Notices
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: How to understand this?

  1. #1 How to understand this? 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Fort Lee, NJ, USA
    Posts
    153
    The 70th anniversary of the German attack on the Soviet Union was on June 21. On that occasion I visited many Russian websites. What a surprise to find that both communists and anticommunists glorify Stalin in today's Russia.

    Communists remember him as a great Marxist ideologist, as Lenin's partner, as a leader responsible for collectivization of agriculture, for rapid industrialization, and for merciless destruction of traitors, especially within the communist party and the military, in the late 1930's. Briefly, they glorify him as the leader of the Soviet proletarian dictatorship, and as a military genius responsible for the Soviet victory over fascism.

    The anticommunists also claim that Stalin was responsible for the Soviet victory over fascism. But they totally ignore his communist ideology, and the brutality he used to impose obedience. Logically, the attitude toward Stalinism should divide communists and anticommunists. But in reality it seems to unite them. How can this be explained?

    And this is not the only puzzle. As some of you probably remember, I wrote a memoir about life in the Soviet Union during the first year of the war. It can be seen at

    http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kow...dedenievo.html

    Thinking about the approaching 70th anniversary of the Great Patriotic War--that is how Russians refer to their experience during WWII--I sent the above link to perhaps as many as 20 editors of Russian newspapers, giving them permission to translate and publish my memoir. Not a single one responded. How can this be explained?
    .


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    They find common ground where Stalin did good. I'm not sure what the confusion is. Americans do the same over many historical figures.


    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Bachelors Degree 15uliane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    depends...
    Posts
    425
    its not just republicans who respect jefferson, even though he was conservative.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Ludwik,
    I enjoyed reading your memoir. Thanks for posting that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Fort Lee, NJ, USA
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Ludwik,
    I enjoyed reading your memoir. Thanks for posting that.
    I am glad you liked it. Have a good day.
    .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    963
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox
    They find common ground where Stalin did good. I'm not sure what the confusion is. Americans do the same over many historical figures.
    Given that the vast majority of sources of information on the history/politics of the Soviet Union state that J.V. Stalin was responsible, directly and indirectly, for the deaths of vast numbers of people, within the USSR, it does seem quite surprising, even confusing, he has any admirers in Russia.
    These people were not killed in an international war or even a civil war, but one could argue that Stalin, and his policemen, had conducted a type of "war" against millions of unarmed, and largely defenceless, civilians.
    On the opening post I do not agree that many communists regarded Stalin as a great Marxist ideologist. Even hardline Stalinists did not necessarily see Stalin as an intellectual altho' it may not have been wise to admit that when he was alive.
    In his book "The Great Terror" Robert Conquest mentions one Soviet communist source as stating it was well known, in Party circles, that Stalin was "eaten up with the vain desire to be a theoretician".
    Another account (from the same book I think) mentions an Old Bolshevik scholar (Ryazanov?) telling Stalin, during a meeting, to stop talking because "theory is not exactly your field".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    419
    Lenin certainly didn't consider Stalin his partner, as a matter of fact, he did not want Stalin to succed him. Stalin gained leadership through treachery and quickly eliminated all his competition. A lot of Russians still think of him as a great leader because Stalin rewrote hystory to make himself look good and hide his treachery. Have a look at all the photographs that were doctored to remove important people of the Communist movement, leaving only himself to take the glory.

    As for the defeat of Hitler and his brand of fashism, it was the russian people who made the ultimate sacrifice and perished by the millions. Ironically Stalin starved almost as many ( mostly Ukranians ) by selling the wheat needed to feed them. He did this to finance his 5 year plans to industrialise the USSR to american levels.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •