population size of 170 million for year 1947 retroactively. This figure, in turn, produced new demographic balancing bullshit in 1990s, which resulted in even more insane figures of total losses of 40, 50, 60 million people.

To retards who don't agree with my explanation - you know that 27 million figure consists of 11 million military losses, 9 million famine victims, and rest being civilians partly killed by Nazis, partly by (fake) orders like total scorched earth policy? You people are literally spouting anti-communist propaganda which tries to portray communism as the worst possible form of government that results in massive losses. Your retardation supports the idiotic, but logical, line of thinking that Soviets should have surrendered immediately, and avoided 20-27-40-50 millions losses entirely, making resistance to fascism pointless.

>>611853
No, that's imperialist propaganda that tries really hard to portray communists as being horrible at their job. Just compare those insane losses of USSR to any other conflict in history, and you'll immediately find out that supposed Soviet losses are waaaaay out of normal.

 No.612165

>>611904
God are you still on with this shit? Can’t you go play in traffic, taste test cyanide, or literally anything else useful with your time?

 No.612179

>>612165
I've explained all the reasons why Stalin's data from 1946-1953 is the truth and all contradicting data is false. You have to call Stalin a liar, and a state that murdered fascism in Europe a state of liars who produce fake data, to continue believing literal anticommunist propaganda. Go on, call Stalin a liar.

 No.612182

File: 1637601347178.png (899.32 KB, 686x457, ClipboardImage.png)


 No.612183

>>612179
>You have to call Stalin a liar
If your argument relies on deifying a man it is already fatally flawed

 No.612184

>>612182
Thrilling argument

 No.612188

File: 1637601646261.jpg (108.24 KB, 480x474, ankid larp.jpg)


 No.612192

>>611904
I found this most helpful, thanks a lot. This thread has served its purpose

 No.612194

>>612188
Wow
Am I really supposed to bother reading a lazy meme?

 No.612201

>>612165
Thrilling argument

 No.612210

>>612201
I made all my arguments a few days ago, it was a waste of my time

 No.612214

>>612210
Sure buddy I debunked anarkiddy-privitardism yesterday and it was a pretty good use of my time

 No.612218

>>612214
Riveting

 No.612235


 No.612247

>>612183
>b-but you are deifying Stalin!!!1

Say it clearly: Stalin is a liar. Come on. It's all it boils down to - who are we to believe, sacredest of archives or "communist deities".

>>612210
>>612214
He is talking about this thread https://leftypol.org/leftypol/res/605357.html Half the thread he was bitching about "but K/D ratio is GAMING!!1" and moaning about the sanctity of archives instead of providing evidence. Was it him or black cat who claimed that modern historians no longer fake history after seeing Engels' quote about bourgeois historians, lol?

 No.612268

>>612247
>Say it clearly: Stalin is a liar. Come on. It's all it boils down to - who are we to believe, sacredest of archives or "communist deities".
Idk, he could've also been just wrong, or even talking about military casualties and not civilian casualties.
How mentally ill do you have to be that saying Stalin was wrong or even (GASP!) lied is actually difficult?

 No.612282

>>612268
>or even talking about military casualties and not civilian casualties.

We went over it already.

It's from Stalin's 1946 Pravda speech

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8_%D0%B2%D0%BE_%D0%92%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D0%BD%D0%B5#%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%BA_%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%8F%D0%BC_%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A0_%D0%B2%D0%BE_%D0%92%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D0%BD%D0%B5

>В феврале 1946 года число потерь в 7 млн человек было опубликовано в журнале «Большевик»[19]. В марте 1946 года Сталин в интервью газете «Правда» заявил, что СССР потерял в годы войны 7 миллионов человек: «В результате немецкого вторжения Советский Союз безвозвратно потерял в боях с немцами, а также из-за немецкой оккупации и угону советских людей на немецкую каторгу около 7 миллионов человек»[20]


It says USSR has lost "irrecoverably" (meaning it's deaths, not losses in military sense) 7 millions due to fights, occupation, and Nazis stealing Soviet citizens as slaves to work in Germany.

>How mentally ill do you have to be that saying Stalin was wrong or even (GASP!) lied is actually difficult?


It's not about me, it's either-either between Stalin as the source and all the historians, archivists, khruschevites, fascists, liberals, who insist on Stalin being wrong or lying. In the final analysis, it's the question of 20th Congress of CPSU. State your fucking side.

 No.612294

>>612282
So it's either your particular interpretation of one person you deify, or 85 years' worth of historical study and statistical analysis

See, this is the sort of thing that made me start using the "anprim" flag, I genuinely can't comprehend what actually separates you from a theist, your position is quite literally an argument about what you want to be true, you think I want this to be true? You think I even care? What bearing on the present day does something as meaningless as WWII death counts really have outside of the value-less debate of deranged history nerds?
>In the final analysis, it's the question of 20th Congress of CPSU
Literally what separates you from a Catholic?

 No.612298

>>611904
Based anti-Khrushchev poster.

 No.612311

>>612294
>So it's either your particular interpretation of one person you deify, or 85 years' worth of historical study and statistical analysis

You know that CPC never undid Stalin, right? Technically speaking, majority of communists on planet Earth are stalinists, on my side. You are siding with historians, archivists, khruschevites, fascists, liberals.

>What bearing on the present day does something as meaningless as WWII death counts really have outside of the value-less debate of deranged history nerds?


Indeed, what bearing does history have when yet another retard says "lol communism never worked" and yet another retard answers "real communism has never been tried"? Fucking hell, have you any fucking idea how much EASIER have it become to talk to people about communism when you have China as an example of communism WORKING and being able TO SOLVE THINGS? USSR was AN EXAMPLE JUST LIKE THAT before retards started inventing 20 millions dead in WW2.

>Literally what separates you from a Catholic?


What. It's not me who believes in sacred nature of someone, it's you who refuses to think that 85 years of bourgeois history could all be lies.

 No.612314

>>612311
>You know that CPC never undid Stalin, right? Technically speaking, majority of communists on planet Earth are stalinists, on my side. You are siding with historians, archivists, khruschevites, fascists, liberals.
Oh, Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics, impressive
Again, am I to care?
>Indeed, what bearing does history have when yet another retard says "lol communism never worked" and yet another retard answers "real communism has never been tried"? Fucking hell, have you any fucking idea how much EASIER have it become to talk to people about communism when you have China as an example of communism WORKING and being able TO SOLVE THINGS? USSR was AN EXAMPLE JUST LIKE THAT before retards started inventing 20 millions dead in WW2.
Man, I almost started reading this, then I got bored
Do you really think this shit matters remotely to people, fucking "K/D" for WWII? You think inflated casualties in a defensive war is why America isn't socialist? It should be obvious from your suburbs why America isn't socialist.
>What. It's not me who believes in sacred nature of someone, it's you who refuses to think that 85 years of bourgeois history could all be lies.
Nah, just don't give a shit about an argument that consists of
<If the casualty rates were real then that would make the USSR look bad…somehow…therefore they didn't happen
I guess Americans also had worse casualties in the Vietnam War, eh?
What even are facts beyond opinions? Honestly truth is a social construct and whatever is right is what I want to believe.

