What you are supposed to think about Stalin, and why - a message to the youth

Etagloc

Superstar
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Messages
5,310

When I discuss subjects like this, people repeat the same old cliches as though I haven't heard the same cliches and conditioned reactions that everyone else has.

Someone here mentioned WW2.

Russia was the real hero of WW2. No one sacrificed more to defeat fascism than Russia. Officially the US was against the fascists.... and I respect the US WW2 veterans.... the utmost respect for them. But the US was working with the fascists. Were it not for Operation Paperclip in which the US brought in Nazi scientists.... MK-ULTRA would probably not even be what it is, we probably would have never heard of MK-ULTRA and this website probably would not exist. These are just facts. Some people believe that certain facts are "anti-US". I do not believe that and I believe what Aristotle said- "For though we love both the truth and our friends, piety requires us to honor the truth first.". As Aristotle has made clear, piety requires us to honor truth above what others would want to hear. They want the hegemony of their narrative. The only narrative I care about is the truth.

In any case, the Soviet Union's heroism in WW2 is undeniable. The US did some good.... while quietly collaborating with the Nazis at the same time. I don't care about people's feelings, I care about the truth and this is not a work place so I'mma say what I want lol.

The real heroes of WW2 were the Soviet heroes. As well as the US WW2 veterans- unlike their traitor, slimy Nazi-collaborating brethren such as the Operation Paperclip folks.

So in any case, Stalin and the Soviet Union deserve praise in leading the fight against the Nazis. Period.

And personally... I do not believe what is said about Stalin that I think is meant to make him look evil. When I discuss this, people act as though I've never heard the same cliches everyone else has. Of course I've heard the old cliches just like everyone else. I might hear them some more on this thread. The problem with old cliches is they're boring. And people who uncritically accept cliches as truth... may I not be of those people. You've more than likely heard the cliches. But the voice of the other side is silenced. We almost never get to hear the other side.

So if I see Stalin differently, it is not because I haven't heard the same cliches as everyone else and heard that line of reasoning.... it's that I've heard both sides.

You almost never hear the other side. Having done a little research.... I don't believe in the one-dimensional depiction of Stalin as a monster. I think Stalin was a hero. For a political agenda of attempting to destroy any alternative to capitalism, of course the world's reactionary forces would demonize Stalin and continue to do so as part of their political agenda. I guess people can say I have an agenda as well. Yes- my agenda is to show that a better world is possible.

In any case, I really appreciate this young man from the ever-classy UK for presenting a fresh, alternative perspective on Stalin and I urge people to watch the video and hear what he has to say- as well as to study Stalin's writings and his own words. His interview with HG Wells really is excellent stuff and shows he was a great and humane thinker.
 






mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,137
The real heroes of WW2 were the Soviet heroes. As well as the US WW2 veterans- unlike their traitor, slimy Nazi-collaborating brethren such as the Operation Paperclip folks.
Why can't the US be at fault along with people like Stalin? Stalin was a murderer, the US were working with Nazis... they're all bad.
 






TMT

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
1,203
The Russians did do the most to defeat Germany that is truth, it's also truth that Stalin was a disaster for world workers, he stained it with so much blood.
 






Helioform

Star
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
2,596
It's true that Hitler and the Nazis got their *ss handed over to them by the Russians. Hitler was just an idiot trying to conquer Russia as well as many countries at the same time. But Stalin was no "hero" there, it was mostly the russian soldiers who did the fighting.
 






Thunderian

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,484
I'm not even bothered really that people disagree. What annoys me is I don't think people even consider the alternative perspective and simply uncritically repeat what has been claimed without even examining the other side.

People haven't even heard an alternative view. They just uncritically repeat what they were told. So people don't have to agree with me. But I want to at least present an alternative view so people can at least see there is an alterative to the dominant narrative. It just annoys me because people are dismissing the other side without even bothering to examine it.

