[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / 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: /spoox/ - Paranormal, horror and the occult.
New board: /AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.


File: 1638600766387.png (1.02 MB, 555x831, ClipboardImage.png)

 No.629464[Last 50 Posts]

>clicking around random wikipedia articles dealing with the russian revolution
>pretty much everyone of note died in the mid-late 30s accused of treason

uhh did stalin really do nuffin? cause this seems kinda sketch. and since we're all marxists what's the explanation here that isn't great man or personality based? why were the old revolutionaries nearly all purged from the state in the stalin era

 No.629470

trostkyism was a mistake, but so was stalinism

 No.629476

>>629464
there are three schools of thoughts on this

on one hand you had the right wing cold war or revisionist thought that stalin was an absolute cold blooded monster that betrayed the revolution

on the other hand you had the stalinist leftwing tankie counterresponse saying that all of the old bolsheviks and others purged were fake revolutionaries, potential traitors and etc

and then you have the middle ground which i argue is the most recent saying that stalin was and most of the communist revolutionaries were genuine but due to misinformation, legacy of failed revolutions of the past, the rising threat of nazism and fascism, the utter factionalism in the party that makes leftypol look tame, the questionable backgrounds of some of the communists, the utter demonizations and attacks that the factions used to attac each other, and just plain disagreement with idelogical approach, it created a perfect situation for paranoia to rise and everyone to think the other guy is an enemy. And people demonize stalin for this but thats because stalin won the power struggle, if it was trotsky or any other russian revolutionary leader or even burkharin there would have still been fucking purges.

 No.629483

File: 1638602090187.jpg (36.47 KB, 306x640, Tukhachevsky.jpg)

he did nothing wrong, convince me otherwise
>inb4 Grover Furr

 No.629488

>>629464
Khrushevites rewrote history and made their trot cronies into "people of note". Kind of like Tukhachevsky became a genius. Given that Khruschev removed all the actual revolutionaries' books from the shelves, and historians are too dumb to read those off-the-shelves books when those aren't anticommunist.

"Old revolutionaries" were opposing Lenin and screeched at him when they realized Lenin's not going to back their reestablishment of bourgeois parliamentarism. Khruschevites made those people into martyrs, dismissing their guilt with a decree. They undid trials not by doing investigations, but by granting amnesty.

>>629476
>all of the old bolsheviks and others purged were fake revolutionaries, potential traitors and etc

When there was a Party-wide vote about whether or not factions should be banned, trotskyists got 4% of the vote on that. Then we had an episode of trots sperging out after the censorship organs refused to print opposition's program (i.e. refused to endorse factionalism), and trots tried to print it by themselves. This rebellion against democratic centralism got purged.

> the utter factionalism in the party that makes leftypol look tame


No more than 4% of the Party supported factionalism, mate. That's why nobody fucking cared for the purged. There was no factionalism, there were at most 4% of shitheads whose voices are overrepresented today due to antistalinist bias in all the media.

>a perfect situation for paranoia to rise and everyone to think the other guy is an enemy


Didn't happen either. Apart from trots/khruschevites who lived in fear, everyone else's memoirs mention nothing of the like.

>>629483
>I'm gonna become a German spy because USSR had a smaller army than even Poland!

 No.629493

>>629488
>That's why nobody fucking cared for the purged.
I only take exception when it comes to WW2
The freshly purged ranks of the red army was no match for any sort of modern warfare, and for 3 years the Soviet union faltered under German tanks and eugenics policies.
I can only imagine what would have happened had the Soviet union out aside their age old socialist squabbles and unite against an actual threat

 No.629496

>>629493
>The freshly purged ranks of the red army was no match for any sort of modern warfare, and for 3 years the Soviet union faltered under German tanks and eugenics policies.

Lolno, Nazis lost 4 million troops dead and injured in 1941 alone. USSR fucking owned invading fascists. Even fucking Hitler admitted that in 1941, saying that Nazi propaganda about the purges in Red Army crippling it was veeeeery far from truth.

 No.629499

>>629496
I'll admit I'm not very knowledgeable in this matter.
I posted in the QTDDTOT thread looking for sources on this topic, so I would very much appreciate it if anyone could supply such info
k thx

 No.629515

The NKVD was infiltrated by the likes of Yezhov and Yagoda, but fortunately Beria managed to get control and clean house. There were some innocents but most were indeed guilty.

 No.629517

Educate yourself

 No.629518

>>629515
*puke*

 No.629522

>>629517
ty, I will read this

 No.629523

>>629518
Beria was the best Chekist the USSR had after Dzerzhinsky.

 No.629526

>>629523
didn't he rape a bunch of people tho

 No.629527

>>629515
Yezhov may have commited suicide or double-suicide with his wife or something. He just "disappeared" from everywhere with no (known) official explanation. Likes of Yakovlev have spread the rumours about his homosexuality and shit. Since he was the head of NKVD at the time of supposed Great Purge, they've had to make him responsible for it, and dead people won't object to such treatment.

Beria was a certified British spy. He was doing who knows what in Georgia during the Civil War. His alibi was being held hostage by Georgian mensheviks, but an inquiry into that alibi has revealed that it wasn't him but a person with he same surname who was taken hostage by those Georgian mensheviks.

 No.629545

>>629526
That's bullshit the Khrushchevites came up with to heap shit on his grave. The KGB was pathetic compared to the Cheka, OGPU and NKVD. Good at espionage but clearly useless at suppressing domestic counterrevolution, the terror was prematurely ended and anti-Soviet elements were allowed to fester.
>>629527
Yezhov confessed to being a German spy, I don't see what the confusion is. Beria was killed because he stood for a continuation of Stalin's policies which would've meant the downfall of careerists and bureaucrats (Stalin was planning a clean up before he was poisoned).
https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/ezhovinterrogs.html

 No.629546

>>629522
>those tiny feet
My sides

 No.629577

>>629476
Can you really call a little child understanding of history where people are either plotting traitorous monsters or karmic benevolent figures schools of thoughts though. Seems like ideology to me.

 No.629583

Zinoviev and Kamenev (2 of the "old Bolsheviks" trots, neocons and liberals like to cry crocodile tears over) were trying to kill Trotsky in 1925

Stalin went to Pravda to expose this and stop Trotsky getting killed
>>629483
No Grover Furr needed. tukhachevsky was a traitor and the Russian government confirmed it in 2018 when they finally released his trial transcript
The Tukhachevsky trial was a military trial and therefore a closed trial (unlike retard historians like Timothy Snyder who called it a "show trial")
http://istmat.info/node/59108


The Krushchevites insisted he never admitted guilt
The grandson of Alksnis who was shot alongside Tukhachevsky grew up an anti Stalinist due to his grandfather being shot, his grandmother going to a gulag and his father being tainted with "son of a traitor"
After he read the transcript he came away convinced his grandfather was guilty
>V.A. My grandfather and Tukhachevsky were friends. And my grandfather was a member of that judicial conference, which tried both Tukhachevsky and Eideman. The interest in this case increased even more after the well-known publications of the prosecutor Viktorov, who wrote that Yakov Alksnis was very active during the trial, “drowning” the accused … According to the transcript, the opposite is true. During the entire process, they were asked only two or three questions. But the strangest thing is the behavior of the accused. The newspapers wrote that they denied everything, did not agree with anything. And in the transcript – full confession. The very fact of a confession, I understand, can be achieved by torture. But there is something completely different: an abundance of details, a long dialogue, mutual accusations, a lot of clarifications. It’s impossible to direct this.
<V.A. I know nothing of the nature of the conspiracy. But today I am completely convinced that a conspiracy within the Red Army really existed, and Tukhachevsky was a participant in it.
https://www.diplomaticpost.co.uk/index.php/2021/11/19/the-moscow-trials-elementy-2003-last-colonel-of-the-empire/

 No.629592

>>629464
During normal times a revolution can continue with ups and downs

Soviets were on eve of a world war and the Trotskyites believed that the Soviets could not win a war against German fascism
Trotsky stated plainly in Revolution Betrayed (1936) that fascism "would sweep away October".

When Solkolnikov was being sentenced he stated "we considered fascism the most organised form of capitalism and it was better to come to terms with it"

The pressure of war weights like an albatross around the neck. Normal, worthwhile people (in ordinary circumstances) will crack under that pressure and contemplate counter-revolution like the trots did

They considered they were saving the revolution by trying to organise a defeat and allowing the Hitlerites to take Ukraine and Western Soviet territory and allowing a rump Soviet state led by Trotsky to survive

 No.629594

>pretty much everyone of note died in the mid-late 30s accused of treason
Yet people like Kruschev survived, opening the door to even worse people like Gorbachev and Yeltsin.
The meme is right, Stalin didn't kill enough people.

 No.629596

>>629583
>no need for furr, here's a weird russian website
lol are you the ww2 k/d moonlanding denier dude

 No.629604

>>629594
Maybe he killed all the people that could have stopped them
Also you must choose, either there was a democratic and lawful process to those purges or Stalin the dictator ordered those deaths. You faggots seems really schizophrenics about that

 No.629606

>>629596
No
>Weird russian website
<Released by the Russian government in Russian (at link I provided) and also in Ukrainian which was reasonably big news in Russia 2018

 No.629658

>>629545
>Yezhov confessed to being a German spy
were his fingernails still attached to his fingers when he made that confession

 No.629663


 No.629664

>>629658
Physical interrogation was only used as a last resort.

 No.629667

Ah yes enhanced interrogation, one of the best way to get reliable intelligence

 No.629675

>>629464
>mid-late 30s

he won the war

maybe if he killed more kulaks they could have pushed to the atlantic

 No.629680

>>629470
There were alternatives to trotskyism but Stalin went full psychopath.

 No.629690

>>629667
>>629664
One has to wonder what can be a more effective torture - knowing that your sentence will likely be death.
Under those conditions why go out grovelling and snivelling
If you know death is imminent, why not throw one in the eye of Soviet government who are supposedly framing you and stand up and declare that all the charges are false?

Radek for instance claimed it was he who tortured the prosecutor
<Let us dismiss at outset some of the fairy tales. Stalin, some whisperers had it, was mortally ill, and was extirpating the last remnants of opposition while he was still alive ; according to other "reports" he had suddenly gone "insane." It was said that the prisoners were tortured, hypnotized, drugged (in order to make them give false confessions) and -a choice detail-impersonated by actors of the Moscow Art theater I But the trials occurred soon after the preliminary investigations were concluded, and they · took place before hundreds of witnesses, many of them experienced correspondents, in open court.
The prisoners testified that they were well-treated during the investigation. Radek, indeed, says that it was he who tortured the prosecutor, by refusing to confess month after month. Pressure there certainly was, in the manner of police investigation all over the world, but no evidence of torture.
>The trials, the Trotskyists assert, were a colossal frame-up. The prisoners were induced to confess, they say, on a promise of immunity and a pardon after the trial-if they talked freely-and then double-croaed and shot. This is hardly conceivable from a dose reading of the tan· mony. It could not easily have occurred in the second trial, whom the defendants must have known that the first batch despite their confessions, were sentenced to death and duly executed.
John Gunther Inside Europe, page p.576

<Every important defendant in the first and second trials was a Zinovievite or a Trotskyist. Radek, Pyatakov, Sokolnikov, Serebryakov, had been Trotskyists for years. Radek joined the Trotsky faction in 1923, went into exile, and only recanted in 1929; he was readmitted to grace in 1930. Their opposition to Stalin was ingrained and inexpungeable ; they were Trotskyists to the bone ; when they saw things gQing badly according to their lights, it was perfectly reasonable for them to ,um back to their old leader. Moreover, these old revolutionaries, quite apart from the fact that they were Trotskyists and therefore dissidents, were conspirators by nature, conspirators born and bred. From their very earliest days they had breathed the air of plot and counterplot. The day of their eminence passed ; Stalin wanted engineers and administrators ; they were naturally disgruntled. In a police-run state like Russia, one should remember, discontent can be expressed only by conspiracy. And Radek and company were congenitally incapable of giving conspiracy up.

ibid.p581
<The Trotskyists-outside Russia at least-made no effort to conceal their violent hatred of the Stalinist regime. They were far beyond such "bourgeois" considerations as orthodox patriotism. They were world revolutionaries, and they no longer regarded tht U.S.S.R. as a revolutionary or communist state. They had the same aim as pre-1939 Germany and Japan, to overthrow the Stalinist regime. Stalin was as much ill enemy to them as Hitler. And they were willing to cooperate even with Hitler, at that time an obvious ally, for their supreme goal-Stalin's destruction.
p.582
<Radek. and the others testified over and over again-the central i,eue of the tria1-tbat they felt war to be inevitable in 1933 or 1934 andthat the Russians would be defeated. They thought that things were going very badly, and that when the crash came the Soviet Union wouid not survive it. Therefore, as good world revolutionaries, they deemed it their duty to get to work and perfect an underground organization that would survive the war, so that revolutionary communism would not altogether perish. Also, if war came, they might themselves have had a chance at getting power in Russia, and therefore an attempt to buy the Germans off, buy the Japanese off, was natural.
<582
< (a) Trotsky was actively eager for a German war against the U.S.S.R., and he hoped that the U.S.S.R. would lose-therefore he sought to weaken it by sabotage; (b) his ambition and his lust for office were such that he was quite willing to give up the Ukraine and the Maritime Provinces as a price for power. One should not forget that Trotsky fought the Tsar during the Great War much as he fights Stalin now, that Lenin crossed Germany with German aid in a German sealed train, and that Trotsky signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk giving an immense amount of Russian territory to Germany.
p.583
<But investigation, so far as investigation was possible, began to disclose a number of enlightening details. Tukhachevsky, brilliant and ambitious, wanted power for himself ; he and Voroshilov were on bad terms, it was said ; a general impression in military circles is that Tukhachevsky planned a "palace" coup d'etat to get rid of Stalin and set up a dictatorship himself. Stalin got him first.
p584
< Few people think that Tukhachevsky could have sold out to Germany, or promised the def eat of his own army in the event of war; but it is quite possible that he envisaged some arrangement with the Reichswehr independently of Stalin. He wanted the Red Army and the German army to work together; politics prevented this. He was known to be an opponent of the Franco-Soviet pact, and the French distrusted him. One suggestion is that the Reichswehr planned to overthrow Hitler just as Tukhachevsky wanted to overthrow Stalin, the two armies to refrain from interference with each other.
p.584

 No.629693

>>629690
>If you know death is imminent, why not throw one in the eye of Soviet government who are supposedly framing you and stand up and declare that all the charges are false?
Because I want the pain to stop and my family safe retard

 No.629700

Actual terrible shit that happened during Stalin's time
>scraping due process during purges
Mfers got the intel that there's a conspiracy inside of the party and did what? Grant NKVD extra power so the conspirators on the inside of it can fuck shit up. Giant self own.
>ethnic deportations AFTER the war
I understand that during the war that might've been a reasonable measure but in peace time it's a straight up atrocity, inexcusable.
Other than that the party and papa Stalin did pretty good.

 No.629706

>>629700
>ethnic deportations AFTER the war
lol, these were political and aimed at anti-Soviet elements in places like Latvia and also repatriatiation to newly established socialist states

 No.629709

>>629706
I'm talking about fuckery in Caucasus, whole ethnicities were uprooted for no good reason.

 No.629711

>>629693
Do Stalinites have zero understanding of human motivation or what? The whole thought process on this is bizarre: Stalin is supposedly trying to stop the secret Trotskyite collaborators with Nazis, even though Stalin was the one who actually "came to terms" and "collaborated" with the Nazis.

 No.629713

>>629693
>Because I want the pain to stop
OK retard, a load of hardened revolutionaries that had been sent to numerous Tzarist gulags in Siberia pre1917 and been tortured by the Tzars secret police, who have been committed communists their entire lives are able to be tortured in a way for them to confess their guilt - without a blemish on them, in front of a public court open to the worlds press and acting defiant

You have to be a complete spastic to do those mental gymanstics
<“With an interpreter at my side, I followed the testimony carefully. Naturally I must confess that I was predisposed against the credibility of the testimony of these defendants… Viewed objectively, however, and based upon my experience in the trial of cases and the application of the tests of credibility which past experience had afforded me, I arrived at the reluctant conclusion that the state had established its case, at least to the extent of proving the existence of a widespread conspiracy and plot among the political leaders against the Soviet government, and which under their statutes established the crimes set forth in the indictment…
<I am still impressed with the many indications of credibility which obtained in the course of the testimony.
<To have assumed that this proceeding was invented and staged as a project of dramatic political fiction would be to presuppose the creative genius of a Shakespeare and the genius of a Belasco in stage production. The historical background and surrounding circumstances also lend credibility to the testimony.
<The reasoning which Sokolnikov and Radek applied in justification of their various activities and their hoped-for results were consistent with probability and entirely plausible. The circumstantial detail… brought out by the various accused, gave unintended corroboration to the gist of the charges.”
(Joseph Davies, Mission to Moscow)

<Very soon after the first trial, Zinoviev and his associates were executed. It has been asserted that they had been promised lenient treatment if they would for their part publicly accuse Trotsky of having conspired with them to overthrow Stalin and the Soviet government. In truth, it was largely upon this supposition that rested the contention that the first trial was a “frameup”. But now that the men were put to death Trotsky and his adherents declared that they, the defendants, had been “double-crossed”. To the Trotskyites this was further proof of their contention that the first trial had been “framed”. To the disinterested student, however, it might be just as easily have proved the contrary. After all, it is one of the simplest rules of logic that one cannot use a premise to prove a thesis and then use the denial of that premise to prove the same thesis. Logically, therefore, one should have looked elsewhere for an explanation of the executions, and the only other possible explanation was that the men were actually put to death in the regular course of justice and for the single reason that they were guilty of the crimes charges against them. Still it was possible, despite the rise of this counter-doubt, that they have been “double-crossed”.

<Now we have come to the second trial. What is the situation? the men now on trial cannot possibly be under any delusion as to their fate. They must know and they do know that they will be put to death. Despite this they do not hesitate to confess their crimes. Why? The only conceivable answer is that they are guilty. Surely it cannot and will not be argued this time as well that there has been a “deal”, for men like Radek are obviously not so stupid as to believe that they are going to save their lives in that manner after what happened to Kamenev and Zinoviev. It has been said that they have been tortured into confessing. But what greater and more effective torture can there be than knowledge of certain death? In any case, the men in the courtroom have been shown not the slightest evidence of having been tortured or of being under duress. It is said by some that they have been hypnotized into confessing, or that the prosecution, working upon its knowledge of Slav psychology, has somehow trapped these men into confessing deeds of which they are not guilty. For example, the unamity with which the men have been confessing is taken as proof that the confessions are false and have been obtained by some mysterious means. Yet these assertions rest upon no tangible or logical proof whatever. the idea that some inexplicable form of oriental mesmerism has been used is one that sound reason must reject as utterly fantastic. The very unamity of the defendants, far from proving that this trial is also a “frame-up”, appears to me to prove directly the contrary. For if these men are innocent, then certainly at least one of the three dozen, knowing that he faced death in any case, would have blurted out the truth. It is inconceivable that out of this great number of defendants, all should lie when lies would not do one of them any good. But why look beyond the obvious for the truth, why seek in mysticism or in dark magic for facts that are before one’s very nose? Why not accept the plain fact that the men are guilty? And this fact, if accepted with regard to the men now on trial, must also be accepted with regard to the men who were executed after the first trial.
-Why I Resigned From the Trotsky defense Committee, by Mauritz A. Hallgren

>my family safe retard

prove it

 No.629720

>>629709
Potential collaboration with imperialist/bourgeois states and presence of anti-communist bourgeois nationalists is a good reason.

 No.629726

>>629720
Not a good reason, get rid of collaborators and nationalists, don't kick regular people out their birthplace.