 No.612334

>>612314
>Oh, Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics, impressive

See? It always boils down to 20th Congress.

>Do you really think this shit matters remotely to people, fucking "K/D" for WWII?


For fuck's sake, do tell me then why is it every fucking historian absolutely politicize their work, and countries take so much trouble of upholding the official version of history. Why the fuck USA needs to push Lendlease bullshit so fucking much if it doesn't actually matter? It's almost fucking like superstructure matters. It's almost like ideology - and it's superiority/inferiorty - matters.

<If the casualty rates were real then that would make the USSR look bad…somehow…therefore they didn't happen


No, you retard, 27 million casualties didn't happen because 7 million casuaties happened. I've proved it over and over, with citing both Stalin and Special Commission, memoirs of all kinds of generals and soldiers. There's no "therefore" in that sentence, it's your retarded attempt to get out of the frying pan by trying to lessen my position from "here are the facts, and you are dumb for falling for anticommunist propaganda" to " you are falling for anticommunist propaganda".

 No.613909

Just to illustrate that Soviet losses being smaller than German losses was the official position of USSR before Khruschev.

https://www.marxists.org/russkij/stalin/t15/t15_13.htm

>За 4 месяца войны мы потеряли убитыми 350 тысяч и пропавшими без вести 378 тысяч человек, а раненых имеем 1 миллион 20 тысяч человек. За этот же период враг потерял убитыми, ранеными и пленными более 4 с половиной миллионов человек.


In 4 months, USSR lost dead 350k people, missed in action 378k people, and injured 1.020k people. In the same period "enemy" has lost dead, injured and captured 4.5 million people. Basically, 2 Soviet soldiers to 5 fascists, and those losses are totally in line with the after the war 7 million USSR losses figure.

 No.613927

>>613909
No It says Soviet losses in 4 months of war had been less than the "enemy" i.e. The Axis, not just Germany but all its allies that also jumped into the fray.

 No.613932

>>613927
Sounds like propaganda given how the soviet union was steamrolled during that time

 No.613942

>>613932
Or Soviets were retreating and scoring 2.5 to 1 kills on the advancing barbaric enemy, who was trying to win through drowning Soviet positions in corpses.

 No.613944

>>613927
German allies provided IIRC 1.5 million troops in 1941. Germans still lost more than Soviets, even if slightly less.

 No.613949

>>613942
The soviet didn't really retreat, they tried to do counter offensives but were crushed

 No.613952

>>613932
>the soviet union was steamrolled during that time
Except it didn't get steamrolled, stop believing Cold War bullshit. The Germans took France, Poland and all the other states of Europe in a matter of days and weeks. It took them MONTHS to take the same amount of territory in the USSR and they didn't hold on to most of it for long. German journals of the time noted extremely heavy losses and only the fact that they had a roughly 1.5:1 ratio of men and machines in comparison to the Red Army, and started off in a sudden strike, did they have a chance. They literally had to amass nearly their entire force of tanks, planes and men and strike early in the morning to break Soviet lines.

 No.613955

>>613944
>1.5 million troops in 1941
I don't think you understand just how large that is at that time. I suggest you go to the world war 2 thread on >>>/edu/ and see the posts there.

>>613949
Counter-offensives =/= no retreat. They used Counter offenses to stall and knock-back the Nazi advance, the overall Soviet lines retreated back and solidified in unity against those already in place. By Moscow the defensive line had become massive.

 No.613957

>>613952
I don't care about nazi diaries, the soviets really lost their shits and wits until around Barbarossa lol. But I guess less people die if you're loosing most of your air force on the ground the first day of the war lmao

 No.613958

>>613949
I wouldn't say crushed. The battle of Smolensk was the first time the Wehrmacht was stopped in its tracks. The soviets lost it but they did something no one else had done until then and they delayed the German advance for an entire month.

 No.613969

>>613957
>Barbarossa
Meant Stalingrad

 No.613993

>>613957
>less people die if you're loosing most of your air force on the ground the first day of the war lmao
That is not what happened, the a large portion of the Soviet airforce managed to get into the air and fight back, but the Germans amassed more bombers and fighters than the Soviets had ready to fly and oversaturated their lines, destroying aircraft as they landed to refuel and rearm.
>Hurr ignore de German diaries, but not their propaganda claims!
Fuck off back to stormfront

 No.614002

>tfw there is no space to discuss the second world war without some LARPers rushing in to defend the honor of their favored faction
i was cursed to consume a literal ton of useless knowledge about Stalingrad and now even the parts that make the Soviets look heroic in the face of an unrelenting German onslaught would get dismissed as Wehraboo propaganda, seriously this is the worst timeline. we went from no interest in the Eastern front of WWII in the West to this shit and i'm not sure if it's really an improvement ngl tbqhwyf

 No.614005

>>611847

According to the data used in modern historiography, the irrecoverable, so-called military-operational losses of the Red Army (killed, succumbed to wounds in hospitals, missing, taken prisoner, died of illness, died from accidents and sentenced by tribunals to be shot ) are estimated to be 11 444,1 thousand people. From this number, two indicators should be subtracted: 1,836 thousand former POWs who returned to their homeland during post-war repatriation and 939,7 thousand people drafted into the Red Army for the second time in the liberated territories of the Soviet Union in 1942-1945. The remaining 8,668,400 people (this also counts losses in the campaign in the Far East) should be considered the total demographic irrecoverable losses. Of this number, the army and navy lost 8,509,300 people, the internal troops - 97,700 people, and the border troops - 61,400 people.

As for the losses of the civilian population, it suffered significantly more losses in comparison with the Armed Forces. During the occupation, more than 13 684 thousand Soviet citizens died. Of these, 7 420 370 people were deliberately exterminated, 2 164 313 people died in forced labor in Germany, 4 100 thousand people died from the cruel conditions of the occupation regime (hunger, disease). The total irrecoverable human losses of the Soviet Union in the Great Patriotic War are now estimated at 26.6 million people.

 No.614018

>>614002
To be fair it seems to be one autist who knows literally nothing about the science of history but apparently played call of duty and read some nazi diary who defend this weird thesis. Literally no historians, or even controversial scholars like Furr defend would defend this lol.

 No.614029

File: 1637699222231.jpg (34.82 KB, 768x433, идите на.jpg)

>>614018
>Все кто не согласен с тобой один и тот же чел
Бля ну и логика. Пиздите какую то хрень а обстоятельства и важных деталей не знаете, и не хотите знать.