Holodomor, myth and reality

“Holodomor” or the so called Ukrainean genocide was a famine in Ukraine from 1932 to 1933. The reason why its called a genocide and not a famine (which it was) is because the argument is made that it was intentional and man made.
The bourgeois have always tried to equate communism and nazi-ism, Stalin and Mao with Hitler. In reality they don’t really have much in common when it comes to actual policy, and on the contrary nazi-ism and communism are diametrically opposed in almost every respect.
However the bourgeois still try to do this. They try to argue that Stalin and therefore communism is as bad as Hitler and nazi-ism by claiming that Stalin was a genocidal monster.
The problem there is that they need a genocide, preferrably something of the same caliber as the holocaust.
Since such a genocide committed by the soviet union under the leadership of stalin doesn’t exist, they instead try to fabricate one from this famine.
Many people have rightly pointed out that the soviet union,as well as the Russian empire, like any other semi-feudal agrarian country had frequent famines. Basically every time there was bad harvest because of drought, flooding, too cold weather, too hot weather etc. there was a famine in some part of the Russian empire.
This is because agriculture at that point was technologically not developed and based on small scale production which barely made a surplus. (we’re talking The Russian empire and the Soviet Union before collectivization and industrialization of the 1930s). The roads were also extremely bad and communications technology was almost nonexistent so sending aid effectively in response to famines was difficult.
The point I’m trying to make here is that famine was common before the soviets took power and the country started to rapidly industrialize in the 30s. Before that there had been famines in some part of the Russian empire almost every couple of years. There was one in 1901, 1906, 1911 and so on.
Therefore the fact that there was a famine in ukraine is not so unusual.
Secondly I’d like to briefly give my thoughts on the number of victims. The number which are not entirely invented out of thing air are often based on unscientific speculations. The cold-war era western “researchers” took the population increase from the years ’32 to ’34 and compared it to other times. They then concluded that because it was less then normally, all those people must have died.
In reality there were simply a lot less births. Granted, there were also starvation deaths but it would be foolish to think that births wouldn’t go down during a famine. I’m sure there are other problems with their methodology but I’m not going to go into that.
We’ve concluded that a famine happening in Ukraine at that time was not unusual, it was common in the situation left behind by Tsarism. We’ve concluded that the number of victims is not accurate but incredibly inflated and unreliable.
The third thing to keep in mind is that there is no evidence, documentary or otherwise to suggest the famine was intentional or man-made, as the most far-right of the anti-communists claim.
There exists no order signed by Stalin to soviet officials ordering them to starve ukraine or anything like that. There are many pictures purporting to depict the famine still circulating these days. These were in fact published by the German and American pro-Nazi Press. These pictures however, are mainly used for shock value since the existence of starvation says nothing about its causes or its severity.
I am not exaggerating when I say these pictures were published by the Nazis or their supporters such as the American Hearst Press. On top of that most of them are not actually taken where they claim to be. Many of them are from World war one, the american civil war, the great depression, or the Russian civil war. Since those days this array of fraudulent “holodomor photos” has been supplemented with pictures from the siege of Leningrad.
With the exception of these pictures and other material published by the nazis and their american supporters, there is no evidence, not even bad evidence to suggest the famine was deliberate or man-made.
The Export Data
The real key to this is question is actually even more simple. The argument goes that the soviet union deliberately starved Ukraine by exporting food grain for money, while there was a famine. The answer lies in the export data. Let’s take a look.
In the year 1930 the soviet government exported 4,846,024 tonnes.
In 1931 the number increased to 5,182,835 tonnes.
In 1932 which is the year when the famine began they exported much less. Only 1,819,114 tonnes. And actually imported 750,000 tonnes during the first half of 1932 and from late April 157,000 tonnes.
The amount of export further decreased the next year and another 200,000 tonnes was also imported.
The soviet government exported only a fraction of what they normally would have and even imported over a million tonnes to be sent as food aid to Ukraine when they realized the extent of the famine. This totally debunks the genocide-theory.
“The official statistics, however, show that the procurements taken from the 1932 harvest were less than the procurements in any other year in the 1930s”
(Professor Mark B. Tauger, “What caused famine in ukraine?”)
Soviet Industrial Revolution & the Western Blockade
But why did the Soviets export grain at all? The USSR required capital for its industrial projects, machines to be bought from the West etc. They planned to acquire this capital from two sources:
1) Selling oil, gold, minerals and other products to the West.
2) Selling consumer goods on the Soviet Union’s internal market.
The initial plan was not to export so large an amount of food grain at all. Most of it was to be sold on the internal market anyway. However, Western powers introduced blockade on Soviet oil and Soviet gold currency.
“The government collected grain and sent it to the West, but not to starve part of a country’s population to death, but because there was no other way it could pay for the supply of equipment. All of Stalin’s hopes were on a new harvest. It turned out to be a small one, however, since the country was struck by a drought. The USSR was unable to buy food in exchange for gold (the gold blockade) or currency (as a result of the embargo there was none). Attempts were urgently made to get supplies of grain from Persia, where they had agreed to accept gold. The authorities did not have time, however, as a catastrophe was already underway. Famine Victims, Kuban, 1932 Famine Victims, Kuban, 1932 Between 1932 and 1933, thousands and thousands of people died and it was only after this that the West was once again renewed to accept oil, timber and precious metals from the Soviets.”
(Oriental review, “Who Organised the Famine in the USSR in 1932-1933?”)
The USSR as an agrarian country relied on selling raw materials. The biggest items of export before the Industrialization were cotton, coal, oil and agricultural produce. Paradoxically the only way out of this trap of agrarian backwardness was to industrialize. But where to get the funds for it? It would be completely unreasonable and in contradiction with material reality to except the Soviet Union to not export at all during the 1932 to 33 period. The thing that caused problems for them were the economic blockade and the poor harvests of the early 1930s, both circumstances out of their control.
As a last ditch effort one might argue; “why not halt all industrialization and give all possible food to the citizens?” The reason should be obvious, halting all industrialization, all projects currently on the way was impossible. Also the purchases of machines had to be paid for somehow even if the bigger project was postponed.
Secondly the Soviets did halt industrialization to the degree that they cut exports when it became clear there was a severe the famine. They only exported large amounts before the famine, when it was still possible to do so without danger. This is generally forgotten when right-wing anti-communists reverse the causality of this event by claiming it was the exports which caused the famine, despite the exports being reduced and the government importing food instead when the famine hit.
Thirdly, halting industrialization wouldn’t have been a good solution to Russia’s troubles. Famine was extremely common not because of industrialization, but because of the opposite, lack of industrialization. Stopping the project to modernize the country would only have prolonged the chronic food-insecurity of the country. The only good way to solve the “grain question” as the Soviets called it, was to modernize the country and thus increase crop yields with the use of machines, scientific methods and infrastructure.

