Was Stalin really that evil?

[Propaganda]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
Propoganda: Read the Gulag Archipelago by Solzhenitsyn, good book describing Soviet atrocities

That's rich. Lucky for you, DinoDoc, too, because I won't even bother.

[Propaganda]

Originally posted by notyoueither
The bottom line, Prop, is that the guy was so twisted and destructive that the Soviets themselves found it necessary to denounce him. That's one bad mofo.

You are so naive. Khruschev denounced Stalin because he wanted to ascend the throne of the Communist Party. What better way to do so than throw off the yoke of the country's greatest leader and pull a wool over everyone's eyes.

BTW, it's funny, but Khruschev barely says anything negative about Stalin in his memoirs. Considering how he berrated him in 1956, I was surprised he didn't dedicate the entire book to Stalin so he can piss all over him again.

[notyoueither]

Either that, or the guy was responsible for the murder of countless millions of his own subjects/citizens and no reasonable person at the time could stand by and deny it.

Or, you could be correct. Maybe gaining points meant dissing the object of the cult of Communism in the USSR at that time. It seems a strange way to win leadership though, if what was said was untrue.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Propaganda
That's rich. Lucky for you, DinoDoc, too, because I won't even bother.

You have no original thoughts of your own if the long stream of crap you posted is any indication so I don't see why anyone would be worried about anything other than you burying an interesting thread under your own crap.

[Propaganda]

Here's more information about your "sources" that provide information for so-called "Ukranian Holocaust."

The title of the crucial part --- Chapter 12 --- of Harvest of Sorrow is `The Famine Rages'. It contains an impressive list of 237 references. A more careful look shows that more than half of the these references come from extreme-right-wing Ukrainian émigrés. The Ukrainian fascist book Black Deeds of the Kremlin is cited 55 times! No wonder that Conquest uses the version of history provided by Ukrainian Nazi collaborators and the U.S. secret services.

In the same chapter, Conquest cites 18 times the book The Ninth Circle by Olexa Woropay, published in 1953 by the youth movement of Stepan Bandera's fascist organization. The author presents a detailed biography for the thirties, but does not mention what he did during the Nazi occupation! A barely concealed admission of his Nazi past. He took up his biography again in 1948, in Muenster, where many Ukrainian fascists took refuge. It is there that he interviewed Ukrainians about the famine-genocide of 1932--1933. None of the `witnesses' is identified, which makes the book worthless from a scientific point of view. Given that he said nothing about what he did during the war, it is probable that those who `revealed the truth about Stalin' were Ukrainian Nazi collaborators who had fled.

.

Ibid. , pp. 58--59.


Beal, who wrote for Hearst's pro-Nazi 1930's press, and later collaborated with the Cold War McCarthyite House Committee on Un-American Activities, was cited five times.

Kravchenko, the anti-Communist émigré, is a source ten times; Lev Kopelev, another Russian émigré, five times.

Among the included `scientific' references is Vasily Grossman's novel, referenced by Conquest fifteen times!

Then, Conquest cites interviews from Harvard's Refugee Interview Project, which was financed by the CIA. He cites the McCarthy-era Congressional Commission on Communist Aggression as well as Ewald Ammende's 1935 Nazi book. Conquest also refers five times to Eugene Lyons and to William Chamberlin, two men who, following World War II, were on the Board of Trustees of Radio Liberty, the CIA Central European radio network.

On page 244, Conquest wrote: `One American, in a village twenty miles south of Kiev, found ... they were cooking a mess that defied analysis'. The reference given is the New York Evening Journal, February 28, 1933. In fact, it is a Thomas Walker article in Hearst's press, published in 1935! Conquest deliberately ante-dated the newspaper to make it correspond to the 1933 famine. Conquest did not name the American: he was afraid that some might recall that Thomas Walker was a fake who never set foot in Ukraine. Conquest is a forgerer.