 No.614034

>>614029
so you're doing this out of some devotion to Russian nationalism or something? like there have been Chinese nationalists who claim the PVA dominated the UN forces in every fight, but i don't think the delusion of those Chinese nationalists lessens the impact of how crazy it was for the PRC to go up against the US almost immediately after it was founded with a peasant army.

 No.614038

>>614002
Wtf are you talking about?

 No.614048

>>614034
> you're doing this out of some devotion to Russian nationalism or something
You are an utter ignoramus.
>Chinese Nationalists
An utter nonsequitur.

Get your projected Cold War boogiemen out of your head.

 No.614059

>>614038
every WWII-related thread recently has devolved into shit flinging about whether or not the Red Army steamrolled its opponents at every stage of the war. it's a dumb thing to argue about, especially when the point is to somehow bolster a political ideology. there were some fascist countries that were good at waging war, and others who weren't. warfare is not a reflection of the ideology, unless those anons are implying we should all just become Turkic steppe nomads because they were good at killing people.

>>614048
then why did you pivot to typing out Russian shit to bolster your arguments? i guess it would help you if you decided to access newly unarchived documentation from the Russian state regarding the Red Army, but i doubt you're doing that.

 No.614110

So i have been reading this thread, and i now have an opinion to share.

it always did seem strange to me that the post war Soviet economy could have had the amount of growth it did if they had lost ~30mill people. So from that point of view the ~7mill looks kinda plausible.

But from a propaganda perspective, it seems strange that they would lie about this. Because the post war propaganda lie was that the Nazis were competent. But causing a lot of civilian deaths is incompetence, even for the evil faction. It means you wasted a bunch of war resources to shoot at irrelevant targets, and it means fewer conquered people that you can squeeze after the war.

The assumption that it would make the Soviet government look bad for having a lot of civilian losses is wrong too, because who ever initiates a war inherits all the responsibility. The reason the responsibility is put on the aggressor and not the defendant is because, if you tell a military to make sure that your neighbor doesn't attack, they are just going to preemptively shoot your neighbor. The possibility for peace would cease to exist.

 No.614112

>>614059
>every WWII-related thread recently has devolved into shit flinging about whether or not the Red Army steamrolled its opponents at every stage of the war. it's a dumb thing to argue about
Agreed, that autistic anon should get off the internet and do something else for a change.

 No.614129

>>614059
>why did you pivot to typing out Russian shit to bolster your arguments
Are you actually this retarded? For real take your meds you absolute schizo, literally none of this is implied in any part of my post.
>decided to access newly unarchived documentation from the Russian state regarding the Red Army, but i doubt you're doing that
I cannot access the new documents since I am not in country at the time, I have read older documents and read the contents and debates of legitimacy on the new documents. The things I have stated in thread, such as the point about "Muh aircraft destroyed on the ground" is common fact that any basic fucking research can dig up.

NTA
>every WWII-related thread recently has devolved into shit flinging about whether or not the Red Army steamrolled its opponents at every stage of the war.
No it hasn't, people just blatantly reject the constant and childishly incorrect narrative that the German forces had been as effective as claimed.
>there were some fascist countries that were good at waging war, and others who weren't. warfare is not a reflection of the ideology
Nobody made that point, it's a fucking meme to make /pol/fags seethe since they love to fellate the Nazis.

 No.614665

>>613949
Dude, active defence implies doing attacks of opportunity. You are not supposed to just sit there and take it, you can actually hit and run, you know?

>>613957
Soviets didn't lose most of their airforce on the ground, though? Halder was writing two months after the start of the war thatt there's parity in air forces with Soviets. Also, he was writing that Nazis have lost 50% of their aircraft in 1941, lol.

 No.614672

>>614002
>and now even the parts that make the Soviets look heroic in the face of an unrelenting German onslaught would get dismissed as Wehraboo propaganda

Dude, Soviets were fending off unrelenting German onslaught from the 22 June onwards, killing more fascists than they lost soldiers.

>>614018
>knows literally nothing about the science of history

To you that means literally "modern historians cannot be wrong because they are modern". That's fucking it, that's your entire argument. "Modern" to you equals "final history, with all contradictions solved". Truth is, however, modern historians are fucking clowns in the service of political interests, and they always were like this.

>>614034
>noooooo UN forces can't suffer higher losses than an enemy!!1 It's impossible, we are the ARYANS with AIR SUPERIORITY and shit!!1

See? There's no practical difference between Nazi and American propagandas.

 No.614682

>>614059
>warfare is not a reflection of the ideology

Wut. Why the fuck a socialist state wouldn't be better at waging war than a bunch of profit-seeking racist cunts? Vietnamese managed to industrialize their war potential to the point Americans cried and have lost two generations to attrition. Socialism is totally superior in warfare.

>access newly unarchived documentation from the Russian state regarding the Red Army


See this here? That's the epitome of the so-called "science of history", as presented by those guys. It's not actual historical work, like checking ALL the available evidence, dismissing fakeries and retardations and constructing the most believable and logical narrative, it's finding new shit in the archives! Which is supposed to be sensationalist, and is supposed to disprove other data - in a narrative of "they've been hiding this fact for decades, but now we know the truth". We've seen this shit times and times again, don't we?

 No.614700

>>614682
> Why the fuck a socialist state wouldn't be better at waging war than a bunch of profit-seeking racist cunts?
Why the fuck would it you dunder headed fuck? Have you forgotten who won the Cold War? Have you forgotten the Soviet defeat by fucking mountain living tribesmen in Afghanistan?
What the actual fuck you bloody moron?
> Socialism is totally superior in warfare.
Then why did they lose the Cold War?
Fuck, why would you even take pride in taking human lives? Why is your metric being better at genocide than capitalists?

Holy fuck do you think ideology determines the weapons and ways of war? Because 20th Century socialism was never more technologically advanced than 20th Century capitalism anyway.

I swear you fucking history nerds are like a two ton weight tied to our dicks

 No.614705

I want to know how many non-German axis soldiers died.
"muh k:d" fags invariably are ignorant of or deliberately ignore the millions of Axis conscripts that came from countries other than Germany and whose deaths were deliberately left out of propaganda

 No.614708

>>614705
It’s actually impressive how few people know that shit tons of countries were either annexed by or allied to Germany. Everyone thinks the Axis was just Japan and Italy and Krautland.

 No.614843

And the award to worst poster of the year goes to: Anprim Fag! You win nothing but contempt from your peers

 No.614874

>>614700
>Have you forgotten who won the Cold War?

By the looks of it - China.

>Have you forgotten the Soviet defeat by fucking mountain living tribesmen in Afghanistan?


No, they weren't. Vietnamese threw Americans out - by having industrial capacity to do so. Afghans did nothing like that, Soviets fulfilled all their goals, and Afghanistan was stable afterwards - unlike USA's losses, both in Vietnam and Afghanistan today.

>Then why did they lose the Cold War?


Because revisionism.

>Fuck, why would you even take pride in taking human lives?