The first cause of the famine: weather
Let us now discuss actual causes of this famine.
Like most famines particularly in less technologically developed countries, like the USSR certainly was at the time, the main cause is bad weather conditions, which lead to poor harvests.
“In 1927, a drought shortened the harvest in southern areas of the Ukrainian SSR and North Caucasus. In 1927–28 the winter tillage area was badly affected due to low snow levels. Despite seed aid from the State, many affected areas were not re-sown. The 1928 harvest was affected by drought in most of the grain producing areas of the Ukrainian SSR”
There was also another terrible drought that lasted through the entirety of 1932-1933 in Ukraine as well as crop diseases such as grain rust, but going into detail about this is beyond the scope of this article.
“The evidence that I have published and other evidence, including recent Ukrainian document collections, show that the famine developed out of a shortage and pervaded the Soviet Union, and that the regime organized a massive program of rationing and relief in towns and in villages, including in Ukraine, but simply did not have enough food. This is why the Soviet famine, an immense crisis and tragedy of the Soviet economy, was not in the same category as the Nazis’ mass murders, which had no agricultural or other economic basis.”(Tauger, Ibid.)
The second cause of the famine: kulak terrorism
It may seem like a stretch to some, that sabotage by a minority of the population could play a part in a famine. It needs to be stated that they only contributed to the already difficult situation, they did not cause the famine.
But how influential were the rural capitalists known as kulaks? They were about 10 or 11 percent of the population, and in fact Ukraine had a larger kulak population then most of the USSR.
Kulaks had aquired control of a large amount of the village plots during the NEP period of 1920 to 1927 and kulak speculation on the food market caused a shortage already in 1927 when the marketed share of grain was only one third of the pre-war years although production had exceeded pre-war figures.
In 1920 when the NEP was implimented and the Soviet Union moved from War-Communism, to a temporary stage where a free market existed, the much feared consequences of the market became evident. Despite the previous land reform nearly 3 million peasants, were quickly once again without land, because the kulaks had driven them bankrupt and then bought their land cheaply. This resulted in 10-11% of the population (kulaks) owning so much land and also horses and machinery compared to the rest of the peasant population that they produced 56 percent of the marketed food. The kulaks largely decided if the towns would eat or not.
Most peasant holdings were so small they produced no marketable grain. All their produce was consumed by the peasant families themselves. Kulak farms however, produced a lot of surplus. They were large plots, employing many farm workers and using horses and tractors.
In 1927 the government began the grain procurement policy as a response to kulaks refusing to sell their grain at the regulated price. This was class struggle, the kulaks knew they had an advantage because they effectively controlled food supply and expected the government to surrender to their demands and increase food prices, thus increasing kulak profits. Instead the government chose to forcibly take the grain.
In response the kulaks refused to farm more then a minimal amount. This way there’d be no grain to procure. This sparked resentment among the landless peasants and the collective farm (obschina) movement was re-kindled. The Bolsheviks had supported the peasantry’s demand for seizing unused landlord and kulak land since 1905 and now they issued a decree making it legal for the poor peasants to do the same, take kulak land and farm it. The kulak response was murderous, they killed many communist organizers and collective farmers. The government responded with deportations of kulaks.
Finally to prevent their property falling into the hands of the poor the kulaks began destroying it. It is a good concrete example of this terrorism and how it could impact the food growing to look at the amount of machinery, food and particularly livestock deliberately destroyed by the kulak saboteurs and the segment of the well-to-do middle peasants who were fooled into doing so by the kulaks. This was escalation of the on-going class struggle in the countryside between the rural poor and the rural rich. The hatred for the kulaks had accumulated over decades, but now the poor peasants were in a position to do something about it. Finally the government proclaimed its policy of “eliminating kulaks as a class”, that is, taking away their wealth & status, reducing them to common farmers. The kulaks launched their final desperate offensive:
The kulak capitalists owned most of the livestock and machinery, while most peasants only owned one horse or cow and 27 million peasants, more then a third of the entire population who owned not a single horse. The devastation was most extreme in the case of cattle and work horses which the kulaks owned the largest share of but also bulls, oxen, pigs, sheep and goats. Particularly the shortage of horses for plowing contributed to the famine.