 No.629732

>>629545
Read Furr's introduction. Don't you feel suspicious about those sources, lol?

We do not know how many interrogations of Ezhov are in existence. All the prosecution materials concerning virtually all the important matters of the later 1930s in the USSR are still top-secret, kept in the Presidential Archives of the Russian Federation. I have simply translated those texts that have been published as of this date (July 2010).

I have compiled and translated these confessions from the following "semi-official" sources:

Briukhanov, Boris Borisovich, and Shoshkov, Evgenii Nikolaevich. Opravdaniiu ne podlezhit. Ezhov i Ezhovshchina 1936-1938 gg. Sankt-Peterburg: OOO "Petrovskii Fond" 1998.

Polianskii, Aleksei. Ezhov. Istoriia «zheleznogo» stalinskogo narkoma. Moscow: «Veche», «Aria-AiF», 2001.

Pavliukov, Aleksei. Ezhov. Biografiia. Moscow: Zakharov, 2007.

I term these sources "semi-official" since they are quoted unproblematically by all the anticommunist scholars. These scholars ignore them almost completely, and ignore their implications completely, but they do not consider the documents false.

In addition I have used these sources, which are more or less "official":

Lubianka. Stalin i NKVD – NKGB – GUKR «SMERSH». 1939 – mart 1946. Moscow: «Materik», 2006.

Petrov, Nikita, and Iansen [Jansen], Mark. «Stalinskii pitomets» – Nikolai Ezhov. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2008.

A few remarks have been taken from other sources, mainly Vassilii Soima, Zapreshchennyi Stalin, Chast' 1. Moscow: OLMA-PRESS, 2001. Where possible I have checked the text with the versions online at http://perpetrator2004.narod.ru/ , "Documents of Soviet Power and of Soviet-Communist Terror", which has used the sources above.

 No.629738

Pretty interesting how shit that happened in 85-91 followed the exact programme of the conspiracy Stalin ostensibly made up to remove his rivals.
Like sure it's happened in 1985 but in 1936 absolutely no lifelong party member would want to do that.

 No.629739

>>629726
They often draw their strength from the wider populace and blend it, using support networks. For security reasons it was necessary with the onset of the cold war initiated by the NATO imperialists.

 No.629740

What's mote impresive is how Khrushev slipped through the cracks, thanks to his peasant background I imagine.

 No.629743

>>629740
You have to staff your administration somehow. Also, Stalin was too liberal and too kind. If he pulled a Cultural Revolution, or Purge in ~1947, USSR would have still be around today.

Did you know that Zhukov was demoted multiple times after the war due to uncommunist behaviour, lol? First in 1946, then in 1948.

 No.629744

>>629740
It's almost like systematically murdering intelligent or outspoken members of your own party makes it so the only people who survive you are loyalist dullards whose anemic leadership makes them susceptible to revisionism.

 No.629745

>>629732
Maybe but I've never seen a convincing defence of Yezhov and Yagoda. The USSR still executed plenty of people from 1939-1953 (although they actually stopped it in 1947) but never again on the scale of 1937-1938, which stands out like a sore thumb.

 No.629752

>>629713
>You have to be a complete spastic to do those mental gymanstics
Total projection on your part. You're making an abstract comparison between two different sets of concrete circumstances, as if the torture by itself is what resulted in the confessions. Revolutionaries persecuted by Czarist authorities have good reason not to confess under torture and betray the cause they support; their torture and even death would have meaning. Ex-revolutionaries persecuted by the same cause have few such reasons, if any at all, and many more to confess, whether for their family and friends, to end their suffering, or even as a sacrifice to the cause itself, insofar as not confessing undermines it.

 No.629753

>>629739
Socialism with ethnic cleansing characteristics

 No.629754

>>629740
He also didn't join the Bolsheviks until quite some time after the October Revolution. It's a cautionary tale against allowing unreliable peasants into high ranking positions.

 No.629758

>>629753
Boo hoo. If anti-communists want to call it "ethnic cleansing" then go ahead. As communists we know repression against bourgeois elements is necessary and should be unconstrained by law. Not every nationality will necessarily survive the transition to communism.

 No.629763

>>629758
>Not every nationality will necessarily survive the transition to communism
You are a bong, right?

 No.629765

>>629758
It's funny that you think a person's ethnicity makes them a bourgeoisie element, but I guess when all you have in your life is shilling for a nation that doesn't exist anymore on an immensely obscure Chan board you'll make any mental leap no matter how retarded. I mean, it was ethnic cleansing, entire ethnic groups were forcefully deported from their lands but whatever.

I think it's time to log off, I'm sure you have assignments due for your undergrad course.

 No.629768

>>629545
>>629732
I'm reading through it, anyway. Interrogations obviously contradict each other, meaning at least some of them total fake.

>- fm perpetrator2004 Yezhov1.doc; Soima; Polianskii 241-245.

>"How did you use this NKVD laboratory in your espionage and conspiratorial activities?" asked Rodos, glancing at Kobulov who was sitting beside him.

That's a totally fake confession. Laboratory X was a Perestroika/90s meme which liberals tried to force to make Kirov dead by Stalin's hands.

About homosexuality stuff. Look at this from another interrogation:

>Did you know a woman named Stefforn?


>Perhaps. Remind me who she is.


>I will. She was your lover, a Czech whom you even wanted to marry, but she preferred somebody named Petrushev to you.


Was he a homosexual, even?

Next, look this shit up:

>[Here the source continues with new material, not printed earlier as a part of this confession.]


>Since I knew about Zhukovsky’s cowardice and stubbornness I did not consider it necessary to keep him up to date about conspiratorial matters. I only introduced him fully to these matters in the Spring of 1938. Then he was appointed my assistant and headed the whole accounting of the NKVD and the GULAG. We conspirators had special plans about the GULAG about which I have given detailed confessions, and I decided to bring Zhukovskii up to date. By this time the people who could have exposed Zhukovskii along the lines of his Trotskyist and espionage connections were already condemned and the danger of Zhukovsky’s arrest had passed. I told Zhukovskii about the existence of the conspiracy in the NKVD, that the conspiratorial organization is connected with governmental circles of Germany, Poland, and Japan. I don’t remember exactly now, but I think that I told him about our desire to get into contact with the English. Then I told him about the leading members of the conspiratorial organization and about our plans, specifically about our terrorist plans…


If it was new material not shown anywhere else before, is it actually REAL material?

>Recently Frinovskii gave confessions about your terrorist activity. Now I shall read them to you: "When Zhukovskii was chief of the 12th section, Ezhov gave him an assignment to develop poisons with the aim of using them in carrying out terrorist acts. Ezhov, speaking with Zhukovskii in my presence, said that it was necessary to work on the question of poisons that would work instantaneously, which could be used on people but without [leaving] visible traces of poisoning. Ezhov also clearly said that we needed these poisons for use within the country."


This is again about Laboratory X bullshit. Which didn't exist.

Next:

>…The greatest population of prisoners was the border regions of the far Eastern borders. Here it was very easy for us to take over different economic tasks of a defense nature because of the lack of workers. However the camps of the Far Eastern Region were situated not only near to the borders but we sent there mostly prisoners sentenced for espionage, diversion, terror and other more serious crimes, and we sent almost no so-called "ordinary" prisoners.


That's a fake too. Political prisoners and spies were never a majority at any camp.

>In the camps the work of the so-called 3rd sections was so badly organized and the camps were guarded so poorly, that the prisoners had the possibility of creating their own counterrevolutionary groups in the camps and to associate with each other at will. Facts like this were many. The guard of the camps was extremely small, made up of unreliable people, the material situation of the soldiers and the command staff was very poor, and, finally, the prisoners themselves were used in many cases in the capacity of guards. As a result of a security organized like this there were many cases of mass escapes from the camps. We fought against this evil poorly and did so consciously, in the hopes that the escapees from the camps would continue their counterrevolutionary activity and would become a force that would spread all kinds of anti-Soviet agitation and rumors.


Look at where Gulags were located, lol. Where are you going to run, even? Into the frozen wilderness, lol?

>"The overwhelming majority of the prisoners were so-called vicious "refusers", as a rule people who had not fulfilled the assigned norm of work, in connection with which these latter were deliberately extremely poorly provided, something we also did for sabotage purposes.


Fake as well. There was no gulags for people who were working poorly, lol. Obvious liberal propaganda.

From the same interrogation:

>Meanwhile mechanization was slowed down by sabotage and all the extraction was based on muscle power alone. As a result already in 1938 more than 100,000 prisoners were brought to Kolyma


Also a fake used to prove anticommunist viewpoint of gulag being a hell on earth, where gazillion people perished like in Nazi camps.

Next:

>The following is from Pavliukov, 531-532:


>"Then the protocol concerning the conclusion of the investigation was announced, in which Ezhov had confirmed the truth of his confessions with his own signature. Ezhov stated that at that moment he had not retracted these confessions, but that he was retracting them now. He had no connections with any intelligence services, had not planned any terrorist act on Red Square on November 7 1938, and had never taken part in any conspiratorial activity.


And immediately thereafter:

>"Reading ‘the Last word’ it is impossible not to notice that Ezhov said nothing about the essence of the accusations leveled against him. He rejected them all, but spoke mainly about his services in exposing "enemies and spies of various types and intelligence services" while stating at the same time he had "such crimes for which I could be shot", promising to discuss them, but admitted guilt only in that he "did not purge enough" enemies.


One of them is an obvious fake. Guess which one?

 No.629769

>>629765
Every nationality is divided into proletarians and bourgeoisie. In some cases like the USSR nationalism is used as an anti-communist battering ram to split it, as happened in 1985-1991. Around 10% of any given nationality are bourgeois. And what will you do with these people?
Deportation should be considered a blessing anyway. The proper Chekist response would be just to shoot them and be done with it. No matter what bourgeois lackeys will tell you, merciless mass red terror is a good thing.

 No.629770

>>629745
>but never again on the scale of 1937-1938, which stands out like a sore thumb.

And you think it's not suspicious at all that there's 300 times more deaths in 1937-38 than the rest of the years, lol? No suspicions at all?

>The USSR still executed plenty of people from 1939-1953


A thousand per year or so, including both murderers and traitors.

 No.629772

>>629752
>Total projection on your part. You're making an abstract comparison between two different sets of concrete circumstances, as if the torture by itself is what resulted in the confessions. Revolutionaries persecuted by Czarist authorities have good reason not to confess under torture and betray the cause they support; their torture and even death would have meaning. Ex-revolutionaries persecuted by the same cause have few such reasons, if any at all, and many more to confess, whether for their family and friends, to end their suffering, or even as a sacrifice to the cause itself, insofar as not confessing undermines it.
Detected pol-ack
Firstly not everyone was shot in the trials. Numerous of them were sentenced to 5 and 10 year stints in prison. Seems pretty irresponsible if you're of the retarded view the trials were frame ups
>betray the cause they support;
Retard alert
Secondly, the trotskyites did not consider the cause to any longer exist. They accused Stalin precisely of betraying that cause.

 No.629774

>>629596
That's not a "weird russian site", it's istmat, "historical materials", they just aggregate all the documents they can with little regard for their plausibility. For fuck's sake, they even digitized anticommunist propaganda books from 1930s printed by white emigres.

 No.629775

>>629770
>And you think it's not suspicious at all that there's 300 times more deaths in 1937-38 than the rest of the years, lol? No suspicions at all?
The numbers are probably overblown but undoubtedly a great many more than normal were shot during those years. Most probably guilty.

 No.629778

>>629775
>undoubtedly a great many more

And I say that 1937-38 had the same thousand people shot per year as the rest years. Prove me wrong without bringing up glowed sources. Protip: you can't.

 No.629779

>>629763
Yeah what's your point? Probably a far higher percentage will have to die here than did in Russia.

 No.629781

>>629769
So your rationale for ethnic cleansing committed decades after the revolution is that 10% of every nationality is bourgeoisie so it's better to just get rid of every member of that nationality?

>Deportation should be considered a blessing anyway. The proper Chekist response would be just to shoot them and be done with it.

Things like this just remind me that I constantly underestimate just how many people on the internet are mentally ill. Imagine unironically say this larp shit, this reminds me of that guy on Twitter who cosplayed as a NKVD officer and wrote fan fiction of raping female prisoners.

Break the Prozac in half next time

 No.629786

>>629758
>Boo hoo. If anti-communists want to call it "ethnic cleansing" then go ahead. As communists we know repression against bourgeois elements is necessary and should be unconstrained by law. Not every nationality will necessarily survive the transition to communism.

 No.629787

>>629772
>Detected pol-ack
You're the one defending an abstract and even "undialectical" conception of possible motivations here.
>Firstly not everyone was shot in the trials.
I never said that they were.
>Secondly, the trotskyites did not consider the cause to any longer exist.
That only holds if you assume they're actually Trotskyists.

 No.629788

>>629769
>Around 10% of any given nationality are bourgeois
I wouldn't cry about deporting that 10% to south pole or the bottom of the ocean, we're talking about deporting 100% of specific ethnicity

 No.629789

>>629781
There was no ethnic cleansing in USSR AT ANY POINT IN TIME. We've already proven that in the thread dedicated to deportations, didn't we? Instead USSR had Stalin's evacuations of nationalities to highly fucking fertile lands in Central Asia ("deportyed" Koreans refused to return to Far East, even, lol) in order to protect them from decades of banditism that followed for nationalities that weren't evacuated, and those evacuations later declared repressions by Khruschev who then proceeded to seize and nationalize property of those evacuated people for the national governments.

 No.629791

>>629788
And we have proven in previous thread that Soviet "deportations" don't fit the definitions of either genocide or cleansing.

 No.629792

>>629789
>There was no ethnic cleansing in Israel AT ANY POINT IN TIME. We've already proven that in the thread dedicated to deportations, didn't we? Instead Israel had evacuations of nationalities to highly fucking fertile lands in Jordan and Lebanon.

 No.629793

>>629791
Deporting entire ethnic groups is a form of ethnic cleansing

 No.629794

>>629781
Ah yes no man no problem
Seriously I didn't know the great patriotic war ended in 1944 also all the ethnicities deported after the actual end of the war would probably have been lynched by their neighbors if they hadn't been moved to safety

 No.629797

>>629788
>>629791
I mean, how can you call ethnic cleansing/genocide when:

People kept their culture, religion;
They kept with them their stuff and even 500 kgs of food, with national governments tasked with replacing stuff they left behind, like cows and shit;
They were removed from poor land and given fertile land in Central Asia;

Where's the INTENT to genocide/ethnic cleanse? Show me this intent.

>>629792
Except Israel literally steals the best plots of land and gives instead the worst plots of land. Try to find better comparisons next time, retard.

>>629793
Evacuations are ethnic cleansing, too, you moron?

 No.629798

>>629797
Oh, forgot to mention, "deported" nationalities kept their voting rights and were moving around the country pretty freely immediately afterwards.

 No.629799

>>629779
Yeah that IS my point. If you even state such nonsense that some nationalities won't make it communism, then I will tell you that your ilk will be the first to perish. Stupid island people…

 No.629800

>>629596
Istmat is legit

 No.629801

>>629787
>You're the one defending an abstract and even "undialectical" conception of possible motivations here.
No you are. The Trotskyites considered the REvolution to have "been betrayed"
<Stalinism and fascism, in spite of a deep difference in social foundations, are symmetrical phenomena. In many of their features they show a deadly similarity. A victorious revolutionary movement in Europe would immediately shake not only fascism, but Soviet Bonapartism.
Trotsky, Revolution Betrayed

<This saving fear is nourished and supported by the illegal party of Bolshevik-Leninists, which is the most conscious expression of the socialist tendencies opposing that bourgeois reaction with which the Thermidorian bureaucracy is completely saturated. As a conscious political force the bureaucracy has betrayed the revolution. But a victorious revolution is fortunately not only a program and a banner, not only political institutions, but also a system of social relations. To betray it is not enough. You have to overthrow it. The October revolution has been betrayed by the ruling stratum, but not yet overthrown.

-Trotsky, Revolution Betrayed
>I never said that they were.
So the Soviet leadership is gonna run a kangaroo court but leave a bunch of them alive?
>That only holds if you assume they're actually Trotskyists.
The secret communication between Sedov and Trotsky which Getty and Broue uncovered confirms they were

 No.629802

>>629801
>So the Soviet leadership is gonna run a kangaroo court but leave a bunch of them alive?
They only left life three of them alive, all of whom died in prison within a few years.

 No.629803

>>629802
Pretty fucking sure half of them have gotten like 10 year long sentences, and they went out of prisons during Khruschev's reign.

 No.629804

>>629798
>Evacuations are ethnic cleansing, too, you moron?
Why were they being evacuated? Was there a fire alarm in the entirety of Crimea that necessitated the forcibly replacement of Tartars with Russians?
>were moving around the country pretty freely immediately afterwards.
Yeah, only after literal decades after their deportation.
>Except Israel literally steals the best plots of land and gives instead the worst plots of land.
So if the land a group of people are forcibly moved to are fertile then it's all good?

 No.629806

>>629802
They got clean housed for ww2
They were guilty of conspiring against the Soviet state. In peace time you work of this crime.
If there's a war on then clean house
>within a few years.
A few years is more than enough time to start shouting and raving the trials were frame ups

Again, if you run a kangaroo court on 30 odd people you'd better not leave any of them alive for a day longer than you need

Unless…. They were actually guilty of their crimes

 No.629808

>>629804
>Why were they being evacuated? Was there a fire alarm in the entirety of Crimea that necessitated the forcibly replacement of Tartars with Russians?

20 fucking years of banditry in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia and West Ukraine, you fucking retard.

>Yeah, only after literal decades after their deportation.


Yeah, nah, they were getting jobs in cities, as shown by the memoirs, barely a year after a "deportation".

>So if the land a group of people are forcibly moved to are fertile then it's all good?


It's not? Gee, show me a capitalist/fascist genocidal state that wants to steal people's land and give them in return a higher quality land. What the fuck, why would they even do that when they have a higher quality land they could spread between their colonists?

 No.629810

>>629802
>They only left life three of them alive,
Outright lies
Solkolnikov, Yakovlevich, Radek, Berngardovich, Volfridovich, Stroilov were sentenced to 5, 8 or 10 years from just the 1937 trial alone

 No.629811

>>629806
>They got clean housed for ww2
Lmao what a retarded excuse. There would be no reason to kill them in prison just because there was a war. The fact that they were killed is extremely suspicious.
>Again, if you run a kangaroo court on 30 odd people you'd better not leave any of them alive for a day longer than you need
Unless you want to make yourself look lenient before killing them anyway. It's not as if they could have caused much trouble from a gulag. I'm not discounting the possibility of guilt for some or even all of the defendants, but there are a number of suspicious factors which imo cast doubt on the verdicts.

 No.629813

>>629810
Then what happened.

 No.629815

>>629781
Moving people around breaks the bourgeois spy and anticommunist networks, pretty simple.
"Larp" is just a word used for anyone who has a strong belief and doesn't believe in compromise. Look up Decossackisation and go cry over your fascist heroes.

 No.629816

>>629813
http://www.hrono.ru/dokum/194_dok/19410906gko.php

170 prisoners started doing anticommunist defeatist agitation in prisons, so they were trialled and shot for that. Simply because you are in prison doesn't mean you are immune from punishment from any further crimes you commit during your sentence, lol. Do you think criminal code stops being applied to you while in prison?

 No.629818

>>629816
Pretty lucky for Stalin that these conspiracies in prison happened to include all the people who weren't sentenced to death in the trials. I guess those guys just really loved to conspire.