Indeed, what's so good about having a better K/D ratio?

>Why is your metric being better at genocide than capitalists?


Why do you call a just war of defence and liberation a genocide?

>Because 20th Century socialism was never more technologically advanced than 20th Century capitalism anyway.


You are a delusional anglo, lol. Guess Gagarin was an American, eh?

 No.614879

>>614700
>Holy fuck do you think ideology determines the weapons and ways of war?

Yes, how could revolutionary leaders throughout history be defeating the hegemons of their days? Netherlands against Spain, Napoleon against reactionary regimes (until he decided to enslave Russia), fucking peasants of Dietmarschen slaughtering knights and lords? Come on now, there's plenty of examples of revolutionary leaders and societies being better at wars than their peers.

 No.614901

>>614700
>USSR lost the cold war
c'mon now

 No.614917

>>611847
>Calls all Soviet soldiers "Russian"
Thread discarded

 No.615073

>>614843
>Literal autistic shut-in losers dislike you for bursting their bubbles
Oh no!

 No.615196

>>614002
This. Even leaving aside the fact that virtually no historian (including those sympathetic to the Soviets) would seriously entertain the idea of the Soviets having less casualties than the Germans, even leaving aside that the generally accepted figures come from the Soviet military's own research, even leaving aside that by the war's end, the military casualty ratio in favour of the Germans wasn't actually that large (less than 1:2). Leaving all this aside, surely the gigantic civilian death toll is a living testament to the brutality of Nazi occupation and genocide. Insisting that the numbers are in fact far lower (at least for civilian deaths) doesn't actually make the Soviets look worse, it just makes the Nazis look less murderous. To say this isn't to accuse Stalin of "lying", since it's entirely possible that at the time of his statements to Pravda, the true figure had yet to be determined, and he was working with an early, incomplete estimate. Clearly this was the case, given that the Soviet military's later investigations provided much higher figures.
>inb4 some long schizo rant about how everything after 1953 is unreliable because Khrushev or something, ignoring the fact that Brezhnev (who was in charge during the initial investigations) partially rehabilitated Stalin and the Soviets had an interest in portraying themselves positively regardless

 No.615208

>>615196
Dude
You realize this nigha has devolved to essentially admitting that his position is based on tit-for-tat historical football regarding countries that no longer even exist?

He’s effectively arguing that, to be a TrueCommunistTM you need to be willing to bullshit and lie to yourself to make the USSR look better, like legit his claim isn’t about actual truth as noted by how quickly he stated you either side with Stalin or literally everyone else, as if discussing the actual facts about a conflict is a team sport

You must have missed the parts where he seethed endlessly when I told him that the USSR never seriously outpaced Western technological development and that the US obviously won the Cold War. Honestly didn’t think the plain fact that the USSR no longer even exists would be controversial, but I think Sovietaboo anon might be schizo-affective

 No.615217

>>615196
>To say this isn't to accuse Stalin of "lying", since it's entirely possible that at the time of his statements to Pravda, the true figure had yet to be determined, and he was working with an early, incomplete estimate. Clearly this was the case, given that the Soviet military's later investigations provided much higher figures.

Do tell me the date of military losses for their respective militaries of US, UK, France, Germany, etc. How come only the USSR needed to review their military losses first a decade after the fact, and then more than 40 years later, lol.

>and he was working with an early, incomplete estimate


No, Stalin has said "nearly 7 million". That doesn't leave any room for reviewing this number to make it 3-4 times bigger.

>Clearly this was the case, given that the Soviet military's later investigations provided much higher figures.


No, it's clearly the case of the later research being fake and gay.

>the military casualty ratio in favour of the Germans wasn't actually that large (less than 1:2)


Are you fucking insane?

>>615208
>He’s effectively arguing that, to be a TrueCommunistTM you need to be willing to bullshit and lie to yourself to make the USSR look better,

You can't fucking read. There's no fucking reason for ordinary folks to follow communism, there's no fucking reason to resist Nazi occupation, if resistance brings 27 million deaths, you fucking retard. It's like you haven't talked to any real people about this.

Furthermore, there's no lying involved! No bullshitting! Just fucking quote Stalin.

>USA had tech superiority and won the Cold War


You are indistinguishable from the "end of history" fags, you know that?

 No.615221

>>615217
> Do tell me the date of military losses for their respective militaries of US, UK, France, Germany, etc
Roughly 1939 - 1945?

 No.615223

>>615208
>>615217
>US obviously won the Cold War

I mean, the very idea that USA enjoyed hegemony and unipolarity since 1990s is a big fat anticommunist lie. Cold War didn't have 2 sides, it had 3 sides. Why do you retards insist that USA has won if China is still here and is still communist? Are you sure you are leftists when you insist on capitalists winning the competition with socialism?

 No.615225

>>615217
> Furthermore, there's no lying involved! No bullshitting! Just fucking quote Stalin. the Bible
This is how you sound
This is literally how you sound
This can only even make sense if you think Stalin is infallible like a god

You are not a Marxist

 No.615226

>>615221
No, the date of publishing, you cretin.

 No.615227

>>615225
>Stalin's words about 7 millions dead total aren't true because my Sacred Archives and Modern History Saints tell me it's actually 27 millions

 No.615228

>>615223
>I mean, the very idea that USA enjoyed hegemony and unipolarity since 1990s is a big fat anticommunist lie. Cold War didn't have 2 sides, it had 3 sides. Why do you retards insist that USA has won if China is still here and is still communist? Are you sure you are leftists when you insist on capitalists winning the competition with socialism?
China was on the USA's side

 No.615229

>>615223
Honestly after helping to destroy the USSR and allying with the CIA from the 70s onwards, to the point of shoring up US capitalism during the neoliberal reaction, I’d hardly call the PRC a “different side” to the Cold War

But I mean, sure, if you want to gloat over the two porky factions winning

 No.615231

>>615228
>>615229
>China was on USA side!

Historylets abound

 No.615232

>>615231
Coping denglets abound. You'll never be able to seethe your way out of the facts.

 No.615233

>>615227
This is only a gotcha if you worship a mere mortal man
You are a theist painted red

 No.615236

>>615227
Correct. One man's inititial statement to a newspaper just a year after the war's end does not outweigh decades of research. This is how the study of history works.

 No.615239

>>615231
I figured they must’ve been, after the Sino-Soviet Split, funding the Mujahideen, helping to arm Pinoshit, arming fucking Israel, and selling off their own proletariat so the US and the West could get an endless source of hyper-cheap labor to save themselves from the crisis of the 70s

But hey, maybe it was all the long game, socialism by 2150 amiright?

 No.615241

>>615232
What fact? China traded with the West, sure. USSR also traded with the West. With Nazis, even! USSR even gave concessions to UK of former British factories. In UN voting, pretty sure USSR and China had closer voting alignment than USA and China had.