Conclusions
The famine was not deliberate or man-made. It was caused by difficult weather conditions and the general backwardness left by tsarism in the country. As there exists no evidence of deliberate genocide, and the case relies entirely on the false assumption that the USSR kept exporting more and more food grain, completely disregarding the famine, I can confidently say that the holodomor has been debunked as a myth and a fabrication.
It is revealing to look at who the people spreading this myth are. In the 1930s they were the Nazi press & their American collaborators. In the modern era their work was carried out by cold-war anti-communists and far-right ukrainian emigres. The myth is still widely propagated those elements, together with Ukrainian neo-nazis. The holodomor myth is the work of Goebbels.

https://mltheory.wordpress.com/2014/06/07/facts-about-the-holodomor-and-why-its-fake/
You are a total ignoramus. My family members died because of Stalin's evil and you praise him. Delete your account.
 






Ella

Rookie
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
13
Stalin and his regime were a nightmare . Never say those things in an eastern European country for your own safety . We don't need to read about it or look alternative sources, we absolutely lived it hunger,cold,fear, the KGB, the ucrainian genocide is only a small part of all the atrocities they've done. This amazing leader was executing Russian families or sending them to work camps if the soldier related to them was captured, during the war. yes Russians fought on two fronts the war and the government ,they deserve all the praise but not Stalin! I've always been intrigued why the nazis had a Nuremberg trial and the ideology and its monsters were condemned while the comunism which made a lot more victims was never punished and was allowed to exist unrestrained till this day as political doctrine
 






Renegade

Veteran
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
718
“In his essay ‘How to Organize the Competition’ (January 7 and 10, 1918), V.I.Lenin proclaimed the common, united purpose of ‘purging the Russian land of all kinds of harmful insects.’ And under the term insects he included not only all class enemies but also ‘workers malingering at their work’ – for example, the typesetters of the Petrograd Party printing shops. (That is what time does. It is difficult for us nowadays to understand how workers who had just become dictators were immediately inclined to malinger at work they were doing for themselves.) And then again: ‘In what block of a big city, in what factory, in what village…are there not…saboteurs who call themselves intellectuals?’ True, the forms of insect-purging which Lenin conceived of in this essay were most varies: in some places they would be placed under arrest, in other places set to cleaning latrines; in some, ‘after having served their time in punishment cells, they would be handed yellow tickets’; in others, parasites would be shot; elsewhere you could take your pick of imprisonment ‘or punishment at forced labor of the hardest kind.’ Even though he perceived and suggested the basic directions punishment should take, Vladimir Ilyich proposed that ‘communes and communities’ should compete to find the best methods of purging.