 No.629819

>>629808
>20 fucking years of banditry in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia and West Ukraine, you fucking retard.
Wow, didn't know the USSR's law enforcement was so weak that it had to deport entire populations instead of getting rid of banditry, did these bandits have nukes? If safety was the reason then why wasn't it safe for one ethnicity to inhabit that area but it was okay for Russians to inhabit it?

>Yeah, nah, they were getting jobs in cities, as shown by the memoirs, barely a year after a "deportation".

Obviously they got jobs, noone is going to just stay unemployed and starve, how does that excuse them being forcibly deported? If a Hispanic family is deported from the US is it automatically made ok if they get employment in the area they were deported to?

>It's not? Gee, show me a capitalist/fascist genocidal state that wants to steal people's land and give them in return a higher quality land.

Do reservations just not exist to you? It's still funny that you think it's ok for a entire population to be forcibly deported from their land as long as it is to some land that is "good and fertile" as if every member of that ethnicity were fucking farmers.

 No.629821

Quite simply: this is what happens when you don't give all power to the soviets, you don't establish an actually democratic mode of governance, and when you instead produce a highly hierarchical system promoting an ossified oligarchy.

 No.629824

>>629801
>The Trotskyites considered the REvolution to have "been betrayed"
And? You have yet to demonstrate that they were all Trotskyists.
>So the Soviet leadership is gonna run a kangaroo court but leave a bunch of them alive?
Then kill them anyway in prison.
>The secret communication between Sedov and Trotsky which Getty and Broue uncovered confirms they were
No, it doesn't confirm they were all actually followers of Trotsky.

 No.629827

>>629819
>If safety was the reason then why wasn't it safe for one ethnicity to inhabit that area but it was okay for Russians to inhabit it?

Because banditry is ethnic, you retard. They press conscript their nationals and they feed off pressing their nationals into giving them food and resources.

>If a Hispanic family is deported from the US is it automatically made ok if they get employment in the area they were deported to?


If a Hispanic family is deported and given better land instead of the one they had, to save that Hispanic family from banditry, and that Hispanic family given the freedom to move around - why the fuck not?

>Do reservations just not exist to you?


Are you fucking implying that Soviets resettled Tartars into a fucking desert? Are you intentionally ignoring facts to keep your imaginary world safe?

 No.629829

>>629799
Fine by me. If you think I'm sort of British nationalist or something you're mistaken, nationalism is a bourgeois disease. The sort of nationalities that become fanatic anticommunists are usually small residual nations, the Völkerabfälle that Engels disdained. The Crimea Tatars fall into this group.

 No.629831

>>629815
>Moving people around breaks the bourgeois spy and anticommunist networks, pretty simple.
Yeah, cause bourgeoisie spies and anti communists are things that are exclusive to certain ethnicities, totally. It's also funny that this insinuated that any law enforcement and counter intelligence the USSR had was so ineffective that the only viable method of disrupting spy networks was to deport entire populations and replace them with ethnicities that are impervious to the bourgeoisie and anti communism.

>"Larp" is just a word used for anyone who has a strong belief and doesn't believe in compromise.

No, it's aptly used for the mentally ill autists who probably require psychiatric help.

 No.629833

>>629829
Stop spewing khruschevite nonsense about deported nationalities, presenting it as if they were deported for crimes or treachery. They were not, they were EVACUATED due to the threat to their safety due to banditry.

 No.629834

>>629827
>Because banditry is ethnic
Lul

 No.629835

>>629813
Lmao you get Sabofagged for telling lies then demand what happened
That's 6 people from the 1937 trial. If they were all forced to testify at length you don't leave them in prisons or gulags (both of which you can escape - as they often did during the Tzarist era. Stalin escaped prison 6 times. That's one hell of a security risk)
>Then what happened.
2 years went by and then they got clean housed. Plenty of time for them to go blabbing about how they were actually innocent (like an innocent person would do)
>>629818
>Pretty lucky for Stalin that these conspiracies in prison happened to include all the people who weren't sentenced to death in the trials. I guess those guys just really loved to conspire.
Prisons at that time became a hive of trotskyite conspiracy lmao

IN 2018 there was the discovery of the prison notebooks which proved prisons became a hive of trotskyite activity
https://www.leftvoice.org/dossier-the-soviet-left-opposition-and-the-discovery-of-the-verkhneuralsk-prison-booklets/

 No.629836

File: 1638626706574.jpg (25.69 KB, 252x346, chortling hi res lad.jpg)

>>629545
>Stalin's policies which would've meant the downfall of careerists and bureaucrats
rofl, like himself? Do you LARPers even have any idea how ridiculous you sound? Papa Stalin can't give you the approval you desperately seek, he's dead and he's never coming back.

 No.629837

>>629833
Maybe you should talk to Leninhat so you guys can get your story straight. Were they deported to protect them from bandits as you suggest or was it because they were a security risk as Leninhat says? Seems like if the truth was obvious and backed by actual evidence then it would be much easier to have a coherent narrative. As things stand right now it looks more like both of you are just grasping at straws to justify this shit, but unfortunately decided to go in different directions.

 No.629841

>>629831
>It's also funny that this insinuated that any law enforcement and counter intelligence the USSR had was so ineffective that the only viable method of disrupting spy networks was to deport entire populations

BANDITRY, you retard. It was a preventive measure that PREVENTED 20 years of bloody hide and seek with bandits.

>and replace them with ethnicities that are impervious to the bourgeoisie and anti communism.


Lolno, Russians did not settle in previously occupied villages. If you didn't fucking know, Tartars were pushed into Crimea's deserts during Czars, Chechens were pushed into the mountains, with settler Russians taking over more fertile lowlands, and about Koreans I have no clue, really, but Far East is fairly mountainous. When their lands were given "back" during Khruschev, do you think Chechens came back into mountains, lol? NO, they came back to Russian cities in the lowlands, because WHO THE FUCK WANTS TO LIVE ON A MOUNTAIN

 No.629843

>>629837
I'm not a Leninhat, for all I care, he has a spicy take influenced by anticommunism. You, on the other hand, is 100% anticommunist.

 No.629846

>>629835
>Lmao you get Sabofagged for telling lies then demand what happened
I didn't lie, three was an estimation, which I low-balled. My point still stands though, which is that only a handful were not killed immediately only to all die in prison shortly after.
>both of which you can escape
A risk sure, but no doubt high value prisoners like them would have been closely guarded. It would also be worth the risk to have the effect if legitimizing the trials.
>Plenty of time for them to go blabbing about how they were actually innocent
To who? Prisoners and guards? What would that accomplish?
>Prisons at that time became a hive of trotskyite conspiracy lmao
That doesn't mean they were involved in them.
>>629843
>You, on the other hand, is 100% anticommunist.
On the contrary I consider the USSR and 20th century socialism in general to be humanity's highest sociopolitical achievement, and the good it did (including Stalin own actions) massively outweighs any wrongdoing. I just also recognize that they committed grave and unjustifiable errors as well.

 No.629849

>>629831
Some nationalities are more anticommunist than others for historical reasons and depending on the strength of the bourgeoisie.
Deportation is only one method. Personally I think the way the Cheka and RKKA dealt with Tambov shows how effective Soviet security could be when it was led by Bolsheviks and not yokels like Khrushchev.

Your line about "mental illness" is just the usual boring old shit about anyone dissenting from capitalism being crazy. Spook.

 No.629855

>>629846
>I just also recognize that they committed grave and unjustifiable errors as well.

And yet instead of actual mistakes you keep on spewing anticommunist propaganda bullshit, WHICH EVEN THE BOURGEOIS INTERNATIONAL COURTS DON'T RECOGNISE AS GENOCIDES OR ETHNIC CLEANSING. You are more anticommunist than anticommunists, for fuck's sake.

 No.629856

>>629855
What you want to call it is beside the point. It was a mistake and an affront to socialist principles and the rights of Soviet citizens in any case.

 No.629857

>>629836
I'm a communist, I don't care for sucking up to anyone and Stalin didn't either. Stalin was a revolutionary, Bolshevik, military commander, a man of both action and theory who was the antithesis of a careerist. The idea that Stalin was a bureaucrat is Trotskyist shit.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/bland/1999/x01/x01.htm
https://www.marxists.org/archive/bland/1980/restoration-capitalism-soviet-union/appendix-3.htm

 No.629858

File: 1638627565666.jpg (110.27 KB, 1080x867, IMG_20211205_011616.jpg)

>>629841
>Lolno, Russians did not settle in previously occupied villages

Drohobycky, Maria (1995). Crimea: Dynamics, Challenges and prospects. Langham: Rowan & Littlefield. ISBN 9780847680672. page 73.

Tanner, Arno (2004). The forgotten minorities of eastern Europe: The history and today of ethnic groups in five countries. Helsinki: East-West Books.

 No.629861

>>629858
That shows the process was beginning long before 1944

 No.629863

>>629846
>I didn't lie, three was an estimation, which I low-balled. My point still stands though, which is that only a handful were not killed immediately only to all die in prison shortly after.
When though? They died in May 1939
I wonder what is significant about May 1939
>A risk sure, but no doubt high value prisoners like them would have been closely guarded. It would also be worth the risk to have the effect if legitimizing the trials.
They were considered legitimate in the eyes of the Soviet people. The Soviet people wanted them shot. They got mercy
>To who? Prisoners and guards? What would that accomplish?
They could write whatever books in prison they wanted to (like the ones discovered) detailing their innocence.
That'd be high on my priority list if I were "framed"
>That doesn't mean they were involved in them.
No it shows prisons were a hive of trot activity and clean housing on the eve of a war was justified

 No.629866

>>629849
>Some nationalities are more anticommunist than others for historical reasons

Racism with socialist characteristics

>The Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by this only: 1. In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independently of all nationality.


Guess who wrote that

>Your line about "mental illness" is just the usual boring old shit about anyone dissenting from capitalism being crazy.


No, it's a accurate description of a terminally online, most likely autistic man who considers himself a uncompromising revolutionary because he shills a long dead nation which was itself compromising.

 No.629867

>>629861
I guess that drastic drop in 1939 was the Russian empires fault.

 No.629868

>>629856
>Implying saving fascist collaborators from lynching at the hands of their victims' families isn't
Oh wait nevermind carry on comrade

 No.629869

>>629867
It shows a similar rate to beforehand.

 No.629875

>>629866
Marx and Engels also rightly sneered at the Völkerabfälle, small nations who were bastions of reaction. Fact is from the Communist perspective that those who fanatically stick to reactionary nationalism should be eliminated. The Bolsheviks also gunned down countless Russian nationalists in the civil war and up to the 1950s, and who cares?

 No.629880

>>629875
Also the fact that the USSR is dead is a tragedy and a direct harm to every proletarian on the planet. The bourgeoisie don't stop heaping shit on it because of what it represents.

 No.629885

>>629875
Surely if any nation has historically clung to reactionary nationalism (with disastrous consequences for the human race) it is the English. The Cheka are on their way now to liquidate you and your entire nationality.

 No.629887

>>629856
People kept their culture, religion;
They kept with them their stuff and even 500 kgs of food, with national governments tasked with replacing stuff they left behind, like cows and shit;
They were removed from poor land and given fertile land in Central Asia;
"deported" nationalities kept their voting rights and were moving around the country pretty freely immediately afterwards.

>>629858
Check wiki.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9D%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%9A%D1%80%D1%8B%D0%BC%D0%B0#%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0

Crimean ASSR was in southern tip of the Peninsula, and it's mainly Russian today. I guess, yeah, Russians settled there.

Yet majority of population growth was enabled by this, actually https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BE-%D0%9A%D1%80%D1%8B%D0%BC%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB You can see an explosive growth of population since 1959 mark. And I don't know how the by-region stats changed around.

 No.629891

>>629885
That would be a price worth paying for world communism.

 No.629892


 No.629895

>>629821
>>629892
Say the trots who wanted factionalism and to not be held accountable by the Soviets and democracy.

 No.629897

>>629895
Not a Trot, keep strawmanning.

 No.629899

>>629897
Stalin being a bureaucrat is a trotskyist position. Reality is the exact opposite - trots were the bureaucrats who wanted to not have their power checked by the democratic process and the Soviets.

 No.629900

>>629895
Factionalism is inevitable, suppressing it just leads to shady shit like the coups of Khruschev and Brezhnev instead of honest discussion and free democratic decision making. Democratic Centralism is a necessary and effective tool for running an underground revolutionary party, but not for running a government as a genuine proletarian democracy.

 No.629901

>>629895
Only cos Trots have been so totally exposed.
No doubt you call yourself "post trot" or "left comm" or whatever brand of opportunism that allows you to retain your utopian view of politics and gullibility when it comes to bourgeois historiography

 No.629903

>>629821
>highly hierarchical system promoting an ossified oligarchy
An oligarchy with oligarchs working for a normal wage and getting shot for slightest fuck up, truly a dream job.

 No.629908

>>629900
>instead of honest discussion and free democratic decision making

OOOOF. Look at factionalism in USA politics. Does this sound like a honest discussion to you? Factionalism DENIES HONEST DISCUSSION. Factions replace democracy, they obstruct democratic decision-making. Instead of voicing their own opinion, people start voicing their faction's opinion. THAT'S NOT A DEMOCRACY.

>suppressing it just leads to shady shit like the coups of Khruschev and Brezhnev


No, NOT suppressing them leads to Khruschev and Brezhnev. Stalin didn't do a much needed Purge in around ~1947 because of after the war troubles, and paid for it dearly.

>Democratic Centralism is a necessary and effective tool for running an underground revolutionary party


<"well kiddos, you sure won with your methods a Revolution, but now step aside and implement the bourgeois parliament like all the grown-ups!"


Holy shit you are brainwashed

 No.629926

>>629908
>Stalin didn't do a much needed Purge in around ~1947 because of after the war troubles
There was an attempt around 1950 to clear the ranks of the party, especially in Leningrad.
>>629857
>https://www.marxists.org/archive/bland/1980/restoration-capitalism-soviet-union/appendix-3.htm

 No.629930

>>629926
Notice who did the purging in Leningrad - Malenkov.

 No.629937

>>629488
WW2 is bourgeois propaganda to make the Soviet Union look bad, Hitler and Nazis never existed or were CIA agents. The fall of the Soviet Union never happened. In fact, Soviets won the Cold War, and took over the world. We're the descendants of the last of the Bourgeoisie who were kicked off Earth and are living in Proxima Centauri in a cloned version of Earth. The Aliens are actually the Soviet spacecrafts looking for us. We are the lost, the damned; the only way to save our souls is to dink the kool-aid and liberate our spirit fom our meat prison to enter the ships from heaven. They call us every night, can't you hear it? Mother earth is calling us, and we must hear her call. Return to whence we came, and uphold the truth. The Union beckons, and we must follow. Deny their lies, they are poison. Save your souls, for only you can do it. Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light Follow the path, we must find the light

 No.629944

File: 1638631353075.jpg (98.14 KB, 900x750, jimjones3.jpg)

>>629937
based beyond belief

 No.629948

>>629930
I consider him a good-intentioned Bolshevik, he was given the boot by Khrushchev.

 No.629960

>>629903
An oligarchy is a form of government where only a certain strata participate in decision making, that's correct. You don't need capitalism to have an oligarchy, simply having elections is sufficient. Especially so if you have elections where electors elect other electees who in turn elect other electees.

 No.629964

>>629908
>THAT'S NOT A DEMOCRACY
It's incredibly foolish to use American government, which from its foundingwas designed to oppose democracy, as a measuring stick to compare what socialist should have been aspiring towards. Repeat after me: elections are not democracy.

 No.630010

>>629908
>Look at factionalism in USA politics.
When did I advocate a rigged two-party system where both are controlled by the same people? How exactly can you have democracy, debate, open discussion of policy, without people coalescing into camps (I.e. "factions") based on shared beliefs and positions? How can there be democracy without open discussion between these camps and their policies?
>No, NOT suppressing them leads to Khruschev and Brezhnev.
Purges simply don't work, at least not in the long term. If they did Albania would still be socialist today, and Khruschev never would have gotten into power. A handful of undesirables always worm their way through because getting everybody is not only practically impossible, but also leaves unaddressed the contradictions which produce revisionism in the first place. It also leaves intact a huge repressive apparatus that means game over when it falls into the hands of those same revisionists. Tell me, how could the evil revisionist Khruschev have come to power in a genuine proletarian democracy? The only answer is either that the workers wanted him, or that it wasn't a democracy and he was only able to hold power by virtue of not being accountable to the people.
<"well kiddos, you sure won with your methods a Revolution, but now step aside and implement the bourgeois parliament like all the grown-ups!"
Can you make one post without strawmanning? Do you think that the only options are bourgeois democracy or complete suppression of dissention within the ranks of the party?

 No.630110

>>630010
>How exactly can you have democracy, debate, open discussion of policy, without people coalescing into camps (I.e. "factions") based on shared beliefs and positions?

By having people voice their opinions without descending into tribalism, DUH

>How can there be democracy without open discussion between these camps and their policies?


Have you talked to people in real life, like ever? You'll immediately notice that cliques are actually detrimental to getting things done.

>Purges simply don't work, at least not in the long term


Oh no, they fucking work, and pretty fucking well. It's like anti-corruption campaigns - it's a forever thing instead of a one-off thing.

>A handful of undesirables always worm their way through because getting everybody is not only practically impossible


And no one ever wanted to remove all trots. Just make them harmless and force them democratically to do what people want. That's democratic centralism for you - freedom of debates, but unity of action.

>It also leaves intact a huge repressive apparatus that means game over when it falls into the hands of those same revisionists.


There was no huge repressive apparatus. Trots had 4% of the total vote at most, and USSR had the least amount of policemen and secret servicemen out of all developed nations. This huge repressive apparatus mostly existed in the form of DEMOCRATIC RIDICULE of trots at democratic debates.

>Do you think that the only options are bourgeois democracy or complete suppression of dissention within the ranks of the party?


You literally call for factions to be allowed. You are infected with bourgeois parliamentarism. All your ideas about the possible democracy are going to be just that, variations of bourgeois parliaments.

Also, nice attempt at false dichotomy there by yourself. The opposite of bourgeois parliamentarism (in our times) is democratic centralism, which is more democratic and LESS OPPRESSIVE than bourgeois parliamentarism. It can be proven even mathematically, for fuck's sake.

 No.630145

>>630110
>There was no huge repressive apparatus. Trots had 4% of the total vote at most, and USSR had the least amount of policemen and secret servicemen out of all developed nations. This huge repressive apparatus mostly existed in the form of DEMOCRATIC RIDICULE of trots at democratic debates.
Hey com, which vote was this?
In the 1927 vote the trots got less than 1% of the vote (4000 votes versus 724,000 for the CC)
Trots never constituted a miniscule percentage point. Which is why they were compelled to
-recanting trotskyism but working their way into positions
-assassinations and terrorism
Was there another vote where they were able to 4%? I don't believe it
<In October 1927, that is, two months before the Fif­ teenth Congress, the Central Committee of the Party announced a general Party discussion, and the fight began. Its result was truly lamentable for the bloc of Trotskyites and Zinovievites: 724,000 Party members voted for the policy of the Central Committee; 4,000, or less than one per cent, for the bloc of Trotskyites and Zinovievites. The anti-Party bloc was completely rout­ed. The overwhelming majority of the Party members were unanimous in rejecting the platform of the bloc.

