ITT: We discuss how things might have been if lennin hadn't died and stalin had never gotten into power.
>>372008
Things would've been exactly the same.
The bolsheviks were a bunch of ruthless thugs. Lenin was a murderous psychopath.
>>372008
Very much the same except without the social conservatism of Stalin. So it would be homosexual Communism.
Nazis would have stormed forward without too much opposition. Stalin's brutality was really the only thing keeping the Soviet union from shattering when Hitler and friends came knocking.
Without a strongman to apply a centralized industrial government that could act as a buffer against Nazi Germany, the U.S. would not have given the Soviets nearly as much (or any) funding. The Soviet Union would collapse a few years after it's creation. Without a Russian trading partner Mao's regime would have never reached the heights it did. Mao would probably have been assassinated.
Less people would die overall, but most would die to senseless mob violence and starvation caused by incompetence and ideology rather than planned mass murdering citizenry.
It would be a bigger shithole for sure. While both were cunts, Stalin was at least a competent cunt.
>>372008
WWII would be too far ahead to tell, but the economic and industrial measures would be much better since Lenin proposed for a more realistic transition to collectivism through capitalism. Stalin did make the Soviet industry humongous but the industrialization was very botched, and his handling of the economy in general cost lots of lives.
>>372008
Lenin would never sign a pact with Nazis.
>>372012
ebin
>>372206
Why not? He was an opportunistic, unscrupulous whore.
>>372008
Exactly the same: scissors, ural-siberian, over devotion to heavy industry, necessity of brutal internal purges to hold the line, imperialist war.
>>372217
He was also Jewish.
>>372206
he was perfectly happy to take the train the Kaiser gave him all the way to Moscow in the first place
>>372775
This is also the answer as to what would have happened with revolutionary left-srs or anarchists in charge.
> Lenin hadn't died
> Stalin never getting into power
It would depend how longer Lenin had lived and who besides Stalin had succeeded him. It's silly to think he'd make it to the war.
If it had been someone on the left of the party (Primary candidates would be Trotsky and Zinoviev) then industrialisation and agriculture-wise it would've probably been similar to Stalin's industrialisation process and the collectivisation of agriculture would've still happened; it would've been the foreign policy of the USSR that would've dramatically changed; and it's hard to imagine that Trotsky or Zinoviev would've been as paranoid as Stalin during the purges either (Retarded decisions like purging early proponent of Tank warfare Tukachevsky as a prime example), so potentially the Red Army could've been more prepared for war; but couple that with an overtly expansionist foreign policy that you would get with Trotsky and I can see that pushing the western Allies into an anti-communist pact with Germany and Italy (Allies would've always chosen Fascism over Communism if they had to choose one to work with).
If it'd been someone from the right of the party (Rykov or Bukharin would be the main candidates) then you would've likely gotten what Stalin originally said he was going to do and the economy would've been based on Lenin's NEP (Stalin originally allied himself with the right on this issue to purge his opponents on the left; later going on to go with the mass collectivisation of the left); which would've definitely resulted in less bloodshed; and it's hard to say whether or not the Holodomor (Whether you think it was intentional or incompetency) would've still happened; though with the lack of peasants slaughtering their cattle in protest at the state collectivisation it's hard to see this happening; and the foreign policy would've been closer to what it was like under Stalin, though whether they would've still signed a non-aggression pact with the Nazis would be up in the air.