To justify the use of émigré books recording rumors, Conquest claimed `truth can thus only percolate in the form of hearsay' and that `basically the best, though not infallible, source is rumor'.

.

J. Arch Getty, Origins of the Great Purges: The Soviet Communist Party Reconsidered, 1933--1938 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985), p. 5.

[notyoueither]

They are not good Communists, so of course they are not credible.

No one should ever listen to the victims because they do not agree with the official position. Is that it?

You call me naive. Pfft.

[Propaganda]

Originally posted by notyoueither
They are not good Communists, so of course they are not credible.

No one should ever listen to the victims because they do not agree with the official position. Is that it?

You call me naive. Pfft.

This might interest you then. This comes from Conquest himself.

"In a little-noticed statement made by Conquest himself in the Preface to what has been considered his "seminal masterpiece" of Kremlinology for the era, The Great Terror: A Reassessment, he said, in 1990, "The Great Terror [his book] still had to rely to a large extent on émigré, defector, and other unofficial [my emphasis] material." Conquest saw his role writing on this subject as one of "balancing and assessing incomplete, partial, and uneven material" (op. cit., p. viii). His method needs to be more ingenuously described as a "finessing" or "smoothing out" of the "facts," many of which he here admits to be doubtful to begin with, coming from hostile sources! The "tool" he used to abrasively sandpaper these "facts" is the totalitarian paradigm of Stalinist society (to be defined below, in this section). Conquest noted, in the same Preface, that he was not working, "as with the writing of modern Western history," by the "deployment...of adequate and credible official archives" (ibid.). The default method he used instead is usually only applied in historical work on ancient history, where the loss of artifacts, documentation, and archival material is accepted as "par for the course." It is not acceptable for the writing of modern history. Now that many heretofore-closed USSR archives have been opened, this approach to the subject must be completely superseded. In the same Preface, Conquest acknowledged a pre-glasnost’ "Khrushchevite contribution" to his "facts." However, as will be detailed in what follows, it has justifiably been said that Khrushchev (like Trotsky) seduced the West into belief. Khrushchev, either out of a shrewd knack for testing Western gullibility or out of sheer idiocy, once claimed for a short time that he "shot Beria" himself."

Source: Stalin and Yezhov: An Extra-Paradigmatic View - by Philip E. Panaggio

[notyoueither]

You seem fairly fixated on a few authors you are aware of. You know, there are others.

Try this guy:

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE4.HTM

He has a good summary table.

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/USSR.TAB1.1.GIF

61 million. Wow. Quite an accomplishment. Well, 21 million were in wars, so the Soviet system couldn't have been that bad, eh? Only 40 million citizens. May I ask, did one call them comrade before killing them?

[Propaganda]

Originally posted by notyoueither
You seem fairly fixated on a few authors you are aware of. You know, there are others.

Try this guy:

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE4.HTM

He has a good summary table.

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/USSR.TAB1.1.GIF

61 million. Wow. Quite an accomplishment. Well, 21 million were in wars, so the Soviet system couldn't have been that bad, eh? Only 40 million citizens. May I ask, did one call them comrade before killing them?

You know, I went down to the page and read his "sources," and what struck me funny was that I HAVE ALREADY DISPROVED THESE PEOPLE IN MY POSTS. Please read what I have posted. I don't want to waste my time.

[notyoueither]

Read miles of regurgitated crap? No thank you. If you can construct a brief, to the point argument, I'll read it.

Also, it seems that most of your disproof revolves around calling people fascists and Nazis. You'll have to do better.

[Serb]

Before making such conclusions you should better read what he posted.


Prop,
umyl ty byrzhuev po polnoy programme. Kruyt im ne chem.

I vobshe menya ubivaet ih predvzyatost. Dostatochno kakim nibud otmorozkam pizdanut "genozid
!!! Ubivayut!!!" I oni uzhe gorlanyat vo vse gorlo pro nashi zverstva. I im gluboko poebat chto eti otmorzki sami konchenie mudaki. Vobshem zhutko doverchiviy i naivnyi narod eti burzhui, odno slovo- vragi.