 No.630174

>>630110
>By having people voice their opinions without descending into tribalism
And where exactly is that line? Moreover the faction ban in the CPSU made no such distinction, rather it was specifically formulated to suppress all criticism of the party line outside of very specific circumstances.
>You'll immediately notice that cliques are actually detrimental to getting things done.
The formation of cliques is inevitable. All suppressing them does is force them to exist underground instead of out in the open where they can be clearly identified. Again, factions obviously existed despite the faction ban.
>Oh no, they fucking work, and pretty fucking well.
If they worked then Khruschev wouldn't have been able to take power before Stalin's corpse was even cold.
>it's a forever thing instead of a one-off thing.
A solution which has no lasting efficacy is no real solution. What can purges accomplish that open discussion can't? Are you not confident that the workers will reject revisionism?
>That's democratic centralism for you - freedom of debates, but unity of action.
Yeah but the problem is that the first part was never properly adhered to, at least not after 1929 and certainly not after 11936. Moreover in a political system where party line and state policy are identical, it makes no sense to limit real political participation to party members. It should be open to all workers and peasants.
>There was no huge repressive apparatus.
Then why was Khruschev not removed removed power by the workers?
>You literally call for factions to be allowed.
I recognize that factions will exist whether they're allowed or not, something you yourself more or less admit when you pointed out thay when the Left and Right Oppositionists "recanted" they simply continued to pursue their agenda in the shadows. The entire concept of a Trotskyist conspiracy, the entire concept of post-Stalin revisionism, presuppose that secret opposition to the party line continues despite the ban on factions. You can't say on the one hand that the faction ban prevented the formation of factions while on the other saying that the party was riddled with revisionist and Trotskyist cliques. Clearly if these cliques continue to exist then the faction ban doesn't work.
>All your ideas about the possible democracy are going to be just that, variations of bourgeois parliaments.
What is it about bourgeois parliaments that makes them bourgeois? Is it the fact that they have multiple parties or the fact that these parties are controlled by the bourgeoisie and operate in a capitalist society? A socialist state, with a socialist constitution and economy, wherein all parties are proletarian and socialist, does not become "bourgeois" democracy just because it has multiple parties or factions.

 No.630193

>>630089
I don't like Stalin but totalitarianism is trash concept that hand waves away all social complexities and economic characteristics of the societies it seeks to depict.

 No.630246

>>630237
>What complexities am i missing?
The fact that even autocratic governments can still be genuine expressions of the popular will and serve the interests of the majority.

 No.630261

>>630251
No? That isn't what happened. The point is that even "totalitatian" governments can (and often do) do things which objectively improve the living conditions for the majority of people and give them more power over their lives. The average Russian had far more opportunities and freedom in 1950 than they did in 1910, despite the fact that both the Russian Empire and USSR were autocratic (though obviously in dramatically different ways).

 No.630265

>>629470
trotskyism was a ploy to fuck art-hoes

 No.630273

>stalin le bad
This board is dead. Is there an alternative that isn't full of redditors and retards

 No.630285

>>630273
malding

 No.630292

>>630273
cya wouldnt wanna be ya!

 No.630302

>>630273
cleared

 No.630304

>>630293
>Sure, but you don't need them to improve conditions.
Sometimes you do, other times it may seem necessary in the context even if hindsight proves otherwise. In either case authoritarian and autocratic tendencies are more often than not a product of a certain set of conditions, though they can of course become self-perpetuating. Still though, "authoritatianism" is not in and of itself a valid criticism when difficult conditions make its appearance practically inevitable, and when great progress and achievements can still be made despite it.

 No.630305

>>630293
>Implying history isn’t a struggle between interests
Read a boom by sheila fitzpatrick, you dumb catamite.

 No.630330

>>630174
>And where exactly is that line? Moreover the faction ban in the CPSU made no such distinction, rather it was specifically formulated to suppress all criticism of the party line outside of very specific circumstances.

Prove this shit you are spouting.

>b-but people who were wanting factionalism kept on appearing! It must mean we have to allow it!


Weak argument, discarded.

>Moreover in a political system where party line and state policy are identical, it makes no sense to limit real political participation to party members. It should be open to all workers and peasants.


What the fuck are you talking about? Party became what you described AFTER Stalin's death, not before. There was a HUGE FUCKING DEAL OF MAKING SOVIETS SOURCES OF POWER RATHER THAN "JUST ANOTHER ORGANIZATION OF WORKERS". Soviets under Stalin were meant to be the POWER, not the Party. It's only later when Party became the de facto state apparatus.

>Then why was Khruschev not removed removed power by the workers?


Because there was a coup, lol. Zhukov threatened to use THE MILITARY against an attempt to remove Khruschev. Khruschev DID NOT inherit repressive apparatus, he created it.

>I recognize that factions will exist whether they're allowed or not


No, you retard, they don't exist when not allowed to. You can have underground fuckers trying to do backroom deals, but the very ban on factionalism allows to continue making them outsiders. Them being in the underground IS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT, they cannot organize.

Oh no, there's a hidden trotskyist plot! It's many, many fucking times harder to make plots when factionalism is banned. When the law enforcement system hounds you for plotting, you are naturally going to have a very small number of plotters - compared to "open secrets" like you have in the West.

>What is it about bourgeois parliaments that makes them bourgeois? Is it the fact that they have multiple parties or the fact that these parties are controlled by the bourgeoisie and operate in a capitalist society?


Politicians uncontrollable by the populace result in corruption necessary for capitalists to push their interests. Factions are what those politicians FUCKING CRAVE. USA's political system is the wet dream for those politicians, it's a perfect swamp for them to do whatever they want while only paying lip service to the population.

Democratic centralism, which bans factions, creates responsibility of the politicians to their voters, it makes it very, very fucking hard to hide their corruption and factionalism. Look at the West - politicians from parties EXPECT to be elected for their party, and parties straight up divide the country into districts which will most likely elect this or that candidate. They are creating a circus out of a democracy! And that's THE NORM under fully developed factionalism.

That's why factions need to be fucking banned. Factions DESTROY DEMOCRACY.

 No.630356

>>630330
>Prove this shit you are spouting.
The fact that Trotskyist and revisionist factions continued to exist despite the ban on factions.
>Weak argument, discarded.
The fact that factions continue to appear despite the faction ban means it doesn't work, and that alternative methods should be considered.
>Soviets under Stalin were meant to be the POWER, not the Party. It's only later when Party became the de facto state apparatus.
Then can you cite any examples where the party and soviets contradicted one another, and where the former was forced to bend to the latter?
>Khruschev DID NOT inherit repressive apparatus, he created it
What are purges and secret police if not a repressive apparatus?
>No, you retard, they don't exist when not allowed to.
<Murder is illegal so that means it doesn't happen
>It's many, many fucking times harder to make plots when factionalism is banned.
And yet they still managed to achieve and retain enough positions of power to seize control of the state immediately after Stalin's death. So clearly it doesn't work. Again what would a faction ban accomplish that couldn't be accomplished by simple democratic accountability? If workers will reject revisionism then there is no reason to throw opposition factions out of the party, since democracy acts as its own check on their power.
>Politicians uncontrollable by the populace result in corruption necessary for capitalists to push their interests.
You mean like politicians who can accuse people of factionalism, ban opposition, and expel critics from the party?
>creates responsibility of the politicians to their voters
How does it do that exactly? If people are not allowed to openly criticize the party leadership or organize resistance to them within the party, then in what way are those leaders accountable?

 No.630371

>>630089
>totalitarism
retarded buzzword made by liberals to equate the USSR and Nazi german, then any country sistem they dont like, after all the payed shill did not consider the apartheid state of the USA totaliarian, even it more than 10 % of its population could do nothing in the country it inhabited.

 No.630382

>>630340
>I don't really believe in centralizing power
Sorry Anon but that's not really relevant. There are situations where centralization is necessary and where the lack of it is suicide. The question is how best to handle those situations and analyze the nature of the regime which emerges on the other side of them.

 No.630392

>>630330
>Factions are what those politicians FUCKING CRAVE. USA's political system is the wet dream for those politicians, it's a perfect swamp for them to do whatever they want while only paying lip service to the population.
That implies the US's problem is too many factions, when that doesn't in the least resemble reality.

 No.630394

>>630356
>rather it was specifically formulated to suppress all criticism of the party line outside of very specific circumstances.
<suppress all criticism of the party line outside of very specific circumstances.
>outside of very specific circumstances.

Prove it.

>The fact that factions continue to appear despite the faction ban means it doesn't work


There's no factions appearing, you fool. Trotsky tried to push his not-factions and got immediately burned, because this shit doesn't work.

>Then can you cite any examples where the party and soviets contradicted one another, and where the former was forced to bend to the latter?


Why should Party have contradictions with the Soviets? Party is made of communists, and they want the best for the people. That means they are going to represent those people. In fact, Bolsheviks didn't even have majority in Soviets at some point in time, but they conquered the people's respect by representing the people's interests over and over again first under Lenin, then under Stalin.

>What are purges and secret police if not a repressive apparatus?


What is scale and the applicability?

<Murder is illegal so that means it doesn't happen


Yes, murderers get sent into prison for murder. Similarly, factions get disbanded and prevented from happening.

>And yet they still managed to achieve and retain enough positions of power to seize control of the state immediately after Stalin's death.


They were fighting for a fucking decade to do that. And they did that by murders, via threatening a coup, via preventing purges, via staffing every position possible with their cronies. It didn't happen overnight, it could have gone either way at every point in time.

>You mean like politicians who can accuse people of factionalism, ban opposition, and expel critics from the party?


Context matters. Don't be a fucking retard who pretends that Soviet debates are the same shit as in the West.

>If people are not allowed to openly criticize the party leadership or organize resistance to them within the party, then in what way are those leaders accountable?


Dude, Soviets both formed the list of people to vote for and voted for them. They determined deputee's program and had the ability to recall that deputee at any point. With factions, you will have deputee running around districts until one of them elects them, or you will have your party/faction choose for you a distrcit where you will win, or shit like that.

Just like I said, you have NO FUCKING IDEA ABOUT THE DEMOCRACY EXCEPT FOR BOURGEOIS PARLIAMENT. Huh, it's almost like one can smell the whole range of trot's ideas just by hearing one of them.

 No.630397

>>630392
I have no clue what it implies in your brain. Politicians don't like responsibility and like to remain in power. Hence, factionalism and parliamentarism, all kinds of obstructions to democracy in order to remain elected unfairly, all kinds of barriers, election districts, weird election rules, national conventions who vet the candidates, etc etc.

USA's problem is capitalism. Bourgeois parliamentarism is just the best way for capitalists to influence the democratic process. There's so much nook and crannies in that shithole that it's impossible to ever root corruption out.

 No.630399

>>630273
Produce better arguments.

 No.630406

File: 1638645583744.png (338 KB, 387x511, d08a3blfpbz41.png)

>>630392
This. If anything the US suffers from a similar problem as the USSR insofar as the political duopoly (which is in reality a monopoly) is practically unassailable. Opposing viewpoints have no platform or means to affect policy outside of channels pre-approved by the DNC and RNC, and are thus in reality not opposition at all. It's why the US is incapable of even social democratic reforms.

 No.630408

File: 1638645629520.jpg (13.5 KB, 400x396, hotpockets.jpg)

>people won't disagree and won't form groups in their disagreement if you don't allow them to
This is your brain on hero worship.

 No.630426

>>630397
>I have no clue what it implies in your brain.
If "factions are what these politicians crave," then you say "USA's political system is the wet dream for those politicians," what do you think you're implying about the US and factions? That it's somehow representative of the effect of "factions," even though in reality it has fewer viable factions than most other Western countries. It's hardly a good example of factionalism.

 No.630429

>>630402
>Since cccp is no more, i guess it wasn't relevant.
I suppose dwelling on it too long would be pretty inconvenient considering what happened when it decentralized

 No.630437

>>630406
>Opposing viewpoints have no platform

Are you fucking insane? Remind me, how much peasants and workers became highest levels of of power in USSR and compare it to USA. USSR had every voice heard, and "opposing opinions" were discarded for being anti-people and pro-capitalist, not becuase they were opposing opinions or trot opinions.

 No.630441

>>630408
Oh no, retards will try to band together to oppose your democratically decided and approved position you have proven to be the way forward during democratic debates! That must mean we must surrender to retards and give them some victories, or else they'll be angry little plotters over and over again!

 No.630442

>>630437
>USSR had every voice heard, and "opposing opinions" were discarded for being anti-people and pro-capitalist, not becuase they were opposing opinions or trot opinions.
If nobody supported them then why bother banning their expression? Not even bourgeois countries do this with anti-capitalist viewpoints most of the time.

 No.630444

>>630442
>If nobody supported them then why bother banning their expression?

Because they were doing terrorism and were spying for capitalists, you retard. What do you think antidemocratic plotters were doing, being repressed for being innocent?

In-fucking-deed, let's give headpats and government positions to people who were conspiring with capitalists to overthrow communism because people didn't vote for them!

 No.630445

>>630441
>That must mean we must surrender to retards and give them some victories
No, but it doesn't require banning their views and throwing them out of the party either.

 No.630448

>>630445
<yes, we did betray communism, but don't throw us out of the Party and don't ban our faction, it's undemocratic!

You are a fucking clown.

 No.630449

>>630444
>Because they were doing terrorism and were spying for capitalists, you retard.
Not in 1929 when the Right and Left Oppositions were suppressed.

 No.630452

>>630448
M8 you can't use what happened in 1936 to retroactively justify the suppression of inner-party opposition 7 years earlier, as if the suppression itself played no role in later developments.

 No.630453

>>630449
And how were they suppressed? There was a huge Party-wide vote, which decided that factionalism should be banned. That's fucking it, Party decided that there should be no factions. What's your fucking problem with that? Are you against democracy, like those trots were?

 No.630458

>>630453
>What's your fucking problem with that?
My problem is that voting to ban minority views because you disagree with them is literally suicide for a democratic system.
>Are you against democracy, like those trots were?
I'm against any policy or action which unnecessarily jeopardizes the long term viability of proletarian democracy, even if that policy is supported by the majority. Surely you would agree that the majority supporting something does not by itself make it a good policy, and that there should be limits to what a majority can impose upon a minority.

 No.630459

>>630452
>M8 you can't use what happened in 1936 to retroactively justify the suppression of inner-party opposition 7 years earlier

M8, those people were admitting during the interrogations to have been carrying out their deeds since fucking 1920s. What fucking suppression are you talking about?

Was that about Trotsky bitching out about censorship forbidding him from printing the opposition program? When he fucking ignored the democratic decision of no factions, no grouping, and decided to discard democracy in favor of his factionalist dreams?

Oh fucking no, how did they DARE to suppress such a freedom of speech that goes against democratic decision-making!

Before crying about opposition you should PROVE that they had no way of expressing themselves. They fucking did, they always did, but at the same time, factions were not allowed. There's no contradiction, it's just you trying your hardest to be a victimized trot.

 No.630460

>>630458
>My problem is that voting to ban minority views because you disagree with them is literally suicide for a democratic system.

Oh fucking yes, having EVEN MORE BARRIERS before the ideas come to discussion - in the way of factions discussing ideas inside themselves before coming to the debate - is more democratic than having people come up with those ideas directly to the debate!

And don't forget corruption charges. Must be waaaaay more convenient for people who have something bad to say about faction leaders first to have to talk to those faction leaders before getting EVERYONE TO SEE THEIR ARGUMENT. Gee, no fucking wonder Trotsky wanted factions so much.

 No.630461

>>630426
Both parties consist of a myriad of factions. Simply because every side upholds factionalism as the basis of their political system doesn't mean there's no factions, lol.

 No.630464

>>630459
>M8, those people were admitting during the interrogations to have been carrying out their deeds since fucking 1920s
Lmao sure m8, they were carrying out sabotage and terrorism against the government that they were still helping to run, and there just happens to be no documentary or physical evidence. The existence of a terrorist plot after 1929 I can believe, but you're on some strong shit if you think that it makes any sense for them to be plotting against themselves.
>Before crying about opposition you should PROVE that they had no way of expressing themselves
I mean in the case of the Right Oppositionists it's pretty obvious, since renouncing their views was literally a condition for not being kicked out of the party. In the case of the Trotskyists I know that even you are not insane enough to think that Trotskyist ideas were not being suppressed outside the party. If not it shouldn't be hard for you to find a Trotskyist newspaper or political organization operating in the open after 1929.
>>630460
>Oh fucking yes, having EVEN MORE BARRIERS
What barriers? I'm just advocating letting people criticize the party and fight for their views without fear of being kicked out. That's removing barriers, not erecting them.
>Must be waaaaay more convenient for people who have something bad to say about faction leaders first to have to talk to those faction leaders before getting EVERYONE TO SEE THEIR ARGUMENT.
I'm not even sure what kind of bizarre strawman you're trying to construct here, but I don't recall advocating a system where factions have to internally decide on a line before they publicize their criticisms.

 No.630466

INITIAL PROJECT
RESOLUTIONS OF THE X-TH CONGRESS R.K.P. ON THE UNITY OF THE PARTY.

1. The congress draws the attention of all party members to the fact that the unity and cohesion of its ranks, ensuring complete trust between party members and really friendly work, really embodying the unity of the will of the vanguard of the proletariat, is especially necessary at the present moment, when a number of circumstances intensify fluctuations in the environment. the petty-bourgeois population of the country.

2. Meanwhile, even before the general Party discussion about trade unions, some signs of factionalism were revealed in the Party, i.e. the emergence of groups with special platforms and with the desire to a certain extent to isolate themselves and create their own group discipline.

It is imperative that all class-conscious workers clearly realize the harm and inadmissibility of any factionalism, which, even with the best desire of representatives of individual groups to preserve party unity, inevitably leads in practice to a weakening of friendly work and to intensified repeated attempts by enemies clinging to the government party to deepen its division. and use it for counter-revolution purposes.

The use by the enemies of the proletariat of any deviations from the strictly sustained communist line was most clearly demonstrated by the example of the Kronstadt rebellion, when the bourgeois counter-revolution and White Guards in all countries of the world immediately showed their readiness to accept the slogans of even the Soviet system, just to overthrow the dictatorship of the proletariat in Russia, when the Socialist-Revolutionaries in general, the bourgeois counter-revolution used in Kronstadt the slogans of an uprising, allegedly in the name of Soviet power against the Soviet government of Russia. Such facts fully prove that the White Guards are striving and are able to disguise themselves as communists and even "to the left" of them, just to weaken and overthrow the bulwark of the proletarian revolution in Russia. The Menshevik leaflets in Petrograd on the eve of the Kronstadt mutiny show, in the same way, how the Mensheviks used disagreements within the R.K.P. to actually push and support the Kronstadt rebels, Socialist-Revolutionaries and White Guards, presenting themselves in words as opponents of the riots and as if they were small supporters of Soviet power with only would be amendments.

3. Propaganda on this issue should consist, on the one hand, in a detailed explanation of the harm and danger of factionalism from the point of view of party unity and the implementation of the unity of the will of the vanguard of the proletariat, as the main condition for the success of the dictatorship of the proletariat, on the other hand, in explaining the originality of the newest tactical methods of enemies Soviet power. These enemies, convinced of the hopelessness of counterrevolution under the openly White Guard flag, are now straining every effort to, confessing the differences within the R.K.P., push counterrevolution in one way or another by transferring power to political groups closest in appearance to the recognition of Soviet power.

Propaganda should also clarify the experience of previous revolutions, when the counter-revolution supported the petty-bourgeois groupings closest to the extreme revolutionary party in order to shake and overthrow the revolutionary dictatorship, thereby paving the way for the further complete victory of the counter-revolution, capitalists and landowners.

4. It is imperative that every organization of the Party strictly see to it that absolutely necessary criticism of the shortcomings of the Party, any analysis of the general line of the Party or consideration of its practical experience, verification of the implementation of its decisions and the method of correcting errors, etc. would be directed not to the discussion of groups that form on some "platform", etc., but to the discussion of all party members. For this, the congress prescribes the publication of a more regular "Discussion Leaflet" and special collections. Anyone who makes criticism must take into account the position of the party among the enemies around it, and must also strive by his direct participation in Soviet and party work to correct the mistakes of the party in practice.

