What did he want?
>>311255
To not to disappoint his mother.
>>311255
He and his factions wanted for proletarian class consciousness.
>>311308
Difficult for them to develop class consciousness when they're dead though.
>>311347
Difficult when they're intelligentsia and nomenklatura substitutionalists divorced entirely from proletarian struggle except when they brutalise the class in their own class interest.
>>311255
Save the world from the cancer what is usa today
>>311362
Indeed comrade! Those kulaks right? Arntcha just sick of 'em?
>>311407
Stalin had no animosity towards the US. He was in fact very good mutual friends with Roosevelt, the two had much appreciation for each other and their struggles for the common worker. He did however want to save the world from capitalism and imperialism, constituting the US (post-FDR), the UK, France, etc. after the war.
If you can imagine a world where FDR was cured of polio and didn't die we honestly might be living in the closest thing to a global utopia right now, or at least a world that wasn't constantly in a state of warfare, violence, and ideological insanity.
>>311667
>If you can imagine a world where FDR was cured of polio and didn't die we honestly might be living in the closest thing to a global utopia right now, or at least a world that wasn't constantly in a state of warfare, violence, and ideological insanity.
You mean because Roosevelt would be basically OK with USSR expansion in Eastern and Central Europe and communism takeover of East Asia? That's not utopia and harmony, that's capitulation. And also I don't think Roosevelt would have been a-ok with it.
>>311679
I mean because Roosevelt and Stalin were both proponents of democratic development as well as cordial, cooperative diplomacy. No shitposting, just put aside the prejudices regarding Stalin: We're talking about Mr. Socialism in One Country. We're talking about the man that literally, in written agreement, handed over Greece and other states in the middle of guaranteed socialist revolutions to Churchill, the man that actually said he needed to strangle Russian communism in its cradle, purely for the sake of diplomacy. Neither Stalin nor the USSR nor the world wide communist movement had anything to gain from Britain violently quelling this movements and installing repressive monarchy/dictatorships except the promise of diplomatic relations and peace. This, of course, didn't happen, exactly because FDR died and Truman was the anti-FDR. Roosevelt may not have been "okay" with communism as such, but he had no interest in war and no interest in repressing other nations to the will of others- hence his efforts to disrupt British empire and bolster Soviet resistance in the war.
Socialism in one country. But then World War 2 happened and he felt obligated to spread communism as the opperunity arose.
>>311698
I still don't see how FDR would have been more 'friendly' to communism than Truman. Cold War doctrine was Cold War doctrine, it wasn't invented neither by Roosevelt nor by Truman. FDR might have been slightly more to the left than Truman on economic matters but I don't see how it should translate to some kind of appeasement in Asia (JFK for example was pretty much a leftist on the economy but also in favor of huge defense build-up).
You're also assuming Stalin was a stable and rational leader, which definitely wasn't the case, particularly in his final years.
>>311255
Worse than Hitler.
>>311761
>Cold War doctrine was Cold War doctrine, it wasn't invented neither by Roosevelt
Well, yeah, because Roosevelt died before the Cold War. The Cold War was a diplomatic stand-off between the Socialist and Capitalist powers after the Second World War.
>I still don't see how FDR would have been more 'friendly' to communism than Truman.
Because FDR was a good capitalist and humanitarian, where Truman was an imperialist and militarist. FDR and Stalin both wanted economic relations that would have benefited both the USSR and the USA. Again, there is no animosity prior to the end of the Pacific War, there is no saber rattling between the two prior to FDR's death.
>You're also assuming Stalin was a stable and rational leader
I realize I'm going to be accused of being a "Stalinist" but this is really poor thinking and a shitty meme.
>>311255
To protect the world from capitalism, expand the Soviet Union, and secure his legacy as a man greater than the Tsars.
>>312064
Mission accomplished :) Until the revisionist take over of course :(
>>311667
Hold up there mate. The russians thought the United States was long lost to imperialism.
The two countries where shooti mg down and executing eachothers slies before ww2 was ever over and the u.s. fought the red army in ww1.
>>312081
It's not his intentions, not really even his accomplishments, it was his methods that turn people against him.
>>312101
>U.S. fought the Red Army in WWI
Wat? Was there some bizarre post Revolution accidental battle I am unaware of? Link?
