Stalin did nothing wrong.
Except for all those missing political dissenters and Ukrainians
Stalin did everything wrong.
>>1245182
>Ukrainians
Nothing wrong.
He crippled Russia's military and weakened her national defense to the point where his country was nearly exterminated by the Germans.
His economic performance was typical for an agrarian economy with a government committed to industrialization, and significantly inferior to Keynesian growth schemes like those tried by Germany and Japan.
He killed a shitload of people for power.
Why can't gommies at least idolize Lenin instead of this pockmarked manlet?
>>1246401
Because it's funny.
>>1246401
Admiration for Stalin is really weird, like really fucking weird.
In one camp, you have socialists/communists who realizes Stalin did some pretty heinous things and did nothing to truly further the cause of socialism, but will correct blatant propaganda or lies about his deeds and decisions and joke and pretend to be Stalin fans ironically.
Then you have the ultra nationalistic faction, who are either incredibly old Russian's who survived WWII or a little before or after that, who saw Russia as better off under the USSR's/Stalin's rule, or uber tankies who can't admit Stalin made mistakes, and both genuinely love with him.
And then you have this really weird branch of fascists/authoritarians who, despite their political leanings, look up too and admire Stalin.
In short, Stalin's fame (or infamy) is pretty strange.
>>1246621
I detest his actions as a leader and am personally very anti-communist, but still admire his drive as a person. You have to have respect for people who fought their way to the top regardless of ideology.
Guys had his own personal library and read over 500 pages a day
What would've happened if Lenin chose Trotsky over Stalin?
>>1247459
He did, Stalin changed it
>>1247493
I thought that he innitially chose Stalin and then when he realized that he fucked up he tried to take his word back, but it was too late and Stalin just took over.
>>1247064
>i don't like rapists, but i sure do admire their courage, strength, and determination
no
>>1247459
>>1247493
Comrade Stalin, having become Secretary-General, has unlimited authority concentrated in his hands, and I am not sure whether he will always be capable of using that authority with sufficient caution. Comrade Trotsky, on the other hand, as his struggle against the C.C. on the question of the People's Commissariat of Communications has already proved, is distinguished not only by outstanding ability. He is personally perhaps the most capable man in the present C.C., but he has displayed excessive self-assurance and shown excessive preoccupation with the purely administrative side of the work.
These two qualities of the two outstanding leaders of the present C.C. can inadvertently lead to a split, and if our Party does not take steps to avert this, the split may come unexpectedly.
Stalin is too coarse and this defect, although quite tolerable in our midst and in dealing among us Communists, becomes intolerable in a Secretary-General. That is why I suggest that the comrades think about a way of removing Stalin from that post and appointing another man in his stead who in all other respects differs from Comrade Stalin in having only one advantage, namely, that of being more tolerant, more loyal, more polite and more considerate to the comrades, less capricious, etc. This circumstance may appear to be a negligible detail. But I think that from the standpoint of safeguards against a split and from the standpoint of what I wrote above about the relationship between Stalin and Trotsky it is not a [minor] detail, but it is a detail which can assume decisive importance.
>>1247557
[Bukharin and Pyatakov] are, in my opinion, the most outstanding figures (among the younger ones), and the following must be borne in mind about them: Bukharin is not only a most valuable and major theorist of the Party; he is also rightly considered the favorite of the whole Party, but his theoretical views can be classified as fully Marxist only with the great reserve, for there is something scholastic about him (he has never made a study of dialectics, and, I think, never fully appreciated it).
As for Pyatakov, he is unquestionably a man of outstanding will and outstanding ability, but shows far too much zeal for administrating and the administrative side of the work to be relied upon in a serious political matter.
Both of these remarks, of course, are made only for the present, on the assumption that both these outstanding and devoted Party workers fail to find an occasion to enhance their knowledge and amend their one-sidedness.
>>1247459
Trotsky wanted a world revolution, he would crash Europe with no survivors.
>>1246621
>In one camp, you have socialists/communists who realizes Stalin did some pretty heinous things and did nothing to truly further the cause of socialism, but will correct blatant propaganda or lies about his deeds and decisions and joke and pretend to be Stalin fans ironically.
There is also the camp of socialists/communists who realize Stalin (and more generally administrators during his tenure) made mistakes, but will correct blatant propaganda or lies about his deeds and decisions, and joke (desu the meme is HOT) but unironically think he did further the cause of socialism.