5. While instructing the Central Committee to carry out the complete abolition of all factionalism, the congress declares at the same time that on issues that attract the special attention of Party members - to cleanse the Party of non-proletarian and unreliable elements, to fight bureaucracy, to develop democracy and initiative of workers, etc. .p., any business proposals should be considered with the greatest attention and tested in practical work. All Party members should know that on these issues the Party does not take all the necessary measures, encountering a number of various obstacles, and that, rejecting mercilessly non-business and factional criticism, the Party will tirelessly continue, testing new methods, to fight by all means against bureaucracy, for expansion democracy, initiative, for the disclosure, exposure and expulsion of those who have attached themselves to the party, etc.

6. The congress therefore prescribes the immediate dissolution of all groups formed on one platform or another, without withdrawal, and instructs all organizations to strictly monitor the prevention of any factional actions. Failure to comply with this resolution of the Congress should lead to unconditional and immediate expulsion from the Party.

7. In order to implement strict discipline within the party and achieve the greatest unity while eliminating any factionalism, the congress gives the Central Committee the authority to apply in cases of violation of discipline or revival, or admitting factionalism, all measures of party penalties up to expulsion from the party, and in relation to members of the Central Committee, their transfer as candidates and even, as a last resort, expulsion from the party. This measure can be applied only by decree of 2/3 of the General Meeting of members of the Central Committee, candidates to the Central Committee and members of the Central Control Commission. (point 7 is not subject to publication)

 No.630467

File: 1638650556250.jpg (555.02 KB, 1080x2004, IMG_20211204_204113.jpg)

>>630442
>If nobody supported them then why bother banning their expression? Not even bourgeois countries do this with anti-capitalist viewpoints most of the time.
In reality the bourgeois state apparatus is more repressive than anything ever seen
They have secret police raping women in UK and having children with them who hand out flyers about badger culling and green activism
That shit is way more insidious and violent than anything the East German counter intelligence ever did
Imagine how the UK state will maneuver if the very State of UK was in question of survival
In north of Ireland we know this meant summary executions, knee cappings and kidnapping by the state for decades

 No.630468

>>630466
> In order to implement strict discipline within the party and achieve the greatest unity while eliminating any factionalism, the congress gives the Central Committee the authority to apply in cases of violation of discipline or revival, or admitting factionalism, all measures of party penalties up to expulsion from the party, and in relation to members of the Central Committee, their transfer as candidates and even, as a last resort, expulsion from the party. This measure can be applied only by decree of 2/3 of the General Meeting of members of the Central Committee, candidates to the Central Committee and members of the Central Control Commission. (point 7 is not subject to publication)

Even fucking expulsion of factionalists had to be approved 2/3, ffs. How's that not democratic, you shitheads?

 No.630470

>>630464
>Lmao sure m8, they were carrying out sabotage and terrorism against the government that they were still helping to run

How would they be able to sabotage the state if they weren't directly involved in running it? Use your fucking head for once.

 No.630483

>>630470
>How would they be able to sabotage the state if they weren't directly involved in running it?
They were. Trotsky sat on the Politburo until 1926, Bukharin was a member until 1929, Kamanev was on the CC until 1927, Zinoviev was chairman of the Comintern until 1926. In order for them to be engaged in sabotage and terrorism in this period they would have to be sabotaging the government that they themselves were running. Unless you unironically believe that they all immediately resorted to terrorism the minute they left office despite their factions not being suppressed until 1929.

 No.630487

>>630464
>If not it shouldn't be hard for you to find a Trotskyist newspaper or political organization operating in the open after 1929.
Trotsky came out as a "trotskyite" (as opposed to a leninist which he was claiming to be) by writing Lessons of October when Lenin's corpse was barely cold
In which he asserted that actually the Bolshevik party prior to 1917 didn't matter (Trotsky joined it in 1917) and already in 1924 it had been taken over by bureaucrats

This starts the fight in the Bolshevik party. An open and public fight where Trotsky demonstrates how retarded he is.
It ends in 1927 when the Left Opposition finally put their platform to a vote and only get less than 1% of the vote
<In October 1927, that is, two months before the Fif­ teenth Congress, the Central Committee of the Party announced a general Party discussion, and the fight began. Its result was truly lamentable for the bloc of Trotskyites and Zinovievites: 724,000 Party members voted for the policy of the Central Committee; 4,000, or less than one per cent, for the bloc of Trotskyites and Zinovievites. The anti-Party bloc was completely rout­ ed. The overwhelming majority of the Party members were unanimous in rejecting the platform of the bloc.
P436

Sabofag you seem to be defending factions. I had a low bar for you but this has lowered it. Factions are inherently anti democracy. It's the reasons US founding fathers opposed formal political parties acting as blocs.

After the trots put their vote publicly to the party in 1927 Trotsky immediately goes to printing his own literature and setting up an opposing demonstration to the Soviet government for October celebration. Trotsky is expelled for this anti party behaviour after a 3 year long public battle

The year before, 1926, the party had passed a motion on trotskyism being a petit bourgeois opportunist and social democratic deviation

The Party is a giant brain. If you spend 3 years coming to a conclusion and the party votes on the issue and you go against the party then you are being anti democratic

Trots were suppressed in 1927-1929 - but only in a slap on the wrist "we'll throw you out of party unless you stop pushing this bullshit" kind of way.

The hammer only came down when the rats recanted their views of trotskyism, buried into positions like worms then began sabotaging industry, overcharging the state for materials so they could flog them for money for their trot activities and began killing Soviet officials

 No.630493

>>630487
M8 I never denied that Trotskyist tendencies were allowed to operate prior to 1929, I specifically asked for proof that they were allowed to exist and operate legally outside the party after that year.
>Factions are inherently anti democracy.
How is allowing open criticism of the party anti-democracy? How can democracy exist where criticism does not?
>It's the reasons US founding fathers opposed formal political parties acting as blocs.
Lmao imagine citing anything the US founding fathers did when it comes to democracy as something we should emulate. They also believed that only white land owning males should vote, and that even then they should only do so indirectly through the electoral college.

 No.630504

>>630493
>I specifically asked for proof that they were allowed to exist and operate legally outside the party after that year.
That was the correct decision. Stalin did his best to prevent a thermidor situation and the trots kept at it with their dishonest, conniving behaviour when the party had publicly rejected their platform
>How is allowing open criticism of the party anti-democracy? How can democracy exist where criticism does not?
By 1927 they'd been 3 bitter years hashing over basically the same things. You can read On the Opposition and by the 1927 year the same things are being repeated by Stalin
http://www.marx2mao.com/Stalin/OTOtc.html
Exactly how many more years should the party accept criticism and 'debate' when a faction has already been routed and exposed?!
>Lmao imagine citing anything the US founding fathers did when it comes to democracy as something we should emulate.
I actually think that's a good thing they did say though. Formal political parties in US led to a duopoly and oligarchic rule in USA.
Factions in a communist party would have the same effect - the loyalty no longer comes down to serving the people but your faction.
It fosters artificial division and there's a reason Lenin banned factions

 No.630509

>>630493
>>630504
rule 11 of leftypol sabo cat and that stalinist will fight each other each day

 No.630512

>>630509
What rule

 No.630515

>>630512
rule 1 of leftypol

there are common trends in leftypol that shall be called rules

 No.630517

>>630504
>Exactly how many more years should the party accept criticism and 'debate' when a faction has already been routed and exposed?!
If they had been routed and were politically irrelevant then what was the point in suppressing them at all? Why not let them continue to wallow in their impotence? Certainly I don't think that these tiny, irrelevant factions warranted introducing a political mechanism that would later be used to beat down all opposition to revisionism and bureaucracy. It was clearly a mistake in hindsight that did more to aid revisionism than combat it.
>Factions in a communist party would have the same effect - the loyalty no longer comes down to serving the people but your faction.
Political factions don't exist independently of social forces. If a faction is able to gain traction and have a serious political impact it is because they represent some segment of society, and their conflict with other factions is an expression of contradictions in society. The correct response to these conflicts is to resolve them in a non-anatagonistic manner wherever possible, not try to suppress them out of existence.

 No.630518

>>630515
Rule 1 says no spam
How is mine and sabos conversation spam

 No.630519

>>630518
rule 2 of leftypol this is a joke and im not being literal and im making bs rules and im suprised you havent figured it out

 No.630527

>>630517
>If they had been routed and were politically irrelevant then what was the point in suppressing them at all? Why not let them continue to wallow in their impotence? Certainly I don't think that these tiny, irrelevant factions warranted introducing a political mechanism that would later be used to beat down all opposition to revisionism and bureaucracy. It was clearly a mistake in hindsight that did more to aid revisionism than combat it.
They weren't suppressed. They were asked to recant their views (which we know now some of them did dishonestly)
If you break rules of a political party mate you get thrown the fuck out of it. Go into any political party conservative/liberal/green whatever
You break the rules you get thrown out
How is this controversial

As to your "repressive apparatus". The repressive apparatus only came out when the trots were killing Soviet officials.
Not a State on earth will sit back and allow high ranking officials like Kirov, Gorky, Peshko, Menzhinsky etc to be murdered with other failed assassination attempts on some more prominent ones like Molotov and Voroshilov to go unanswered

If 5 MPs were assassinated in Britain in one year I guarantee you the clamp down on British society would be harder than 1930s ussr
>Political factions don't exist independently of social forces. If a faction is able to gain traction and have a serious political impact it is because they represent some segment of society, and their conflict with other factions is an expression of contradictions in society. The correct response to these conflicts is to resolve them in a non-anatagonistic manner wherever possible, not try to suppress them out of existence
Political factions in a communist party, if allowed to progress to a logical conclusion, would end up with multiple political parties
The function of a one party state is the same thing as a 'no party State'. Functionally there's no difference. You can only run on your ideas and policies.
The purging function of all political parties (ie throwing out useless members, members who haven't paid dues, lazy members, members pushing shit ideas etc) is to purify the communist line

If you agree Marxism is a synthesis and it is synthesised routinely into a new dialectic (Marxism-Leninism for example). From that conclusion you can include your practical work (in a communist party) can either synthesise Marxism to a new higher level with the policies it implements - or deviate into an ultra left or right opportunist line

The function of a Communist party is essentially to g et even opportunists, careerists , ShitLibs or trots to work for the party or be thrown out
No conservative party would allow a member to join talking about Communism and pushing communism at every party meeting and conference
Why should a communist party allow an opportunist sect of retards like trots when they had already won a public 3 year long fight against them?
The criticism was neither worthwhile or principled

 No.630529

>>630519
I resent you for making me read the rules

 No.630532


 No.630541

>>630527
>If you break rules of a political party mate you get thrown the fuck out of it.
Sure, but that has nothing to do with whether or not those rules are good rules.
>As to your "repressive apparatus". The repressive apparatus only came out when the trots were killing Soviet officials.
The faction ban itself was a form of repression, and the one which I would say was most frequently used to protect the later revisionist regime. We should also consider that the suppression of these factions may have itself been a catalyst for them resorting to terrorism, feeling that this was the only option to avert what they (mistakenly) believed would be Stalin's disastrous policies. We can't say what would have happened if they had never been forced underground, but certainly it would be undialecticsl to argue that this had no impact on their later actions.
>Political factions in a communist party, if allowed to progress to a logical conclusion, would end up with multiple political parties
Sure, but I don't see why this is inherently a bad thing. Again, even in a one party or no party state people are going to coalesce into alliances based on shared views and interests. A political party is merely the formalization of such an alliance, and it isn't inherently anti-communist nor a threat to the revolution provided it plays the role of loyal opposition. Somehow the bourgeoisie manage to organize multiple parties amongst themselves, openly criticize one another, oppose one another etc without endangering the bourgeois social order or the integrity of their rule. In doing so they act as a check on one another and give the state the class character of the entire bourgeoisie rather than one narrow segment of it. I see no reason why the proletariat and peasantry cannot do the same.
>The purging function of all political parties (ie throwing out useless members, members who haven't paid dues, lazy members, members pushing shit ideas etc) is to purify the communist line
And as the post-Stalin era showed it could just as easily be used to purify the communist party of genuine revolutionaries and replace them with careerist bureaucrats. Do you not think that it would have been easier to restore worker power after Stalin's death if there had been no faction ban? If careerists and revisionists could have been openly criticized and opposed by the rank and file without fear of being kicked out for "factionalism"?

 No.630565

>>630541
>Sure, but that has nothing to do with whether or not those rules are good rules.
Name another ideological political party (social-democratic/conservative/libertarian/green etc) that will debate the same issues for 3 years.
Only communists do that and that was to try to get everyone on the same page for unity.
>The faction ban itself was a form of repression, and the one which I would say was most frequently used to protect the later revisionist regime.
The Left Opposition stood on a platform that socialism could not be built in one country. Both the Trotskyites and Zinovievites insisted they could only "move towards socialism"
If they believed that why would you even have a socialist revolution. Stalin stood on Lenins platform that socialism could be built in one country. (Lenin, United States of Europe Slogan)
>We should also consider that the suppression of these factions may have itself been a catalyst for them resorting to terrorism, feeling that this was the only option to avert what they (mistakenly) believed would be Stalin's disastrous policies.
Ah yes it's the terrorists fault their terrorists. Lmao
They put their platform to the party and the party rejected it. The minute they thought they were more clever than the party (some 800,000 people debating, discussing and mapping out these ideas) is when they were inevitably going to be pushed into terrorism and all their assorted dealings in the 30s
Now I'm not even saying the "Party is always right!". As Stalin pointed out the party is not always right and it can err and make mistakes. The problem is that when working out a platform you are expected to abide by the parties decision and to carry out the parties decision to the best of your abilities. If the party is wrong they will need to reconvene and reasses.
The Trots bypassed completely this democracy in the party because Trotsky thought the sun shone out of his ass.
And yet the Trots were wrong on every point. A funny point in the 1936 trials is how the Trots were trying to justify their position after the astounding economic growth of the 2nd 5 year plan. They admitted how ridiculous they now looked.
But there was Trotsky in 1936 insisting the Soviets cannot survive a war against fascism. IF you start out from this starting point then neogtiating with Hitlerites and Japanese imperialists makes sense
>Sure, but I don't see why this is inherently a bad thing. Again, even in a one party or no party state people are going to coalesce into alliances based on shared views and interests. A political party is merely the formalization of such an alliance, and it isn't inherently anti-communist nor a threat to the revolution provided it plays the role of loyal opposition. Somehow the bourgeoisie manage to organize multiple parties amongst themselves, openly criticize one another, oppose one another etc without endangering the bourgeois social order or the integrity of their rule. In doing so they act as a check on one another and give the state the class character of the entire bourgeoisie rather than one narrow segment of it. I see no reason why the proletariat and peasantry cannot do the same.
That's because political power and economic power does not really reside in political parties in capitalist societies. Capitalist societies can put on a show of electing whatever red or blue faggot and the deep state - the intelligence agencies, the bank of england/Fed/European bank, the network of landowners,ceos and shareholders continue to retain power and control in the country. This is Marxism 101 com.
Secondly there were multiple political parties in Soviet Union and independents. Sometimes Soviet officials lost their seats to independents and the like with encouragement from the Communist Party because of lazy/corrupt officials

DPRK for instance has multiple political parties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_North_Korea
The 'other' political parties in DPRK have about as much chance as coming to power as a 3rd party in USA or someone outside the Lib/Lab/Con parties in UK though. This is the exact nature of the State as described by Marx and Engels. It either works for the bourgeois (and therefore corrupts the entire state apparatus for bourgeois ends) or it is wielded by the proletariat in which the State is wielded against the bourgeois and liberal elements
>And as the post-Stalin era showed it could just as easily be used to purify the communist party of genuine revolutionaries and replace them with careerist bureaucrats. Do you not think that it would have been easier to restore worker power after Stalin's death if there had been no faction ban? If careerists and revisionists could have been openly criticized and opposed by the rank and file without fear of being kicked out for "factionalism"?
This is part of class struggle and class struggle continues even after socialism has been established. The feeling in Soviet Union post 1945 was that they wanted detente with imperialism having experienced such destruction.
Secondly, Stalin was planning another purge which would've cleared out the useless fuckers before he was killed.
As noted at the time his death happened just in the nick of time for the revisionists
<“For many leading Soviet statesmen and officials, Stalin’s demise . . . came in the nick of time. Whether or not it was due to natural causes is another matter”
(D. M. Lang, p. 262).
<“While murder cannot be proved, there was no question that motive for murder existed. . . . For . . . if Stalin were dying a natural death. it was the luckiest thing that had ever happened to the men who stood closest to him”.
(H. Salisbury, p. 160-61).“
https://mltheory.wordpress.com/2019/05/07/the-khrushchev-coup-death-of-stalin-khrushchevs-rise-to-power/
And I don't know why you love factionalism
If factionalism was allowed they'd have openly factionalised in the 40s in the Leningrad affair with the revisionist economist Vozhnetsky and overthrown socialism then. The fact they weren't allowed to allowed the MLs to come out on top.

 No.630573

>>630273
Cope.
though to be fair, most of what Stalin is blamed for can be attributed to the NKVD

 No.630576

>>630573
are you saying that the nkvd went rogue and manipulated stalin?

 No.630597

>>630576
>behind ethnic deportations
>killed bolsheviks who were attempting to call them out on their bullshit
>Stalin knew of the rapes committed by the NKVD
<are you saying Stalin was manipulated

 No.630600

>>630597
well you said this
"though to be fair, most of what Stalin is blamed for can be attributed to the NKVD
"

it sounded like you were saying the nkvd were doing things and stalin got wrongly blamed for things the nkvd did

and the only way he got wrongly blamed is if somehow stalin was not involved or did not know of some of the shit the nkvd did

 No.630607

>>630600
> it sounded like you were saying the nkvd were doing things and stalin got wrongly blamed for things the nkvd did

But Anon, that is what I’m saying. Stalin did some shit things, but a good chunk of what he’s blamed for is what the NKVD.

 No.630612

>>630607
yeah and thats why i asked did nkvd went rogue and manipulated stalin? in those cases

and you responded with uh

">behind ethnic deportations
>killed bolsheviks who were attempting to call them out on their bullshit
>Stalin knew of the rapes committed by the NKVD
<are you saying Stalin was manipulated"

because if the nkvd did do it and it wasnt stalin fault then either stalin didnt know about it, stalin was manipulated by them to a degree, or etc

and it cant be stalin allowed it or accepted it because if that was the case then stalin is still shares the blame fo allowing and accepting that behaviour

 No.630614

>>630607

>Stalin did some shit things, but a good chunk of what he’s blamed for is what the NKVD.


Almost everything blamed on stalin can be attributed to him being blamed for something someone else did

 No.630676

File: 1638664281352.png (985 KB, 749x1024, ClipboardImage.png)

Things would've been much better had this bad boy taken charge of the Union.

Though i got to give credit where credit is due. The fact that Stalin in the 1920's predicted yet another colossal war coming to the USSR (even if he got his enemies wrong), and desperately tried to industrialize the country to be able to fight it, is nothing short of a miracle, one which i'm not sure anyone else could've pulled off.

 No.630692

>>630441
>your democratically decided and approved position you have proven to be the way forward during democratic debates
See >>629964 and stop repeating American founding father propaganda. Elections are not "democratic decision making".

 No.630819

>>630692
I was talking about debates, though, as in the exact process of deciding what to do and how to do it, not elections.

 No.630822

>>630483
>In order for them to be engaged in sabotage and terrorism in this period they would have to be sabotaging the government that they themselves were running

They did exactly that. In the open they were pretending to be honest communists, but in the dark they were sabotaging everything they could reach in order to discredit socialism and make people turn back to capitalism. Just like in 1980s, really.

It's not the smart argument you think it is.

>despite their factions not being suppressed until 1929.


Factions were dead since 1921. After that there were "groupings", which were fought at every opportunity.

 No.630834

>>630517
>If they had been routed and were politically irrelevant then what was the point in suppressing them at all?

<hey dude you are wrong, but I will do nothing whatsoever to fix your wrong ideas :^)


Also, if they were politically irrelevant, why WOULDN'T you remove them for their political irrelevancy? They take space that could have been better used by someone with a more politically relevant ideas.

>Certainly I don't think that these tiny, irrelevant factions warranted introducing a political mechanism that would later be used to beat down all opposition


We went over this already. Khruschev did not inherit any repressive apparatus and instead created it. Was there a threat of the military intervening into the political process under Stalin? No. Was there destruction of people based on their political beliefs? Again no, they tolerated trots for 3 years, even, until trots started to derail trains and other crazy shit.

>It was clearly a mistake in hindsight that did more to aid revisionism than combat it.


10 fucking years, mate, during which and in spite of Khruschev stalinists murdered fascist resurgence in Hungary, did the greatest transfer of technology in history to China (which Khruschev hated, by the way), organized Cuban Crisis (with Khruschev surrendering all victories there) and forced through Sputnik and first man in space. Khruschev had to fight TEN FUCKING YEARS before his supposedly inherited repressive apparatus was able to remove stalinists from power.

What a fucking scary repressive apparatus Stalin had! Your narrative of Khruschev using stalinists' tools against them comes apart so fucking easily, boohoo

>Political factions don't exist independently of social forces. If a faction is able to gain traction and have a serious political impact it is because they represent some segment of society


And Bolshevik Party is a vanguard Party of proletariat. Petite-bourgeois tendencies mean it's a corruption.

 No.630838

>>629464
Marxists don't need to condemn Stalin. They can disagree with his methods, of criticize his policies, but ultimately they understand that much of his behavior was motivated by material conditions, and to a much lesser extent personality, but ultimately it doesn't matter. Understanding of communism is dependent on learning on what materially works for a given material state within a material stage.We take what works from organizing policy and learn to admit our mistakes. Revolution is fundamentally a process of experimentation. A leap of faith. The optimism that another world is possible. The actuality of revolution is found in being able to recognize, materially, that we were preceded by a material stage that had worse material conditions, and that our material stage must too come to an end and give rise to another.

 No.630870

>>630394
>, murderers get sent into prison for murder. Similarly, factions get disbanded and prevented from happening.
<similarly
These things are not alike.

 No.630873

>>630870
>Do shit, get punished for it.
<it's not similar!

 No.630896

>>629470
"marxism-leninism was a mistake, but so was marxism-leninism"

this is how stupid you sound

 No.630913

>>629778
What about this?
>The true number of those falsely accused of counter-revolutionary activities who were executed in the 1936-38 period, is probably between 20,000 and 100,000. Both George Kennan and Jerry Hough concur that the likely number of executions was closer to the former than the latter figure. During the French Revolution about 17,000 people were executed for counter-revolutionary activity in the 1793-94 period of Jacobin Terror, representing about .065% of the French population at the time. If the figure of 20,000 for the 1936-38 Red Terror is accurate, this represents .01% of the Soviet population; if the 100,000 figure is correct, this represents.05%. Any reasonable estimate of executions in the 1936-38 period of the Great Purge indicates that, in relative terms, at most they did not exceed those of the Jacobin Terror, and were probably fewer. Clearly the popular conception of the bloodiness of the Great Purge is a gross exaggeration cultivated by those concerned to discredit developments in the Soviet Union in the 1930s and since, as well as the contemporary or revolutionary process in other countries.
Szymanski, Albert. Human Rights in the Soviet Union
>By that time Yezhov had sunk to a point of degeneration…. They started to accuse Yezhov when he began to set arrest quotas by regions, on down to districts. No fewer than 2000 must be liquidated in such and such region, no fewer than 50 in such and such district…. That’s the reason why he was shot. His official conduct, of course, had not been subjected to oversight…. Closer oversight was needed. Oversight was inadequate.
Chuev, Feliks. Molotov Remembers
>Initially, the NKVD, under Yezhov’s orders, set a cap of 186,500 imprisonments and 72,950 death penalties for a 1937 special operation to combat the threat of foreign and internal subversion. The operation was decided upon after the discovery of Bonapartist plots against the government, led by Tukhacevsky, whose links with opportunist factions within the Party caused total panic. The NKVD’s orders had to be carried out by troikas, 3-men tribunalsa. As the troikas passed sentences before the accused had even been arrested, local authorities requested increases in their own quotas, and there was an official request in 1938 for a doubling of the amount of prisoner transport that had been initially requisitioned to carry out the original campaign quotas of the tribunals.
https://espressostalinist.com/2013/03/15/on-the-deaths-in-stalins-ussr/
https://espressostalinist.com/the-real-stalin-series/yezhovshchina/

While the USSR always had executions except for a brief period in the late 1940s, to me it seems that the combining of police actions in the military and party puts 1937-1938 above the other years.

 No.630933

>>630913
Chuev is a liar who didn't do interview with Molotov AT ALL. It's just Khruschev's talking point, but with a twist "but it was good, akshually!".

Szymanski, Albert just says "probably between 20k and 100k because I feel like it". Opinion discarded.

>set a cap of 186,500 imprisonments and 72,950 death penalties for a 1937 special operation to combat the threat of foreign and internal subversion


Archival document about "limits" getting revised higher by Politburo is another fake. It doesn't follow secrecy rules at all, as well as worded incorrectly - if the absurdity of the whole thing is not enough to you. Also, "limits" document contradicts the basis documentation of Great Terror, of Stalin supposedly getting duped by Ezhov, who killed lots and lots of people without Stalin, and Party and the entire population of USSR, not knowing anything.

So yeah, congrats, you have brought glowed sources and one source of a random guy who just felt like USSR had to kill from 0.01% to 0.05% of it's population in 1936-38, because why the fuck not.

 No.630934

>>630933
>Chuev is a liar who didn't do interview with Molotov AT ALL. It's just Khruschev's talking point, but with a twist "but it was good, akshually!".

I mean, Chuev didn't write anything at all that wasn't known beforehand, it's all rehashed info from other sources, but put in the mouth of Molotov. Even if we discard the fact that Chuev wouldn't even be able to interview Molotov, that Chuev didn't ever had any audio cassettes to prove his words, it's still amazing how Molotov didn't say anything that was antagonistic to Khruschev's version of the events.

 No.630997

>>630676
>The fact that Stalin in the 1920's predicted yet another colossal war coming to the USSR (even if he got his enemies wrong)
Interesting. Who'd he think it was going to be?

 No.630998

>wikipedia
lol

 No.631006

>>630933
>Chuev is a liar who didn't do interview with Molotov AT ALL
Proofs?

 No.631085

>>631006
How would this proof look like? Think about it. It should either be an admission by Chuev himself that he fantasized all of it, Molotov disproving it, relatives of either disproving it, or some kind of a total sweep of Chuev's apartments with the point of finding the tapes. None of that is going to happen, isn't it?

So, the only proof you are going to get is that Chuev DIDN'T EXPOSE ANYTHING NEW, meaning Molotov he spoke to was entirely imaginary and based off information already in the open - like khruschevite historiography. Gotta use your own head more often, lol

 No.631091

>>629901
>>629899
>want all power to soviets
<NO U ARE A TROT!
Its all so tiresome.

 No.631139

>>631085
There were supposed interviews with Kaganovich which were proven fake. To my knowledge nobody has claimed the Chuev book is fake.

 No.631167

>>631139
>To my knowledge nobody has claimed the Chuev book is fake.

I claim it based off facts and logic. Anti-Party group's books were taken out of libraries, they themselves were exiled into their apartments, there was no public appearances of them whatsoever, and there was a huge censorship around their role in history, including making them look like clowns who were hindering the geniuses of khruschevites. And now comes Chuev, who somehow was able to take interview with Molotov? And on top of that, Chuev didn't show us any new facts, only confirmed existing khruschevite view on history.

 No.631209

>>631167
So in other words Chuev corroborated things which contradict your worldview and you don't like it so you declare the entire thing to be fake.
>only confirmed existing khruschevite view on history
That isn't true. Molotov defends the purges and trials, and much of Stalin's policies in general. Khruschev meanwhile denounced them as show trials.

 No.631239

File: 1638721925505.png (976.14 KB, 1881x2651, ClipboardImage.png)

>>630997
Picrel, but tl;dr:
He thought the imperialist powers were going to, once again, launch an invasion against the USSR, and he wasn't too troubled about Nazi Germany when compared to the UK, France and Japan, whom he perceived as being the country's archenemies.

Sauce: https://www.deviantart.com/pathtoenlighten/art/Stalin-s-fear-of-a-two-front-war-against-the-USSR-772493751

 No.631244

>>631239
I wouldn't say he got it wrong so much as he was able to diplomatically maneuver Germany and France/Britain into going to war with each other first before either could attack the USSR. Molotov-Ribbentrop was a work of diplomatic and geopolitical brilliance tbh. If war had broken out between any of the capitalist powers and the USSR before breaking out between the imperialist nations themselves, then surely they all would have united against the Soviets.

 No.633095

File: 1638779537195.png (262.79 KB, 480x480, ClipboardImage.png)

Representing the entire spectrum
>>629476
>>629488
>>629515
>>629758

 No.633096

>>633095
"Didn't happen" is the reality, though. Provable with documents and logic, though, so it's way above most of people.

 No.633099

>>631209
>So in other words Chuev corroborated things which contradict your worldview and you don't like it so you declare the entire thing to be fake.

Go on then, prove that interviews happened at all. Pro-fucking-tip: you can't. There's no tapes, no witnesses of those interviews, no proven cases of similar interviews happening (IIRC Chuev supposedly did those with other Anti-Party Group people), etc.

When will you start actually crticially looking at sources, dude? It's tiring. Do you believe random journos who claim to have done an interview with a person decades ago, this person already dead today, and such interview bringing no new historical knowledge whatsoever?

Say, there was a Khruschev's interview/diary that was supposedly snuck out of USSR during the Cold War. Khruschev, being alive, denounced such a thing even existing. Molotov was dead when Chuev's book came out, so there's literally zero people who can prove that Chuev's book is fake. It all can be determined only through logic and reason.

>That isn't true. Molotov defends the purges and trials, and much of Stalin's policies in general. Khruschev meanwhile denounced them as show trials.


Yes, he says what khruschevites say, but says "it was good, akshually". As per >>633095 pic.

 No.633103

File: 1638780995715-0.jpg (395.41 KB, 1251x935, KorolyovContrast.jpg)

File: 1638780995715-1.jpg (319.02 KB, 1251x935, KorolyovContrast2.jpg)

File: 1638780995715-2.png (509.77 KB, 836x875, KorolyovContrast3.png)

>>633099
Oh, and falsification of Soviet history is totally fucking real and obvious. And it's MASSIVE. Up to the point of claiming that Korolyov was gulagged, even that is faked.

 No.633105

>>633103
another day another shitty conspiracy theory

 No.633134

>>633105
>blatant fucking photoshop from the cosmonautics museum in Moscow
>conspiracy story

 No.633535

>>633099
>Go on then, prove that interviews happened at all.
Prove Tucydides wasn't making it all up. There's no audio recordings of the Peloponnesian War, so I guess we can just assume that it didn't happen, or happened in a totally different way than he says.
>When will you start actually crticially looking at sources, dude?
Says the person that takes the trial confessions at face value and doesn't entertain the notion that any part of them could be fabricated or exaggerated.
>It all can be determined only through logic and reason.
What you're doing isn't logic or reason, it's grasping at any conceivable pretext to dismiss things which contradict your worldview. Your position on Chuev is highly indicative of this. You don't have any actual proof that Chuev fabricated the interviews. Your argument is merely based on the fact that Soviet history has in the past been falsified, and the fact that Chuev could have falsified it. No, Molotov being dead when it was published, nor the other things you mentioned, do not prove it was fake, it just means it could have been faked. In other words you are treating the fact that Chuev plausibly could have faked them as a certainty that he did. You clearly don't understand the difference between circumstantial and definitive evidence.

 No.633677

>>633535
>In other words you are treating the fact that Chuev plausibly could have faked them as a certainty that he did.

I said multiple times already that there could be no definitive proof of Chuev faking interviews because everyone concerned is already dead, and there was no tapes found anyway. There can be no proof.

My certainty that it's fake based off a) Molotov saying no new stuff whatsoever, meaning he didn't say things that only he could know, b) there being no interviews with other people from Anti-Party Group or stalinists. There were highly-censored books authored by them, where censors took out chunks of the text, but otherwise - those stalinists were removed from journalists. Meaning it is highly improbable Chuev could even take those interviews.

>Prove Tucydides wasn't making it all up.


Oh, are you implying it's unheard of for people to make fake records of the events? You are grasping at straws, lol.

My opinion is that every ancient historian lied half the time. You piece together the truth by critically analyzing those accounts. You don't do "critically analyzing" part at all, you just repeat after trots and westerners, lol

>Says the person that takes the trial confessions at face value


They don't contradict each other, they expose new facts with every word, and they make other people under the trial expose more facts in turn. Also, "confessions" happened at the end of the trials, not at the start. At the start those people kept on denying their guilt, and then they cross-referenced each other under the questioning tactic used by Soviet prosecution.

Again, eye-witnesses considered trials real, not show and not fake.

>doesn't entertain the notion that any part of them could be fabricated or exaggerated.


Fabricated? How, exactly? Are you implying NKVD came to all those people and made them expose each other, play a play that convinced even foreign observers, and making such a blasting effect on the world that trots all over the globe screeched?

 No.633695

>>633677
>My certainty that it's fake based off a) Molotov saying no new stuff whatsoever, meaning he didn't say things that only he could know
So you're saying that you know it's fake because everything Molotov said was corroborated by other sources?
>Also, "confessions" happened at the end of the trials, not at the start. At the start those people kept on denying their guilt
Gonna need a citation on that, since iirc the accounts I've read of the trial said that they opened with the defendants admitting guilt. Skimming the court proceedings on Marxists.org seems to also show this.
https://www.marxists.org/history/ussr/government/law/1936/moscow-trials/index.htm
>Fabricated? How, exactly? Are you implying NKVD came to all those people and made them expose each other, play a play that convinced even foreign observers
I'm saying that in the absence of documentary or physical evidence, large portions of the testimony cannot be corroborated. Even if it would be difficult (but not impossible) to fake the entire thing, it would be much easier to fake certain parts, exaggerate things, etc.

 No.633740

>>633103
when you are high on russian boomer writers like Muhin or Balayev, lmao

 No.633772

Well I read all of Furr, and there seriously aren't any evil, delibetare actions by Stalin to kill people or to inflict horrors on the general Soviet population. There were fuck ups in policy, sure, and decisions being made on wrong grounds. But he wasn't some maniac getting pleasure from executing and slaughtering people.

 No.633786

>>633772
You'll find that most, if not all of those accusations of sadism and depravity are strictly projection.

 No.633798

>>633695
>So you're saying that you know it's fake because everything Molotov said was corroborated by other sources?

You are leaving out b), which makes a) stronger. Again, there could be no direct proof that Chuev faked the interview, sans the obvious. Well, you also can try to check the way Molotov always acted against the Chuev's book. Again, not a direct proof.

>Gonna need a citation on that, since iirc the accounts I've read of the trial said that they opened with the defendants admitting guilt. Skimming the court proceedings on Marxists.org seems to also show this.


Lol'd, literally the first one

https://www.marxists.org/history/ussr/government/law/1936/moscow-trials/19/dreitzer.htm

<"There could be no acting on one's own, no orchestra without a conductor among us," stated Dreitzer. "I am surprised at the assertions of Smirnov, who, according to his words, both knew and did not know, spoke and did not speak, acted and did not act. This is not true!"


>Even if it would be difficult (but not impossible) to fake the entire thing, it would be much easier to fake certain parts, exaggerate things, etc.


Oh, and why do you think such fakery should be aimed towards incriminating the defendants instead of making them out as innocent?

 No.633817

File: 1638817674375-0.jpg (156.94 KB, 700x767, gulag44.jpg)

File: 1638817674375-1.jpg (237.44 KB, 700x1143, gulag43.jpg)

File: 1638817674375-2.jpg (251.41 KB, 1020x696, Bw1940-02-29-KorolevSP.jpg)

File: 1638817674375-4.jpg (87.72 KB, 700x395, gulag25.jpg)

>>633740
Check at how gulag museum glued priceless archival document to a board, lawl

This stuff is from the same collection as gulag25, prisoners' letters who supposedly threw them out of windows when getting transported by trains, some random woman picked them up, read them, and gave to relatives of those prisoners. And then those families kept those letters as relics from their loved ones for decades. Stuff right out of twitter, where imprisoned uyghurs hid "i'm lokked in Chyna makin shoos plz send halp" in vietnamese boots, lawl

 No.633827

File: 1638818295869-0.jpg (72.35 KB, 700x395, gulag26.jpg)

File: 1638818295869-1.jpg (71.6 KB, 700x344, gulag27.jpg)

>>633817
Also, this shit. Prisoners were logging woods, alright, so they were writing with pencils on logs of wood and sent them down the river with the rest of the logged wood in the hopes that someone will read it and know about their… ugh, sacrifice? Literally uyghur boot story.

Note the quality of Soviet wood from 1930-40s. Fucking amazing stuff, isn't it? SOME REAL FUCKING WOOD. Well, it doesn't have anything to do with Korolyov, but I'm just illustrating the intellectual quality and honesty of people who find and collect archival documents of gulags

 No.633834

File: 1638818764933.png (285.69 KB, 680x453, daa.png)


 No.636307

File: 1638989769700.png (466.8 KB, 358x587, KatynNurembergTrial.png)

Found it!

Nuremberg puts the Katyn 100% as the Nazis' crime.

https://viewer.rusneb.ru/ru/000199_000009_005626953?page=66&rotate=0&theme=white

Retards putting the blame on Soviets BTFO.

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/07-01-46.asp

>This document is dated "Berlin, 29 October 1941." It is headed, "The Chief of the Security Police and of the Security Service." It has a classification, "Top Secret; Urgent letter; Operational Order Number-14." Reference is made to decrees of 17 July and 12 Sep{ember 1941. I shall now read a few short sentences, and I shall begin with the first sentence:


>"In the appendix, I am sending directions for the evacuation of Soviet civilian prisoners and prisoners of war out of permanent prisoner-of-war camps and transit camps in the rear of the Army…


>"These directives have been worked out in collaboration with the Army High Command. The Army High Command-has notified the commanders of the armies in the rear as well as the local commanders of the prisoner-of-war camps and of the transit camps.


>"The task force groups, depending on the size of the camp in their territory, are setting up special commands in sufficient strength under the leadership of an SS leader. The commands are instructed immediately to start work in the camps."


>I break off here, and will continue reading the last paragraph: "I emphasize especially that Operational Orders Number 8 and 14 as well as the appendix are to be destroyed immediately in the case of immediate danger."


>I shall finish my reading and now I shall only mention the distribution list. On Page 2 I quote the part concerning Smolensk. It says here that in Smolensk the Einsatzgruppe "B" was located, consisting of Special Commands 7a, 7b, 8, and 9; and in addition to this, there was already located in Smolensk a special command, which had been rather prematurely named "Moscow" by its organizers.


>These are the contents of the document, Mr. President.



>BAZILEVSKY: Yes. When he told me that the prisoners of war had been killed, he emphasized once more the necessity of keeping it strictly secret in order to avoid disagreeable consequences. He started to explain to me the reasons for the German behavior with respect to the Polish prisoners of war. He pointed out that this was only one measure of the general system of treating Polish prisoners of war.


>MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: Did you hear anything about the extermination of the Poles from the employees of the German Kommandantur?