>>615233
>>615236
>modern bourgeois history and data produced in 1980-90s during the destruction of socialism is more trustworthy than Stalin's estimates

Jesus Christ you people have no critical thinking whatsoever.

>>615239
Just a reminder to a historylet - China didn't do destalinization, and therefore accepts the 7 million dead Soviets in WW2 number.

You readiness to consume Western propaganda against China is telling.

 No.615242

>>615241
Oh, China didn't denounce Lysenko, even. Fun fact: in Lysenko threads, all the modern scientists who write in defence of Lysenko have Chinese surnames.

 No.615243

>>615241
>China didn't do destalinization, and therefore accepts the 7 million dead Soviets in WW2 number
Gonna need a source on that one.

 No.615247

>>615241
> modern bourgeois history and data produced in 1980-90s during the destruction of socialism is more trustworthy than Stalin's estimates
How do you even interact with anyone that isn’t braindead and venerating figures you personally worship?
Rant and raving about le bourgeois historians doesn’t make
>This is what Daddy Stalin said so it’s true
Anymore valid you fucking brainlet leech

 No.615248

>>615243
China doesn't accept 50 million dead due to Great Leap Forward number either. I wonder why, lol

 No.615249

>>615227
Stalin would have a lot of reasons to come up with bullshit numbers at the time too though. "Tens of millions of Soviet citizens died" is prime material for reactionaries to jump on to take advantage of.

 No.615254

>>615247
>Rant and raving about le bourgeois historians doesn’t make

Aaaaand here we come back to Engels denouncing bourgeois historians as producers of historical fakeries. You still haven't shown us proof that modern historians became better at their job, lol

>>615249
>"Tens of millions of Soviet citizens died" is prime material for reactionaries to jump on to take advantage of.

Glad you understand this! Explains pretty well why flag-fags in this thread defend 27 million losses during WW2 with tooth and nail - because they are reactionaries who hate communism.

 No.615255

>>615249
This. The entire premise simply assumes that Stalin had no interest in lowering the numbers for political reasons. Personally I do not think that he did, and this was simply a question of incomplete estimates, however it of course is a possibility.

 No.615261

>>615255
Yes-yes, Stalin was so inept that when he started counting his army losses, he missed every second corpse. It's not like they had an army to run, with supplies, weapons, ammunition, clothing, housing, etc etc. No fucking way Stalin in 1946 could have known the real number of dead or missing Soviet soldiers, lololol

 No.615266

>>615261
>Implying Stalin personally singlehandedly ran the army for starters
>Implying 7 million isn’t just describing military losses and discounting civilian losses
>Implying Stalin could not simply be wrong
<His argument literally relies on inspiring emotion in other anons by demanding to know how dare they disagree with Stalin
Stalin was wrong, seethe

 No.615279

>>615266
>Implying 7 million isn’t just describing military losses and discounting civilian losses

How many times do I have to quote Stalin on that, lol? In no uncertain terms, he have said it was military and civilian casualties, including POWs.

>Implying Stalin personally singlehandedly ran the army for starters


What's a Stavka and who was Stalin in it, lollollol

>Implying Stalin could not simply be wrong


How often Stalin was wrong? I mean, he did a lot of interviews and wrote a lot of works. How often do politicians make mistakes like that with numbers?

You are becoming a solipsist at this point. Everything is fake, nothing is real, only my Sacred Archives and Modern Historians are the Truth.

<His argument literally relies on inspiring emotion in other anons by demanding to know how dare they disagree with Stalin


Sure, why not? Clearly defining sides helps. How can you be a stalinist when you call Stalin a liar or a person who fakes the numbers of dead people under his watch? It puts you in a position where you have to CHOOSE - believing either Stalin or Khruschev, because that's what it always boils down to.

 No.615302

>>615279
> How many times do I have to quote Stalin on that, lol? In no uncertain terms, he have said it was military and civilian casualties, including POWs.
Imma blow your mind here
Ready?
I don’t venerate Stalin and don’t give a fuck what he thought on the matter

 No.615303

>>615279
> You are becoming a solipsist at this point. Everything is fake, nothing is real, only my Sacred Archives and Modern Historians Great and Noble and Infallible Leader are the Truth.

 No.615305

>>615302
Oh gee, what do you say about USSR sending to UN the population number of 193 million people in the year 1947? It's not Stalin saying this, it's entire Soviet government now, right?

>>615303
<I'm gonna claim that you are the real solipsist!
<still not proving that modern historians became any better than during the Engels' times, tho

 No.615455

>>614005
This is the correct answer.

 No.615470

>>615455
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1941/11/06.htm

>In four months of war we have lost 350,000 in killed, and 378,000 missing, and our wounded number 1,020,000. In the same period the enemy has in killed, wounded and prisoners lost more than four and a half million men.


https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1946/03/x01.htm

>Secondly, the following circumstance should not be forgotten. The Germans made their invasion of the U.S.S.R. through Finland, Poland, Rumania, Bulgaria and Hungary. The Germans were able to make their invasion through these countries because, at the time, governments hostile to the Soviet Union existed in these countries. As a result of the German invasion the Soviet Union has lost irretrievably in the fighting against the Germans, and also through the German occupation and the deportation of Soviet citizens to German servitude, a total of about seven million people. In other words, the Soviet Union’s loss of life has been several times greater than that of Britain and the United States of America put together.


7 million people is the only correct answer. 27 million people is this >>615249 :

>"Tens of millions of Soviet citizens died" is prime material for reactionaries to jump on to take advantage of.


Weak USSR saved only by American Lendlease is the purest anticommunist propaganda.

 No.615483

>>615470
>Weak USSR saved only by American Lendlease is the purest anticommunist propaganda.
The US Lend Lease was extremely useful, not only for the trucks and the radios which facilitated logistics, but first and foremost because of food exports which permitted the USSR to mobilize fast and throw manpower toward the front or in the war industry rather than using young men to do agriculture. No land lease = manpower crunch. It didn't save the USSR but probably millions of people and shortened the war a fair amount.

 No.615511

>>615483
See? It's all one big anti-communist narrative. What if I say to you, that modern historians managed to find that USSR had lost due to famine during the war 8-9 million people from those 27 mentioned?

>Trucks and radios


Proof those happened at the amounts worth mentioning? Because there's huge doubts that 400k trucks sent to USSR existed in the first place. There's proof that Soviets were importing large quantities of buttons for their uniforms, though, also, aluminium for planes and tushonka which Soviets have stockpiled and were eating even in 1960s as backlogged stuff.