[Propaganda]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Read miles of regurgitated crap? No thank you. If you can construct a brief, to the point argument, I'll read it.

Also, it seems that most of your disproof revolves around calling people fascists and Nazis. You'll have to do better.

Conquest, Solzhenitsyn, Medvedev and others used statistics published by the Soviet Union, for instance, national population censuses, to which they added a supposed population increase without taking account of the situation in the country. In this way they reached their conclusions as to how many people there ought to have been in the country at the end of given years. The people who were missing were claimed to have died or been incarcerated because of socialism. The method is simple but also completely fraudulent. This type of ‘revelation’ of such important political events would never have been accepted if the ‘revelation’ in question concerned the western world. In such a case it is certain that professors and historians would have protested against such fabrications. But since it was the Soviet Union that was the object of the fabrications, they were acceptable. One of the reasons is certainly that professors and historians place their professional advancement well ahead of their professional integrity.

Source: Lies concerning the history of the Soviet Union, by Mario Sousa

Robert Conquest: Conquest’s past was exposed by the Guardian of 27 January 1978 in an article which identified him as a former agent in the disinformation department of the British Secret Service, i.e., the Information Research Department (IRD). The IRD was a section set up in 1947 (originally called the Communist Information Bureau) whose main task it was to combat communist influence throughout the world by planting stories among politicians, journalists and others in a position to influence public opinion. The activities of the IRD were very wide-ranging, as much in Britain as abroad. When the IRD had to be formally disbanded in 1977, as a result of the exposure of its involvement with the far right, it was discovered that in Britain alone more than 100 of the best-known journalists had an IRD contact who regularly supplied them with material for articles. This was routine in several major British newspapers, such as the Financial Times, The Times, Economist, Daily Mail, Daily Mirror, The Express, The Guardian and others. The facts exposed by the Guardian therefore give us an indication as to how the secret services were able to manipulate the news reaching the public at large.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn: Solzhenitsyn became famous throughout the western world towards the end of 1960 with his book, The Gulag Archipelago. He himself had been sentenced in 1946 to 8 years in a labour camp for counter-revolutionary activity in the form of distribution of anti-Soviet propaganda. When in the U.S., he supported a second war against Vietnam. He supported Franco's fascist government, and actually advocated it even after Franco's death, claiming "democracy to be too radical a step in Spain."

What else is there to say?

[Propaganda]

Originally posted by Serb
Before making such conclusions you should better read what he posted.


Prop,
umyl ty byrzhuev po polnoy programme. Kruyt im ne chem.

I vobshe menya ubivaet ih predvzyatost. Dostatochno kakim nibud otmorozkam pizdanut "genozid
!!! Ubivayut!!!" I oni uzhe gorlanyat vo vse gorlo pro nashi zverstva. I im gluboko poebat chto eti otmorzki sami konchenie mudaki. Vobshem zhutko doverchiviy i naivnyi narod eti burzhui, odno slovo- vragi.

vse pravilno. oni vse vragi noroda, eti europitzi i amerikansi. ih propagandisti gosudarvstva zabili v'rot etu vsyu chush, i oni syeli neznaya shto oni yedat, i yesho neznayut shto ih zorozili boleznyu. ya igrayu rol' teper kak antibiotic. YA ETO VSYO SKORO OSTONAVLYU!

PS: ti imiyesh MSN Messenger ili net?

[Serb]

Originally posted by Propaganda
YA ETO VSYO SKORO OSTONAVLYU!

Somnevayus. Bespoleznoe eto delo. Ya tozhe ranshe pitalsya. S takim zhe uspehom mozho golovoy steny taranit.

PS: ti imiyesh MSN Messenger ili net?

Net. Da i nakoi on mne, kogda mozhno i tut po spamit

[The Mad Monk]

spamit