>BAZILEVSKY: Yes, 2 or 3 days later.


>DR. STAHMER: Did you yourself see Polish officers?


>BAZILEVSKY: I did not see them myself, but my students saw them, and they told me that they had seen them in 1941.


>DR. STAHMER: And where did they see them?


>BAZILEVSKY: On the road where they were doing repair work at the beginning of summer, 1941.


>DR. STAHMER: In what general area or location?


>BAZILEVSKY: In the district of the Moscow-Minsk highway, somewhat to the west of Smolensk.


>MARKOV: The only part of our activity which could be characterized as a scientific, medico-legal examination were the autopsies carried out by certain members of the commission who were themselves medico-legal experts; but there were only seven or eight of us who could lay claim to that qualification, and as far as I recall only eight corpses were opened. Each of us operated on one corpse, except Professor Hajek, who dissected two corpses. Our further activity during these 2 days consisted of a hasty inspection under the guidance of Germans. It was like a tourists' walk during which we saw the open graves; and we were shown a peasant's house, a few kilometers distant from the Katyn wood, where in showcases papers and objects of various sorts were kept. We were told that these papers and objects had been found in the clothes of the corpses which had been exhumed.


>MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: Were you actually present when these papers were taken from the corpses or were they shown to you when they were already under glass in display cabinets?


>MARKOV: The documents which we saw in the glass cases had already been removed from the bodies before we arrived.


>MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: Were you allowed to investigate these documents, to examine these documents, for instance, to see whether the papers were impregnated with any acids which had developed by the decay of the corpses, or to carry out any other kind of scientific examination?


>MARKOV: We did not carry out any scientific examination of these papers. As I have already told you, these papers were exhibited in glass cases and we did not even touch them.


So, you retards who keep on insisting that USSR has shot the Polish POWs are literally going against Nuremberg. You people should be put in the same contempt as fascists denying Holocaust, you know?

 No.636312

>>636307
Soviets even brought to Nuremberg as a witness a Bulgarian who was brought by the Nazis to Katyn, lol.

>MARKOV: As to that question I could judge only from the corpse on which I myself had held a post mortem. The condition of this corpse, as I have already stated, was typical of the average condition of the Katyn corpses. These corpses were far removed from the stage of disintegration of the soft parts, since the fat was only beginning to turn into wax. In my opinion these corpses were buried for a shorter period of time than 3 years. I considered that the corpse which I dissected had been buried for not more than 1 year or 18 months.


>MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: Therefore, applying the criteria of the facts which you ascertained to your experiences in Bulgaria- that is, in a country of a more southern climate than Smolensk and where decay, therefore, is more rapid-one must come to the conclusion that the corpses that were exhumed in the Katyn forest had been lying under the earth for not more than a year and a half? Did I understand you correctly?


>MARKOV: Yes, quite right. I had the impression that they had been buried for not more than a year and a half.

 No.636316

>>633817
>>633827
>prisoners wouldn't do things in secret; this is fantasy, besides, look at the wood guys!
wow some historian we have here

 No.636329

>>636316
>prisoners writing on the scraps of cloth and throwing it out the train windows and writing on the wood pieces (which are in very good quality even 70 years later) which they sent down the rivers is totally believable

How do you even live like that without an ounce of critical thinking?

 No.637802

File: 1639069623318.gif (674.85 KB, 1000x793, SamusKeepingItIn.gif)

https://zen.yandex.ru/media/mem/chestnyi-istorik-ob-arhivah-nkvd-fsb-61a9297f65594c7ef102e281

HAHAHAHA

Snake starts to eat it's own tail! Zemskov's comrade, Zemskov being the guy who took Yakovlev's repression figures as well as losses in a war and such shit and legitimized it, now starts writing books about falsifications in archives, and how evil liberals (with both Zemskov and this Dugin guy being not liberals, obviously!) were faking Soviet/Russian history in service of USA!

Imagine fucking that - as it turns out historians WITH DEGREES AND ACCESS TO ARCHIVES DO say that archives are full of fakes! I'm fucking certain that flagged fags will try and defend those historical fake even now, because "le Stalin bad", "le Stalin didn't know how to fight Nazis", and "Trotsky and factionalism are good, akshually". And all it took was the West not letting Russia in into the fun of imperialist core countries, including trying to extract from Russia as the heir of a criminal communist stalinist regime political and economical reparations for those communist crimes. Who could have predicted that?

 No.637815

His only mistake was not killing more traitors

 No.637820


 No.637834

Realistically speaking >95% of the population is simply incapable of genuine commitment to the cause. No matter how much they may want to believe themselves to be good communists they will always be a threat and thus must be kept on a short leash and put down without mercy at the first sign of mutiny.

 No.637845

>>630461
>Both parties consist of a myriad of factions.
You haven't yet demonstrated that the US has stronger or more diversity in terms of internal political factions than other countries. Moreover, the presence of only two mainstream parties and their overall lack of internal diversity are opposed to the basic contention being made. It seems like the sort of arrant nonsense one simply asserts when trying to defend an indefensible position.

 No.637871

>>637802
> Дугин приводит допросы Шапиро, помощника Ежова.
LIBTARDS OWNED EPIC STYLE

 No.637884

>>629827
>banditry is ethnic
Incredible

 No.637890

>>637884
>Taking quotes out of context to get bantz
You missed the part of
<They press conscript their nationals and they feed off pressing their nationals into giving them food and resources

 No.637932

>>637802
do you have pdf of the Dugin book(s)?

 No.638261

>>638257
therefore it is acceptable to kill them
fair enough. fine by me considering how most leftypolacks will be pencil pushers at best anyways

 No.638289

>>638281
>Most leftypol users are radlibs
lol

 No.638319

>>638281
>It takes a very special kind of person to guide a people, and Stalin was the pinnacle of such a person.
pure idealism

 No.638327

>>638319
Almost as idealist as the notion that Stalin and Lenin were running the Soviet government by themselves without any help from the rest of the CC and Politburo lmao.

 No.638343

>>638330
>the human nature
huh okay…

 No.638346

>>638330
> fairy tale ideas of egalitarianism
Jargon spouting lib detected

 No.638366

>>638364
Engels sure as shit didn't peddle Great Man theory lol.

 No.638370

>>638364
Nobody on the site talks about egalitarianism though do they you little faggot, so it can only be assumed you think that's in all the books you've not read

 No.638565

>>638330
>Blanquism
Get bent

 No.638569

>>638257
No, many were hostile and others plain old wreckers. This isn’t a question of them being purged because they weren’t good enough or something.

 No.638577

>>638573
Did you think Leninism and the bolshevik political vanguard was blanquism, you historical illiterate?

 No.639094

>>629887
There is nothing "fertile" about central asia. I know it full well cause I live there

 No.639158

>>638281
excellent bait anon, if this was posted on 8chan leftypol i would have fell for it

 No.639276

>>637932
No, I don't. https://books.google.ru/books?id=JFrvDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA1&lpg=PP1&focus=viewport&hl=ru off the google, though. Weird links with free stuff lead to some rabbit hole, so I pass going there. Judging off first pages and reviews, guy's not really questioning the existance of Great Terror, just attributes it, as per official Russian position today, to overmotivated local officers, including Yezhov, and Beria has saved everyone and then was murdered by Khruschev.

 No.639278


 No.639401

>>638327
and without the help of tens of millions of soviet proletarians

 No.642503

File: 1639328087073.png (644.01 KB, 640x480, LeninVsWhites.png)

Regarding the Stalin's tactic to cede ground in order to kill 4 million nazis in 4 months as if it was something inconceivable.

http://www.uaio.ru/vil/42.htm

Lenin's full works.

58 page and onwards:

>We used it to fortify ourselves so that we could not be taken by military force. We gained a little time and only gave a lot of space for it. Then, I remember, they philosophized that in order to gain time, one must give up space. It was with the philosophers' theory of time and advertising that was dealt with practically and politically; We gave a lot of space, but we gained such time during which we could get stronger. When all the imperialists wanted to go to a big war against us, it turned out - it was impossible, for a big war they had neither the means nor the strength. We then did not sacrifice the interests, we gave up the secondary ones and preserved the indigenous ones.


>Here, by the way, the question of opportunism arises. Opportunism is about sacrificing core interests in order to gain temporary partial benefits. This is the crux of the matter if we take the theoretical definition of opportunism. Many got lost here. It was on the Brest-Litovsk Peace that we sacrificed the secondary interests of Russia from the point of view of socialism, as they are understood in the patriotic sense; we made gigantic sacrifices, but they were still minor sacrifices. The Germans hated England with all their hearts. They also hated the Bolsheviks, but we beckoned them, they got in. They assured all the time that they would not go as far as Napoleon went, and indeed, they did not reach Moscow, but went to Ukraine and failed there. They thought they had learned a lot from Napoleon, but in reality it turned out differently. We won a lot.


Also, the whole quote was about Brest-Litovsk peace with Germany. Regularly gets brought up on this site as something bad that Lenin did

>It turned out, it might seem, something like a bloc of the first socialist republic with German imperialism against the imperialism of another. But we did not conclude any bloc with them, nowhere did we cross the line that would undermine or discredit socialist power, and we used the fbi.gov between the two imperialisms in such a way that, in the end, both lost. Germany took nothing from the Brest-Litovsk Peace, except for several million poods of grain, but brought Bolshevik decomposition to Germany. We gained time, during which the Red Army began to take shape. Even the gigantic disasters in Ukraine proved to be curable, albeit at a difficult and heavy cost. What our opponents hoped for, the rapid collapse of Soviet power in Russia, did not follow. Just the time that history gave us for a respite, we used to strengthen ourselves so that we could not be taken by military force. We won the pace, we gained a little time and only gave a lot of space for it. Then, I remember, they philosophized that in order to gain time, one must give up space. It was with the philosophers' theory of time and space that it was dealt with practically and politically; We gave a lot of space, but we gained such time during which we could get stronger. After that, when all the imperialists wanted to go to a big war against us, it turned out - it was impossible, for a big war they had neither the means nor the strength. At that time we did not sacrifice the fundamental interests, we gave up the minor ones and preserved the fundamental ones.

 No.649515

Rail war presented from both sides of the war (just run it through google, too much text):

https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5c1cf4490df9c100aafd3652/neizvestnoe-orujie-stalina-obespechivshee-pobedu-v-voine-61b7c1359530ba7840962e24?&

In short, Soviets utilized all their trains successfully, used army-like structure and had people live on the trains, while Germans lost 4 out of 5 trains due to weather. Just think about it: just one train column supplying Leningrad in 1941-42 had as much goods transported as entire German railway system dedicated to Army Group Center.

Explains why Germans were throwing corpses at Soviet positions in 1941 and lost 4 million soldiers with those tactics - they didn't have enough bullets and supplies.

 No.650174

>>631167
>And on top of that, Chuev didn't show us any new facts, only confirmed existing khruschevite view on history.

What about stuff like this?
https://www.autistici.org/poderobrero/articulos/molotov-on-khrushchev

Also Molotov in that book calls Lenin "harsher than Stalin" which contrasts the stupid Khrushchevite/Trotskyite view of the good kind Lenin vs big bad Stalin.

 No.650575

>>650174
>What about stuff like this?

Is this a real historic fact? 3 days, behind closed doors, with no ways to verify if it was a real thing.

>We had no program to advance. Our only goal was to remove Khrushchev and have him appointed minister of agriculture.


Oh yeah, totally what stalinists were doing, lol. Khruschevite erasure of stalinists' achievements while still in positions of power in 1953-1960s.

>Also Molotov in that book calls Lenin "harsher than Stalin"


You don't fucking get it. Molotov fits the narrative of a stalinist as presented by khruschevites/trotskyists. Chuev invented a Molotov that looked like something he thought a die-hard stalinist should look like. Like what, did you expect Chuev to paint an image of baby-eating Molotov who wanted to baby-eat and nothing else? Character has to have a justification for his actions, you know?

Moreso, exactly WHAT in Molotov's supposed interviews didn't pass khruschevite censorship, which prevented it to be printed before USSR's collapse?

 No.650733

So did anybody answer OP's question
What's a TLDRTT answer?

 No.650782

>>629464
Who even cares? Do you think somebodies going to argue with you for being a communist over something Stalin did? The average person has never even heard of Holodomor. We might have an issue if Hollywood underwent some radical takeover, but that’ll never happen, so that’s the rightoids problem.

 No.650859

>>629604
It depends on whatever makes Stalin look best at the current moment

 No.650869

>>629711
The actual Stalinists that tortured people to get bullshit nonsensical confessions out of them obviously understood people quite well
The retard modern zoomer/millennial westerners with a broken sense of identity looking for their strong father figure in politics? No, not at all honestly

 No.650872

>>650869
>Coping about people on a website you supposedly hate
Go to bed, burger

 No.650875

>>629797
> I mean, how can you call ethnic cleansing/genocide when
Do you not know that ethnic cleansing and genocide are not synonymous?

 No.650877

>>650872
Actually this thread gave me hope that not everyone here is a shit-for-brains stalin simp

 No.650879

>>650877
>Being an anticommunist makes you a free thinking, principled communist
Go back to the other thread

 No.650881

>>650879
communism is the real movement, not the jerking off to long dead great men

 No.650884

>>650881
>Those dead men didn’t contribute to the “real movement”
>We should embrace opportunism and anticommunist obscurantism to be hip with the times

 No.650885

>>630174
> What can purges accomplish that open discussion can't?
His personal thirst for blood

 No.650886

>>650885
>Purge is when you kill people and not force them into an early retirement

 No.650887

>>650884
Is there anything more opportunistic than writing inventing insane conspiracies to justify killing off everyone who could potentially threaten your personal power then ranting and raving about how these lifelong committed communists who nearly gave their lives fighting through a nightmarish civil war were uhhhhh actually secret nazis all along because they criticized you or were just not enthusiastic enough about your state?

Honestly it’s pretty fucking funny to me that you Stalin simps will rant and rave about how Trotsky was a Nazi because he said Ukraine should be independent at a time when the USSR wasn’t even at war with Germany while simultaneously praising the Molotov-Ribbentrope Pact

Have you ever considered that you’re actually just stuck in a bubble?

 No.650888

>>650886
Seems to be how the Stalin Era USSR interpreted it

 No.650890

>>637834
And shit like this is when tankies reveal how full of shit they truly are when they talk about “liberation”
>No for me, not for thee, silly prole
<Don’t you see that I have the superior theoretical understanding you foul creature, anyway since you’ve criticized me you have demonstrated fascist sympathies, now face the wall.

 No.650893

>>650887
>Thinking it was a power struggle and not actual ideological schisms and barely concealed threats to commit violence
>Thinking the ten year nonagression pact wasn’t signed after the attempts to form antifascist alliances with Britain and France beforehand
You know nothing and are proud of it, now go to bed.

 No.650899

>>629868
Kinda funny you people will simp for the USSR forcibly deporting “suspect” ethnicities but adamantly oppose decolonization in your own settler colonial countries

 No.650900

>>650899
>Shifting goalposts
You hate to see it folks

 No.650902

>>650893
>Thinking it was a power struggle
Yes
>Muh Britain and Frog alliance treaty
Oh I’m well aware of the treaty and is what I used to bring up when I was a Stalin simp desperately searching for a father figure, I just think it’s funny as shit that in your people’s minds writing an essay that can be seen as “treason” against a state that already betrayed and exiled you after you helped found it is unironically worse than actually collaborating with the Nazis (with caveats*)

 No.650903

>>650900
Not really shifting goalposts when you admit the deportations occurred but ackshually entire ethnicities were, uhhhh Nazis; which is why deporting people from their homelands = good but anyway deporting the descendants of the fascistic American state’s historical invasion force = bad

 No.650904

>>630873
>Do shit, get punished
<These things are not the same
Uhhh
No you fucking buffoon?
This is akin to claiming it’s the same when a state arrests someone for committing murder and arrests someone for wearing the wrong shoes because uhhhh both are illegal

 No.650907

>>650902
>Projecting your imsecurities onto other people to own the tankies
What the tuck do you think politics is? That they were all anime true companions that were all buddy-buddy with one another and not unified into a block mostly by external circumstances that, once removed, wouldn’t let those tensions return? That they weren’t petty parliamentarians and closet liberals who were willing to compromise the project for their own gain? Or that there wasn’t an actual threat against the leader of the soviet union? Spoiler alert: most of the bolshevik “old guard” would’ve acted the same.

Did you think that Stalin and his political agenda was unpopular? Or I know, that the soviet union and its people weren’t in on it at all and both proudly participated in the construction of a new society and/or gleefully liquidated both perceived threats and former oppressors?

 No.650909

>>650904
>Thinking that people in the soviet union were arrested for something as stupid as wearing the wrong shoes

 No.650913

>>650907
> What the tuck do you think politics is?
Not whatever happens in this imageboard, that’s for damn sure
> That they were all anime true companions that were all buddy-buddy with one another and not unified into a block mostly by external circumstances that, once removed, wouldn’t let those tensions return?
Funny that you’re saying this while also claiming that Stalin was the 100% verifiable incorruptible anime protagonist hero without whom the Germans would have surely won a war against a rapidly industrializing state with a much larger population while also being at war with the other western powers at the time, therefore ackshually all his actions were justified, were not committed in the name of personal power, and surely those lifelong communists were fascist saboteurs all along

See, their participation in the Russian Revolution and Civil War was actually a fascist plot all along, step one was to destroy the monarchists, step two was to defeat the liberals, step three was to create a socialist state and then destroy it from within, fuck how could I have not seen this plot?
> That they weren’t petty parliamentarians and closet liberals who were willing to compromise the project for their own gain?
Ah yes, surely unlike Stalin who:
Mostly refused to support the other ongoing revolutions at the time
Was immediately followed by Khrushchev who a bunch of western schizos here think destroyed the untouchable Man of Steel’s legacy
Literally tried to join fucking NATO
> Spoiler alert: most of the bolshevik “old guard” would’ve acted the same.
At which point you’re not actually saying anything in favor of the bolsheviks in general

Okay, let’s get this out of the way once and for all, are you just simping for the only powerful socialist states you know of and must be uncritical because you feel you have no other choice?
> Did you think that Stalin and his political agenda was unpopular?
Even fucking Tsar Nicholas was popular at one point, even fucking World War I was popular at one point, tf does this even mean and how can you verify the popularity of it anyway? You think someone was going around polling the Soviet populace?
> Or I know, that the soviet union and its people weren’t in on it at all and both proudly participated in the construction of a new society and/or gleefully liquidated both perceived threats and former oppressors?
Ngl
These are just words mate
>>650909
>Making yourself a fucking moron with no reading comprehension to simp for Daddy Stalin
Hint: the situation was a hypothetical regarding whether legality actually makes something right or wrong

 No.651162

>>650902

Something about this post doesn't make sense:

What exactly was the Soviet Union supposed to do in these circumstances? Having tried to court allies against Germany and and being rebuffed, what other options does it have to buy time to prepare for the inevitable conflict? Should it have faced the Germans immediately and alone in a weaker position?

Moreover if one accepts Trotsky's thesis that the Soviet Union was too technologically and industrially backward to win the war st the time, wouldn't it then make sense to advocate for an prolonging non-aggression pact longer, rather than for example advocating for secession of Ukraine (and in fact collaborating with Nazis for tactical reasons of wanting to come back to power, see video).



Aside, you really shouldn't project your personal insecurities onto others. While there is nothing wrong sith wanting a strong father, the reason why say 70% of Russians have deep respect for Stalin is because symbolizes the epoch real material gains for the population, including industrialization, defeat of the nazi invader, mass housing, free education, health, early retirement, etc, etc.