Like, just googling this shit gives very interesting results. Apparently, American trucks had 30-40% of their originally intended lifespan, resulting in, you guessed it, in a higher turnover rate. The very 400k truck figure comes from absolutely hilarious sources

>В годы перестройки были опубликованы выдержки из записей приватных разговоров Жукова, сделанных КГБ в ходе прослушивания его дачи в 1963 году. "Вот сейчас говорят, что союзники никогда нам не помогали. Но ведь нельзя отрицать, что американцы нам гнали столько материалов, без которых мы бы не могли формировать свои резервы и не могли бы продолжать войну. У нас не было взрывчатки, пороха. Не было чем снаряжать винтовочные патроны. Американцы по-настоящему выручили нас с порохом, взрывчаткой. А сколько они нам гнали листовой стали! Разве мы могли бы быстро наладить производство танков, если бы не американская помощь сталью? А сейчас представляют дело так, что у нас все это было свое в изобилии", - говорил маршал в кругу своих.


Literally is said that this Zhukov's evaluation of Lendlease was first printed during Perestroika. Supposedly, comes from KGB bugging Zhukov's dacha, where he was saying this to his friends. KEK.

Mikoyan's account of Lendlease being absolutely totally essential comes from this http://militera.lib.ru/h/kymanev_ga2/index.html

>По словам члена политбюро Анастаса Микояна, "в 1941 году мы все потеряли, и если бы не ленд-лиз, не оружие, продовольствие и теплые вещи для армии - еще вопрос, как обернулось бы дело".


This https://nvo.ng.ru/history/1999-10-14/profit.html says Kumanyov - author of that book - was recording his interviews with all-all-all important people like Mikoyan on audiotapes, LOL.

Again all lies, eh. Funny how every modern historian is a whore. Kumanyov's own bibliography oscillated from "komsomol during the war" during USSR (because leaders of USSR post 1960s were all in komsomol during the war, obviously, and weren't heroes, so they needed a legend) to "secret new documents of WW2" (because that's what liberals love and pay for).

Reality is, USA and UK were selling to Germany wolframe through Spain and Turkey for German anti-tank capabilities. In 1943, they started actually trading with USSR, and USSR was buying from them mainly technologies like motors for subsequent production in USSR itself. Well, and buttons for Soviet uniforms. Can't forget about those! While Stalin was asking for Second Front since 1941, because that Second Front wouldn't have been much bigger help than any Lendlease, but again, Allies much rather won't do anything useful.

Hell, the most telling shit about Lendlease propaganda is that Lendlease was "evaluated" at 9-11 billions, but USA only demanded 2.7 billions after the war, but USSR agreeing to pay back only 300 million, and Stalin talked about credit of 1 billion from USA in 1941.

In other words, real size of Lendlease was 2.7 billions large total, as that was the maximum USA COULD PROVE they provided, out of which USSR considered only 300 million worth returning - meaning under the Lendlease terms only 300 millions were a valid payback. In other words, again, USA for propaganda purposes enlarged their Lendlease size claims by a factor of 3.

 No.615523

>>615511
Every scientist is lying because you have a nice google fu and know russian got it

 No.615524

>>615523
"every scientist" you talk about is supposedly writing books based off audiotapes with their interviews of Molotov, Mikoyan, etc. Obviously, none of those audiotapes were seen or heard by anyone, and they exist only in imaginary realms of those "every scientist". But wikipedia, and every fucking site in existance, take those claims of those being real interviews at face value. And then "every scientist" also quotes every other "every scientist", all this shit being hilarious in it's absurdity.

 No.615539

>>615523
Here, have a random wiki page's discussion. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%B1%D1%81%D1%83%D0%B6%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5:%D0%A0%D0%B5%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%A1%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BE_%D0%92%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%9E%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D0%BD%D1%8B#%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%84%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BC%D1%83%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2_%D0%9C%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%B0 Stalin in June 1941. Despite journal of visitors to Stalin being known to researchers, historians, and wiki users, still try to sneak in bullshit from modern historians who are adamant about Stalin being paralyzed, shocked, whatever, since 22 of June. Because Khruschev said so, and they must uphold the antistalinist line with their bunch of mythology. This one link is about Mikoyan's memoirs, printed in 1999, being "redacted", where THEY FUCKING ADDED STALIN BEING PARANOID AND SHOCKED, lol. Stuff that wasn't present in original was added to conform to the official anticommunist historiography, lol.

 No.615543

>>615539
Oh, and just skimming over Mikoyan's memoirs printed in 1999, because why the fuck not

http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/mikoyan/04.html

О том, как были созданы резервы стратегического сырья, следует рассказать подробнее. В 1939 г. у Сталина возникла идея закупить на случай войны стратегические материалы, которых у нас было мало, и создать запас, о котором абсолютно никто не знал бы. Об этом он мне сказал с глазу на глаз и поручил действовать. В мое личное распоряжение он выделил большую сумму валюты.

В составе Наркомвнешторга находилось Таможенное управление, имевшее склады, предназначенные для хранения импортных товаров. И вот я решил создать, так сказать, в недрах Таможенного управления, но фактически от него не зависимую, организацию по закупке и хранению стратегических материалов. Такая организация была создана. Но об этой организации ни Госплан, ни Наркомфин и никакие другие государственные органы ничего не знали. Эта организация подчинялась только и непосредственно мне как наркому внешней торговли. Во главе организации был поставлен инженер Васильев, который формально числился заместителем начальника Таможенного управления, а на деле был полностью от него независим и отчитывался в своей деятельности только мне.

За довольно короткий срок было закуплено за границей значительное количество высококачественного остродефицитного, стратегического сырья: каучук, олово, медь, цинк, свинец, алюминий, никель, кобальт, висмут, кадмий, магний, ртуть, алмазы, ферровольфрам, феррованадий, ферромолибден, феррохром, ферромарганец, ферротитан, ферросилиций, молибденовый концентрат и др. Первоначально все это хранилось на таможенных складах, расположенных в приграничных районах. Когда же угроза войны стала реальной, я решил перебазировать эти запасы подальше от границы, в Оренбург, где для этой цели были освобождены большие хлебные склады. Сталин очень интересовался всем этим делом. Я ему регулярно докладывал о ходе закупок и образовании запасов, об организации их хранения.

В 1975 г. Васильев прислал мне письмо, в котором, вспоминая о проделанной тогда работе, писал, что в период Отечественной войны "советская промышленность свыше 70% своей потребности в остродефицитных и стратегических товарах и сырье, необходимых для производства танков, самолетов, орудий, боеприпасов, удовлетворяла за счет запасов Минвнешторга".

It says, Stalin ordered in 1939 to buy up huge reserves of goods which could be cut off from USSR in case of war. 70% of WAR PRODUCTION USING DEFICIT GOODS was filled in by those RESERVES CREATED in 1939+. Those reserves were filled in even by buying from germans.

You know what that means? THAT'S FUCKING RIGHT, it means that Lendlease imports getting compared to USSR's production of deficit goods IS INVALID, since USSR had reserves of those goods fulfilling USSR's war needs by 70%.

Holy shit, Lendlease propaganda is even more pathetic than was thought.