First he wanted communism and then he want crazy so who knows.
>>311255
I just think he got off at being feared.
>>312052
The Cold War started in Yalta m8
>>311698
>Stalin
>proponent of democratic development as well as cordial, cooperative diplomacy
Are you insane or have you simply never looked at history?
>>311698
I have a hard time getting my head around how wrong this guy is
>>312126
Cant link from phone, but yeah the u.s. fought the bolsheviks after ww1. They wanted the white army to win.
>I must unite Soviet people under one flag
>>311255
Very simple, to protect and preserve the Soviet Union at all costs. To this end he was prepared to use forced deportations, puppet states, and death squads.
Did nothing wrong btw.
>>312101
Right, but I'm not saying that the USSR was on good terms prior to the formation of the Allies, only that this partnership developed a new relationship between Stalin and FDR that was friendly and sympathetic. Anyway, we're talking about socialist revolutionaries - they didn't conflate a country's working class with its government.
>>312198
>>312716
Shoo, adults are talking.
to unite the world until the true hero mosley emerged
>>313135
Besides killing more of your people than WWII. What makes it worse is that is that he's Georgian.
>>314179
>people unironically believe this
>>311255
Senpai will never notice me
Power and control, Power and control, Power and control. More or less, he died with that goal accomplished.
>>311255
to blaze it 420 xD
>believing this power meme.
>Thousands of decisions were taken at Politburo level that directly affected the real lives of real people no less than questions of global strategy, and Stalin did not take them all. Aside from the laconic Politburo protocols and the spotty memoir evidence, we now have a unique set of sources for the 1930s shedding light on decisionmaking in the inner circle: the correspondence between Stalin and L.M. Kaganovich while the former was on his lengthy annual holidays in the south. During Stalin’s absences, Kaganovich as tacit Second Secretary of the Central Committee, supervised decision-making in Moscow while in communication with Stalin...
>On the face of it, it seems quite remarkable that a micromanaging dictator would absent himself for three months per year to a faraway place with no telephone during what had become the most crucial season of all for the Soviet economy: harvest time. One cannot imagine a British prime minister or American president so absenting her/himself, with or without a telephone...
>Looking closely at one of these periods can be quite revealing.1934 was the last period of Stalin’s absence without a telephone. It was also the busiest year of the 1930s for Politburo resolutions: there were 3,945 decisions listed on Politburo protocols for that year and the Politburo met forty-six times. During Stalin’s holiday (August through October, 1934), more than a quarter of Politburo decisions (1,038 of the year’s 3,945) were registered and sixteen of the Politburo’s forty-six meetings took place without Stalin’s presence...
>>314782
>Politburo members took a large number of decisions without Stalin’s participation. Stalin intervened in only 119 (11 per cent) of the 1,038 recorded Politburo decisions taken during his vacation in 1934. The great majority of his interventions (91 of 119, or 76 per cent) were responses to initiatives from Kaganovich. The remainder consists of points first raised by Stalin. These numbers show that of all Politburo decisions taken in these three months, Stalin either did not respond to, or routinely confirmed, his lieutenants’ decisions 96 per cent of the time. Of his replies to Kaganovich’s requests for guidance, he confirmed his lieutenants’ proposal or decision without modification 84 per cent of the time...
>Stalin left many matters to Kaganovich and the other Politburo members for decision, and many of them were not trivial...
>On some very important questions, Stalin contented himself with providing general guidance or exhortation and then turning the matter over to Kaganovich and the team...
>he often seems to have delegated more in the 1930s than previously. In September 1933, he wrote from his holiday location to Kaganovich and the Politburo in Moscow: ‘I cannot and should not have to decide any and all questions that animate the Politburo ... you yourselves can consider things and work them out.’
from J. Arch Getty's article "Stalin as Prime Minister" in Davies and Harris, "Stalin: A New History," pp. 94-97:
>>314782
>>314788
Stalin, the gentle helmsman
An ice pick lovingly inserted into the butthole.
>>311255
>What did he want?
He never knew, as always happens with pleb-borns who fly too high.
To advance Marxism-Leninism.
The revisionists and victims of imperialist propaganda love to slander this great man.
Read his own works to see how amazing this mind was.