 No.651174

>>651162
>Russians
<Tfw the Anglo/Yankee/Frog etc. delusionally sees themselves as equivalent to Russians who have an actual connection to Stalin and the Soviet Union

 No.651180

>>651162
In hindsight the best course of action probably would have been to attack the Germans before France fell, but to be fair to the Soviets nobody knew it would happen so fast, so its not as if they would have had time to prepare anyway.

 No.651187

>>651180

The German attack on France is itself however contingent on the non-aggression pact having already been signed.

As for whether breaking the pact and attacking Germany would have worked then, I am a bit skeptical, but maybe you have some strategic analysis that shows it would have a good chance at success? Happy to look into it.

 No.651192

>>651187
>breaking the pact and attacking Germany
Of course, this is what I meant.
>but maybe you have some strategic analysis that shows it would have a good chance at success?
Well I'm just spitballing here, but fighting on two fronts obviously would have put the Germans at a tremendous disadvantage. Especially since their tank corps was the heart of their doctrine, and they didn't have them in sufficient numbers to deploy them on both fronts. The lack of access to Soviet oil also would have hindered their mechanized units, not to mention Germany's precarious food situation in 1940. On the other hand though, the Red Army had only just begin a series of major reforms that would still be in progress when the Germans attacked in 1941, so their own combat capabilities probably would have been relatively limited. Then again they would have been able to do it without having to recover the kinds of losses they experienced in 1941. There's also the possibility of the Western Allies concluding a separate peace with Germany in the event of a Soviet attack, although they didn't do this irl so I don't know how likely it would have been. Ultimately I think it's impossible to say, but I think that at the very least fighting the war on German/Polish instead of Soviet soil would have been better for the USSR.

 No.651368


 No.651537

File: 1639859140924.pdf (78.15 MB, 255x175, USSR_stats_1913-1951.pdf)

>>651192
>Then again they would have been able to do it without having to recover the kinds of losses they experienced in 1941.

For fuck's sake, just read already accounts of Gernans themselves instead of propagandists' statistics. Germans lost 4 millions in 4 months, while Soviets have lost 1 million. Just read this shit >>649515

How would you be able to score higher K/D ratio when you don't have supply lines, food, clothes and bullets? They did have a lot of weaponry, though - which they couldn't supply due to outstretched lines. When in two weeks initial blitzkrieg supplies ran out without any resupplies, that's when their blitzkrieg failed.

So, now you are saying that Soviets would have won with lower losses than imaginary 27 millions if they attacked Germany preemptively? Well, that's for sure - they would have lost maybe 10-20 millions to real history's 3.5 million soldiers and 3.5 million civilians. Check the PDF, look up numbers for people employed, in education and such for those years. Remember than Stalin's USSR has reported to the UN a population figure of 193 millions in 1946. Remember that Germany's population today is ~80 millions, basically the same figure as in 1939, while EVERYONE FUCKING ELSE IN EUROPE had their popualtions grew by 1/3 from 1939 to 1990, from France to Britain and USSR.

Germany was throwing corpses at USSR, not the other way around. Germany overextended itself and did the pro-gamer move of trying to push their luck with all their reserves - because if they didn't do it, they'd have VERY limited territorial advancement, and USSR having even bigger advantage than USSR had in reality. You can see this shit in HOI4 lan games all the time, when noobs keep trying to break enemy's defences because 1-2-3 years from now on the enemy will be much stronger than them, so they have to keep pushing.

 No.651552


 No.651570

File: 1639861385702.jpg (744.9 KB, 1193x1000, NaziKD.jpg)

>>651192
>>651537
>>651552
Look at the fucking wikipedia, even https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_in_Germany

I'm so mad I even made you a fucking collage

 No.651587

>>651570
Wait, is that 4 million figure actually from a speech? That's your source? You realize that a wartime speech by a leader is by definition propaganda right? And you think this is more reliable than actual statistics?

 No.651589

File: 1639862472245.jpg (546.04 KB, 1000x753, MolotovRibbentropSecrecy.jpg)

>>650887
Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact wasn't secret and wasn't malicious, as everyone had such a pact with Germany at the time (and Germany broke half of them, anyway). USSR was printing "secret' contents of that pact in a schoolchidren's newspaper, even! That's how secret and malicious it was!

You see, sweaty, Molotov-Ribbentrop craze was invented with presupposition that there were SECRET PROTOCOLS, and guess fucking what, it turned out that those secret protocols were in the OPEN since 1939, meaning THERE WERE NO SECRET PROTOCOLS. You know, secret stuff where Stalin was kissing Hitler on the lips turned out to be complete bullshit - so, fakers put into their forgeries WELL-KNOWN information from 1939 and claimed it was a top-super-secret stuff.

What, exactly, was in that pact? Well, it just postulated that Germany couldn't place troops past the imaginary line. Note that USSR took Lithuania, and separation of Poland was different as well. Look at the pic, again. Note 1939, note newspaper's name. What fucking secrecy? USSR stated clearly it's intentions - no German troops past the line. That's what happened.

 No.651591

>>651587
>than actual statistics?

"Actual statistics" show a drop in population in Germany from 80 million to 65 million. Stalin's figures totally in line with official stats - except the ones where losses are calculated off Goebbels' propaganda figures, lol

 No.651600

>>651591
>Actual statistics" show a drop in population in Germany from 80 million to 65 million
Yeah because in addition to military casualties of the Eastern Front there were casualties in other theaters, civilian casualties, people exterminated by the Nazis, and the people living in territories that were no longer part of Germany after the war. The wiki article even says that the 1939 census included German territory in what is now Poland, plus Austria and the Sudentenland. The 1946 census did not.

 No.651607

>>651600
Germany got itself a 12 million influx of germans from all over Europe after the war. It had in 1990 3 million turks, 1-2 million southern slavs, 1 million other non-germans. Today it has 1 million russians, even and up to 7 million turks.

I get it you want to suck Goebbels' dick, but come on now, have some dignity. Clear fucking picture - while everyone grew by 30% by 1990, Germany was RESTORING it's population size to 1939 figure. Meaning - that's right! - huge fucking military losses, which destroyed Germany's demographics. None of Germany's neighbours had that.

 No.651615

>>651607
>Germany got itself a 12 million influx of germans from all over Europe after the war
What's your source on that? Were they all back within Germany's new borders as of the 1946 census?

 No.651618

>>651537
>whenever we are raided by /pol/ this stalinist schizo poster also appears
curious

 No.651621

>>651615
>>651607
So a quick search shows that of the 15 million people missing from the 1946 census, about 7 million can be attributed to the war, either as deaths or a decline in births, increase in infant mortality, etc. That leaves 8 million unaccounted for, and the population of Austria and the Sudentenland in 1939, who are not included in the 1946 census, are counted at just under 10 million combined. So that means that the loss of territories more than accounts for this discrepancy, and even allows room for some of the 12 million Germans relocated to the new German borders after the war (a process which wasn't completed until 1950). Moreover, the population of Germany proper in 1939 was only about 70 million, so the losses are nearly as large as you are claiming.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_in_1939

 No.651673

>>651589
None of this shit matters to me, simian, my point was contrasting the stance you fucking mindless stalin simpfags have regarding Trotsky’s actions vs Stalin’s actions

 No.651675

>>651587
Stalin was god unironically
His word is Truth

Seriously just accept that stalinsimps are mindless pseudo-theists

 No.651946

>>651673
>I don’t have real principles, I just want to be an anticommunist contrarian

 No.651996

>>651621
Austria's population today is 9 mln. "Germany proper" was 70 million, add to that 3.2 mln Sudeten Germans, add to that, Poland's 1.8 + 1.6 + 0.6 + 0.4 = 4.4 mln Germans were deported, 2 mln in East Prussia.

https://theconversation.com/postwar-forced-resettlement-of-germans-echoes-through-the-decades-137219

Total expelled were around 10-14 mln. I can't find real figure, so here's my estimate. So, total, "Germany proper" got a pure population boost of around 1-5 million people. Keep in mind that Poland's and Sudeten Germans are accounted by 80 million figure of 1939.

So, we get around 19 million demographic losses of Germans in Germany and Eastern Europe. In my pic >>651570 we have 14 million because those 5 million influx is unaccounted for.

 No.673772

File: 1641323916292.png (389.35 KB, 540x810, lenin laugh.png)

So, people were quoting Zemskov as the source of objective truth regarding repressions Stalin did. But wait, let's look up the time his figures first came to light!

https://www.politpros.com/journal/read/?ID=783

>At the beginning of 1989, by decision of the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences, a commission of the History Department of the USSR Academy of Sciences, headed by corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences Yu.A. Polyakov, was created to determine the population losses. As part of this commission, we were among the first historians to gain access to the previously unreleased statistical reports of the OGPU-NKVD-MVD-MGB, the highest bodies of state power and government bodies of the USSR, which were in special storage in the Central State Archives of the October Revolution (TsGAOR USSR), now renamed the State Archives of the Russian Federation (GARF).


<1989


Note this specifically from the article:

>The number of those convicted of counter-revolutionary and other especially dangerous crimes against the state (4,060,306 for 1921-1953) was first published in 1990 in one of the articles by a member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee A.N. Yakovlev in the Izvestia newspaper. In more detail this statistics (I special department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs), with dynamics over the years, was published in 1992 by VP Popov in the journal "Domestic Archives".


<first published in 1990 in one of the articles by a member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee A.N. Yakovlev


<first published in 1990


Now then, onto Yakovlev himself:

http://doc20vek.ru/node/4230

Check the date - 1988. LAWL.

Check the figures mentioned by both Zemskov in 1990+ and by Yakovlev in 1988, they are pretty much identical. Quite fucking obvious that Zemskov was quoting Yakovlev, the known anticommunist who admitted to have been anticommunist from the very beginning, despite being the member of CPSU Central Committee, who was, by his admission, acting in the interests of destroying USSR from the inside. And now here you are, guys, who keep quoting Zemskov as some kind of an objective figure who is telling truth, truth and nothing but truth.

 No.673814

>>673772
And just to completely murder surprisingly good name Zemskov has amongst leftists, to stop those idiots from quoting him ever again:

https://scepsis.net/library/id_957.html

>In determining the total number of dispossessed people, the arguments of the opponent are quite reasonable, but they did not completely convince me. I still believe that the number of dispossessed people was about 4 million people, who were divided into three groups with the application of the following sanctions: 1st group - arrest and conviction; 2nd - eviction with sending to a special settlement; 3rd - eviction without sending to a special settlement. Maksudov brings this figure up to 10 million by adding "self-dispossessed" and subject to confiscation of property for non-payment of taxes. If desired, this list can be continued by including millions of peasants who, out of fear of the authorities, "voluntarily" entered collective farms and whose land property (with the exception of household plots) was alienated and turned into "socialized". The radical agrarian reform, which was collectivization, had a pronounced confiscatory character, and most of the peasantry suffered from it to one degree or another, i.e. not 10 million, but much higher.


<collectivization was a campaign of dispossession


<number of repressed peasants is much higher than 10 million people


Defend this as Zemskov being pro-communist, you retards

 No.673871

>>673814
nobody cares, lol

 No.675283

>>673871
Those people I am talking very much care about those things. Their willingness to show their care, however, is determined by how many people answer in this thread. They can't refute, so they ignore, and if someone breaks ignore, they'll have to try and refute vocally.

In any case, I hope anons will know that Zemskov is a fucking hack, and he is the same kind of anticommunist as Yakovlev, and his numbers come from Yakovlev as well.

 No.675340

>>673772
You're doing Marx's work comrade.

Also regarding our earlier discussion on Molotov and Khrushchev. >>650575
Why do you think it was fake? Molotov comes off as pretty reasonable in the book.

 No.675676

>>675652
>Gorbachev was a stalinist
Schizo article. He literally denounced Stalin and persecuted people in favor of planning, acussing them of "stalinism".

 No.675820

>>675652
BASED

 No.676643

>>629464 I'm about to blow every 14 year old on here's mind with this but Stalin fucked up plenty, same as literally every other socialist who came to power.

He isn't baby eater extraordinaire and he still did a lot of good but it's retarded to think that every single person he purged deserved it. Especially since he ended up killing a shit ton of NKVD men for abusing their power and manipulating him into killing innocents.

 No.677481

>>675340
I can say nothing new but what I already have said earlier.

Because Molotov was a stalinist basically imprisoned in his own apartments. Why do you think they would allow any journo anywhere near him? They didn't allow anyone to take interviews from Khruschev, even. They've heavily censored others like him - like Voroshilov - to the point of taking his books out of libraries and circulation and not allowing any journos access to him, and then we have Chuev who published this shit after USSR's dissolution. Again, there was also no previously unknown facts disclosed.

 No.677483

>>676643
>Especially since he ended up killing a shit ton of NKVD men for abusing their power and manipulating him into killing innocents.

This whole idea of NKVD men abusing their power to kill innocents is the result of real investigations into the archives, which showed quite clearly that people on the top didn't know of innocent killing. You'd think people would realize that this must mean that innocent killings didn't happen at all, but due to being retards they start to push for two contradictory things simultaneously - that killings happened and Stalin didn't know about 666k people killed without him, and anyone else in the country, noticing. Start doubting 666k figure, and you immediately get rid of perceived contradictions of history and it's retarded moments.

 No.677644

>>629476
>Ban factions
>Factionalism only gets worse
>Factionalism gets so bad you end up killing half the party
MLs on suicide watch. The first revisionist things Lenin did was ban factions.

 No.677647

>>677644
Banning factions was the right move in time of civil war and after what happened in 1917 when zinovyev an buharin publicly went against the party. Enforcing the ban after 1922 was a costly mistake.

 No.677674

>>677647
The ban on factions is what stopped racist politics like those in the US, from happening in the USSR too. It was not a mistake, none of the many ethnic groups could politicize racial identities to rally people around racial supremacy politics.

 No.677718

>>677674
>Political factions is when you do ethno nationalism
You fucking retarded American, that's not even what factions ever were anywhere. Factions are groups of people with different political views within the same party, not fucking ethno nationalism

 No.677738

>>677644
That's what trots want you to believe. In reality, however, 666k people killed in 1937-38 didn't happen, thus your whole thesis of factionalism getting worse isn't supported by reality.

 No.677744

>>677738
Faction bans still sucks and continues to destroy our movements even if they didn't kill actual 666 thousand people.
You don't need to go the trot way of making everything about factions.
Both ml parties and Trot parties constantly split and purge over the tiniest shit because they are both fucking retarded who can't see that if you don't just let people openly express their disagreement together with others, you force people into defensive factional wars to either take control or be purged.

 No.677797

>>677718
>Factions are groups of people with different political views
That's idealist, factions form around material interests of certain groups.
Racist politics is just one possible outcome of factionalism, another is break up into many sects.
Don't throw away Lenin, that political style is not the reason for the political suppression of dissent that occurred in the USSR. That was the result of a State ramping up internal security during the build up for War. No matter what style of politics you have the result is always like that. Authentic democracy can't fight wars, nobody wants to pay for a massive military.

 No.677823

>>677797
>That's idealist, factions form around material interests of certain groups.
Thinking that different racial groups have different economic interests and then calling *me* idealist? Jesus Christ this is your brain on burger politics.

 No.677828

>>677823

Also reminder that unlike burgerstan, in the soviet union and china, minority groups have direct representation in the parlaiment. So much for your retarded "waaaah muh ethnic factions" argument.

You're completely wrong, you're burger poisoned, kill yourself, also saying that Lenin made ONE mistake by banning factions isn't "throwing away Lenin" you dogmatic tanky piece of shit. Your kind is the reason why the left is in fucking shambles with 100 different micro parties.

 No.677833

>>677828
Oh and lastly "factions form around the material interests of specific groups" is insanely reductionist and asserts, like all retarded lead poisoned tankies since Stalin do, that there is one one true line, rather than that everybody makes fucking mistakes constantly and having different views on future decisions isn't the same as having fucking class interests. And again, racial groups don't have their own economic interests. And if the Muslims want to express their material interests for building some mosques through a faction I wouldn't fucking care, I would be democratic.

The ban on faction dogmatism is one of the biggest reasons why communism fell and keeps falling everywhere. You're on the wrong side of history.

 No.677872

>>677823
>Thinking that different racial groups have different economic interests and then calling *me* idealist? Jesus Christ this is your brain on burger politics.
Just WOW, that's your bias, not mine. Racist politics is used by petite bourgeois interest groups or labor aristocrats that need justification for social hierarchies. Do i really have to spell out everything ?

>>677828
The ban on faction is about preventing over-representation of a minority group. For example a minority of bourgeois is over-represented politically in bourgeois democracy. You need to ban factions or else electoral democracy will lead to minority capture of state institutions. It's the bolshevik (majority party) vs menshevik (minority party) question.

I'm not married to the ban on factions though, you can also do democracy by random draw of a lot instead of electoral democracy, that achieves the same goals, it might even be a little more effective than the Leninist style.

>You're completely wrong, you're burger poisoned, kill yourself

What ? I'm not from America. One can observe many places having such problems.
>Your kind
homo sapience ? Cool it with the dehumanization.

>>677833
>Oh and lastly "factions form around the material interests of specific groups" is insanely reductionist
So reductionist is good, it means more clarity of thought. Politics are about material interests.
>retarded lead poisoned tankies
So as soon as you are confronted with a strong difference of opinion, you are othering me into a different faction "the metal tankies", while i may feel a little flattered by this, I'm taking this as unintentional proof that the ban on factions has merit.
>And if the Muslims want to express their material interests for building some mosques through a faction I wouldn't fucking care
No you can't build a place of spiritual worship that is limited to a single faith, the state has to be secular and build multi-faith facilities, that can be used by every faith.
>The ban on faction dogmatism is one of the biggest reasons why communism fell and keeps falling everywhere. You're on the wrong side of history.
Most of the communist parties in history that won upheld the ban on factions.
I'm saying it again, this time more clearly, the ban on factions is a patch for errors in electoral democracy. We are not stuck doing electoral democracy, we can also do democracy by random lot, that has no need for banning factions. If you really are so upset about this, lets settle on random draw democracy instead of electoralism

 No.677908

>>677744
>if you don't just let people openly express their disagreement together with others

You are espouting trot nonsense of factionalism not being serious but rather being a petty disagreement over trivial matters. Truth is, factionalism is a split over CORE issues, it's a tactic used by trots (and your point of view being a cover for it making it seem like trots are the victims here) to stop the movement in it's tracks, to squabble over irrelevant shit instead of actually doing what's important. Factionalism benefits the enemies of communism, and trots are the inside agents of anticommunists, that's why they insist on this bullshit take.

Next. Trotsky ever managed to get meagre what, 4% of the total votes? There was a vote in the Party regarding factionalism, and Party overwhelmingly voted against factionalism. Fuck trots for denying democracy.

 No.677909

>>677828
>Your kind is the reason why the left is in fucking shambles with 100 different micro parties.

No, the Left in the WEST is in shambles because they aren't Leninist enough. CPC is fucking monolithic and is Leninist. Take note of CPC's successes due to banning factions.

 No.677988

>>675676
Trotskyists do this with fucking everyone. Khrushchev? Stalinist. Brezhnev? Stalinist. Janos Kadar? Stalinist. Xi Jinping? Stalinist.

 No.677995

>>677481
Perhaps they thought he was harmless given his age?

I've always liked Voroshilov and wanted to know more about him. Do you have any recommendations?

 No.678012

>>677995
Read Balaev, if you can. He posted entire chapters in his blog, although blog service's design is dogshit if you want to read it like this. First entry of the book, although I didn't check thoroughly https://p-balaev.livejournal.com/220119.html

 No.678048

>>677909
>China simp
>still calls them CPC

 No.678062

File: 1641491201153.jpg (96.72 KB, 1024x766, klim.jpg)



Unique IPs: 88

[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 / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]