 No.615616

>>614917
See >>>/hobby/21443 and shut up

 No.615618

>>615073
>autistic shut-in losers dislike you for bursting their bubbles
nice projection LMAO

 No.615646

>>611847
I am not going to read this retard-ass thread full of schizos, so I will answer directly to op
>In history class today we learnt Soviet military casualties were particularly high, 20-27 million for soldiers and another 20 million for civilians.
that's a nonsense. contemporary mainstream historiography operates with 20-27 million victims IN TOTAL.

I remember, that in 2016 there was some schizo attempt of the russian gov to claim there was 40 million deaths, but that was immediately proven as wrong.

For retards having mucho texto arguments about "but muh Stalin said 7 million". Yes, Stalin said that the total number of victims, both civilian and military, was 7 million. He didn't say that because he was ebil totalitarian 1984 liar or that he had some epic research that told him this. He just couldn't say publicly how many soviet people died. The USSR was preparing itself for another war (with USA and Great Britain). He didn't want them in what situation his country actually is, because obviously that wouldn't be very smart.

the number of 20 million is probably too high, because there are a lot of indirect victims of war in that number, but 7 million is probably too low. (I am talking about victims IN TOTAL).

 No.615710

>>615618
The funny part about your cope reply is that I was almost the same as the tankoid schizo before I got a job and a girlfriend
And no, my job isn't good

 No.615713

>>615710
NTA, but I have a girlfriend and am in grad school doing preprofessional education myself and while the people here can be edgelords, I still agree with them 70%.

Maybe you’re just a twat.

 No.615766

>>615713
>I still agree with them 70%.
And I should care because…?

 No.615768

>>615766
Every thread you enter is you start with garbage opinions, abs continue about how all of leftypol is shit, but when confronted on your shit takes, you vanish lmao
Every single time
I'm sure your broad umbrella claims of leftypol being shit must include you too, no?

 No.616295

>>615768 I mean he is pretty shit…so that checks out.

 No.616424

>>615710
Suuuure bud. Oh and some advise; saying "you're c-coping" ad nauseum only implies the opposite.

 No.616465

>>615646
You think you are being reasonable, but you are doing "lowest estimates are 7 million, highest are 20, and truth is somewhere in the middle", which defines pretty well how the "historical research" of Soviet losses in the war goes.

>The USSR was preparing itself for another war (with USA and Great Britain).


Who cares about population losses in this case, though? What matters is the number of divisions and mobilization potential and production capacity, all of which USSR was dominating in relation to Allies at the end of the war.

But more importantly, it was USSR's OFFICIAL position. Show me cases from history when states did what you say Stalin supposedly did with this figure - say OFFICIALLY a lie, and then went back on it later. When states do that, they employ "third parties", like journos, historians, etc, so that plausible deniability could be invoked, and those third party accounts get propagandized for a time, with the state later giving out "correct" official line.

 No.616468

>>616465
states lie all the time only to back down after it lol do you live in a parallel universe or what

 No.616472

>>616468
also the soviets generally had shitty intelligence so it's not necessarily a lie but maybe just bad figures, Stalin just read the reports given to him. thinking the germans would not invade so soon is not as much an erroneous analysis on his part than the bad job the NKVD did in counting troops at the border.

 No.616499

>>616472
>le "Stalin didn't believe spies" meme

Disinfo is a thing, and it is an expected thing rather than an occurence. Also, NOT crowding troops at the border was part of Soviet strategy - Blitzkrieg implies encircling all the enemy army at the border, and then roll in unopposed onto the enemy territory. USSR did multiple echelons of defence, with entire reserve fronts, precisely because it was a counter to Blitzkrieg. Also, USSR did Blitzkrieg in Finland - Sovetis have encircled an entire Finnish army after breaking through Mannerheim Line, afterall.

>le "Soviets had shitty intelligence" meme


They had intelligence services efficient enouigh to break apart anti-communist crusade Hitler has envisioned. There was no peace between UK and Germany. The whole meme of surprise attack comes part from German propaganda, part from mistranslation/misunderstanding of what word "verolomnyi" means - literally "faith-breaking", meaning that Nazis have broken the deals they had with USSR, including non-agression pact.

>>616468
They don't. There's official line state upholds, breaking it has repercussions for the state official. Sure, states admonish their out-of-line officials all the time, that's part of what I was talking about.

Just look at how long MI6 and CIA wait until declassiying documents - and even then they destroy evidence in their archives, as well as [CENSORED] half the pages away, anyway.

 No.616506

>>616499
>evidence I don't like is a meme
ok

 No.616509

>>616499
>Disinfo is a thing, and it is an expected thing rather than an occurence
that's got to be some powerful disinformation if people from multiple intelligence services, even your own spies, are all telling you the same thing

 No.616535

>>616509
What same thing?

 No.616596

>>616535
barbarossa comes to mind

 No.616658

>>615470
Stalin might simply not have had the complete numbers as it was still too early and there was not enough time for proper research. Also often the point of obfuscating the atrocities earlier on was to not incite the retribution towards people of germany and other collaborating countries that the red army and the suffered people's populations' had a presence in. German fascists' occupying forces were working for three years on occupied territories hands free to do anything, we still find the sites of mass murder to this day. Their goal was the total extermination of our people. There is no point in belittling our losses, it was a tragedy but the other outcome would have been our extinction.

 No.616733

>>616658
All other countries find out approximate number of losses year or two after the war. Why can't USSR? What, is it really that hard to look over losses in armies and to look over how many worker reserves are registered?

Special Commission employed 7 million informers, and was provided with millions in funding to find how many Soviets have died. There's money in this, too - Soviets extracted concessions from Germany based off those figures.

>not to incite retribution


Oh, did Stalin hide the real number of dead polish people from Poland? Pretty sure they calculated their losses in a couple of years, too, and were revisiting them only to push the blame for those losses off Nazis and onto Soviets, aka Katyn.

>we still find the sites of mass murder to this day


Which merely make a MIA person into a KIA one. Those graves do not increase the number of losses, as it's an assumed fact that a person has died, but officials just don't know where their corpse is buried at.

Well, now that I think about it, Memorial graves do increase numbers of Soviet repressions. Because they invent dead people out of thin air.

 No.616748

>>616733
You seem to have brought up the numbers that were estimated during and immediately after the war.

What's the exact breakdown of the military and civilian losses of the USSR according to you? And, according to you, what's the ratio of military losses between Germany and USSR?

 No.616855

File: 1637860466882-0.jpg (282.11 KB, 680x993, 04.jpg)

File: 1637860466882-1.djvu (25.69 MB, 224x300, voroshilov_ke04.djvu)

>>616748
>You seem to have brought up the numbers that were estimated during and immediately after the war.

No, I've brought up the numbers Special Commission has produced. This is just one metric amongst many, like the number of sheep fascists stole, damage they inflicted on kolkhozes and industry, how many villages they've burnt, how much tractors stole, all the things related to the casualties of war.

https://statearchive.ru/1185

Pic is taken from that link. Literally a list of civilians who were shot by Nazis.

>What's the exact breakdown of the military and civilian losses of the USSR according to you?


I have no idea, really. Khruschev rewrote history. Apart from Stalin's interview to Pravda with 7 millions mentioned, as well as UN figure of USSR population in 1946 being 193 million people, I haven't seen much reports. Heck, I've seen more FOREIGN press reports on USSR's afterwar population dated 1945-1950 than Soviet sources. Khruschev was very fucking thorough. Apparently, they've been book-burning like crazy after Stalin. Say, this Voroshilov's book in djvu, printed in 1937, was to be destroyed, and has relevant archival markings that it was meant to be destroyed, and it only survived because archivist didn't fulfill the order.

My knee-jerk estimate is 5 millions military and 2 millions civilians losses. It's not based on anything, really.

>And, according to you, what's the ratio of military losses between Germany and USSR?


Western researchers put german military losses below 5 millions, lol, and instead push the "germans were genocided when expulsions happened!!1" narrative. Realistically, though, it's around 9 millions losses for Germany alone - 18 millions were mobilized, only around 10 millions found in Allied captivity after the war, plus civilian casualties. All the "excess" deaths from Western estimates of 3-5 million military losses are pushed into "POW deaths" and "civilians deaths due to post-war german genocide" categories.

Apparently, Allies did a census in Germany in 1946 and found population of 66 millions, with 7.5 millions of women more than men?

So, here we are. 5 millions of Soviet military losses to Germany's 8 millions. That's about the effect one would expect from having so much more tanks and planes and artillery than your enemy, no?

 No.618045

>>616855
>Khruschev was very fucking thorough. Apparently, they've been book-burning like crazy after Stalin. Say, this Voroshilov's book in djvu, printed in 1937, was to be destroyed, and has relevant archival markings that it was meant to be destroyed, and it only survived because archivist didn't fulfill the order.
proof? the book also seems to be just a compilation of Voroshilov's articles fror Pravda. If someone wanted to destroy, he would have to destroy a complete archive of Pravda.

 No.618179

>>618045
Now I feel like an idiot. I've downloaded it from comments that described it as having those markings for being destroyed. At least that's how I remember it. I can't track down the page, though. Searching archives for "183705 Фт." gave me no results, and I can't find any "Фт." archive or library mentioned anywhere. I assume that's what those comments meant back then? Found this book on sale, also, from private collections, though, as there were no markings. This one seems to be from 2012 from militera, though, and those others were placed for sale in 2016+.

>If someone wanted to destroy, he would have to destroy a complete archive of Pravda.


Yeah, but we are talking about population smears as well. Nobody had 1920-30s Pravda issues in 1950-60s, except for random crazies who collect them.

Well, let's see. It's Vitebsk's something something librarian, so it's local observations, but I think it's representative.

https://rep.vsu.by/bitstream/123456789/1529/1/%D0%AF%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0%20%D0%93.%D0%9D..pdf

It says censorship organs were created in 1953. In the first paragraph, it says that Khruschev's Thaw resulted in a lot of documents getting destroyed. It mentions later Beria getting edited out of Big Soviet Encyclopedia, and how political situation abroad - Yugoslavia and China, for example - immediately resulted in books getting removed from the shelves. Also, it talks about how censors voiced objections about putting back on the shelves works of rehabilitated under Khruschev "national democrat" writers, lol. Anti-party group got cleansed out of libraries and shops after 1957, and in 1960, Zhukov.

Well, I assume this book printed in 1937 must have been removed in 1957, or something. Can't prove if it was actually meant to be destroyed, though.

 No.618211

File: 1637945022053-0.jpg (508.94 KB, 2714x1809, SC2056351-1.jpg)

File: 1637945022053-1.jpg (146.29 KB, 1611x1119, soviet-Shermans-1.jpg)

File: 1637945022053-2.jpeg (343.27 KB, 1600x1066, Soviet_sherman1-1.jpeg)

File: 1637945022053-3.jpg (115.69 KB, 800x539, general-lee.jpg)

i thought there weren't supposed to be any pictures of soviet M4 shermans?

 No.618230

>>618211
Any? We were talking about insanely high claims of Lendlease propaganda. 3 billion worth of USD Lendlease came to USSR, that's for sure. It constituted 4% of USSR's production during the war, though.

 No.618355

https://warspot.ru/13416-trinadtsat-tankov-za-odnu-nogu

Here's detailed research of Rudel's claim that he destroyed 13 Soviet tanks in return for his leg in 1945. As it turns out, Soviet losses' reports don't even mention losing this many tanks, lol. They mention losses, alright, in manpower, of people who were trying to set up a bridge, but only 1 tank destroyed, 2 damaged. That's it's about German aces.

A godawful site, though.

 No.618403

Okay, I found statistical proof for my claims of ~7 million losses for USSR. Behold, the statistical yearbook of sorts for years 1913-1951, apparently, printed in 1952.

We are interested in pages 115 for kolkhozes (1940 - 42.9 mln workers, 1945 - 34.7 mln, 1950 - 40.6), 167 for industries (1940 - 31.2 mln, 1945 - 27.3 mln, 1946 - 30.6 mln, 1950 - 38.3 mln), last pages for students (1940/41 - 34.8 mln, 1945/46 - 26.1 mln, 1950/51 - 33.3 mln). In short, we are losing 8 mln kolkhozniks and 4 mln for workers, and replace them with 6 mln kids - so, we lose due to war 6 mln worker population. By around 1948, USSR's worker population was already higher than it was in 1940.

Not sure about women, though. 185 deals with percentage of women in industries (not kolkhozes). 1940 - 38.4%, 1945 - 55.3%, 1946 - 48.4%, 1950 - 47.3%. So, it means in 1940 there were around 18 mln male industry workers and 12 mln female, in 1945 13 mln male and 14 mln female, in 1950 around 20 mln each. I'm too tired to think by how much it changes the 6 million stat.

Rest of ~193 mln Soviet population is both elderly, kids below 6 years old, and services workers. There's also healthcare workers stat at page 213, 1940 - 137.3k normal doctors + 14.5k dentists, 1945 - 116.1k + 10.1k, 1950 - 241.7k + 17.4k I couldn't find the other population categories.

As we can see in the end, the main DEMOGRAPHIC, as in, seen in graphs without reality taken into account, damage was suffered by the student kids - drop in size by 8 millions, facilitated by women not birthing new kids during the war very much. This number didn't catch up by 1951, even, because USSR's first year school age was 6-7 year. Otherwise, this stat is totally in line with the 193 million figure USSR has sent to UN in 1946. https://www.un-ilibrary.org/content/books/9789210581783/read page 85

Oh no~ it looks like faggots believing in 27 million Soviet losses were murdered with facts and logic~


Unique IPs: 27

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / booru ]