“It is not possible for us at this time to fully investigate exactly who fell within the broad definition of insects; the population of Russia was too heterogeneous and encompassed small, special groups, entirely superfluous and, today, forgotten. The people in the local zemstvo self-governing bodies in the provinces were, of course, insects. People in the cooperative movement were also insects, as were all owners of their own homes. There were not a few insects among the teachers in the gymnasiums. The church parish councils were made up almost exclusively of insects, and it was insects, of course, who sang in church choirs. All priests were insects – and monks and nuns even more so. And all those Tolstoyans who, when they undertook to serve the Soviet government on, for example, the railroads, refused to sign the required oath to defend the Soviet government with gun in hand thereby showed themselves to be insects too. (We will later see some of them on trial.) The railroads were particularly important, for there were indeed many insects hidden beneath railroad uniforms, and they had to be rooted out and some of them slapped down. And telegraphers, for some reason, were, for the most part, inveterate insects who had no sympathy for the Soviets. Nor could you say a good word about Vikzhel, the All-Russian Executive Committee of the Union of Railroad Workers, nor about the other trade unions, which were often filled with insects hostile to the working class.

“Just those groups we have so far enumerated represent an enormous number of people – several years’ worth of purge activity.

“In addition, how many kinds of cursed intellectuals there were – restless students and a variety of eccentrics, truth-seekers, and holy fools, of whom even Peter the Great had tried in vain to purge Russia and who are always a hindrance to a well-ordered, strict regime.

“It would have been impossible to carry out this hygienic purging, especially under wartime conditions, if they had had to follow outdated legal processes and normal judicial procedures. And so an entirely new form was adopted: extrajudicial reprisal, and this thankless job was self-sacrificingly assumed by the Cheka, the Sentinel of the Revolution, which was the only punitive organ in human history that combined in one set of hands investigation, arrest, interrogation, prosecution, trial, and execution of the verdict.”

"Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn The Gulag Archipelago"
 






Illuminized

Established
Joined
Apr 29, 2017
Messages
213
And your point is? Everyone is converging towards a single personality these days. Trump, Andrew Jackson, Stalin, Putin, Jesus, Corneliu Codreanu, Hitler, Lincoln Rockwell, etc. That says nothing about whether they actually know the personality. This is merely a manifestation of unconscious collective desire for a true leader, in light of the increasing revelation that democracy breeds false leaders. The people are grasping in the dark for someone to unify them. It's hardly a reboot of fascism or monarchism.

Besides:
"The majority of respondents acknowledged that Stalin’s radical policies had caused millions of casualties among innocent Soviet citizens and mass violations of human rights. Two thirds of respondents agreed that Stalin was a tyrant and about half said that Stalinist purges were crimes."
 






Last edited:

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,137
Despite the propaganda... I think Lenin and Stalin were traitors to the people and the revolution. Lenin might have started with good intentions but things went south quick.
 






Last edited:

Antipapirus

Established
Joined
Sep 18, 2017
Messages
352
I'm not even bothered really that people disagree. What annoys me is I don't think people even consider the alternative perspective and simply uncritically repeat what has been claimed without even examining the other side.

People haven't even heard an alternative view. They just uncritically repeat what they were told. So people don't have to agree with me. But I want to at least present an alternative view so people can at least see there is an alterative to the dominant narrative. It just annoys me because people are dismissing the other side without even bothering to examine it.

Holodomor, myth and reality

“Holodomor” or the so called Ukrainean genocide was a famine in Ukraine from 1932 to 1933. The reason why its called a genocide and not a famine (which it was) is because the argument is made that it was intentional and man made.
The bourgeois have always tried to equate communism and nazi-ism, Stalin and Mao with Hitler. In reality they don’t really have much in common when it comes to actual policy, and on the contrary nazi-ism and communism are diametrically opposed in almost every respect.
However the bourgeois still try to do this. They try to argue that Stalin and therefore communism is as bad as Hitler and nazi-ism by claiming that Stalin was a genocidal monster.
The problem there is that they need a genocide, preferrably something of the same caliber as the holocaust.
Since such a genocide committed by the soviet union under the leadership of stalin doesn’t exist, they instead try to fabricate one from this famine.
Many people have rightly pointed out that the soviet union,as well as the Russian empire, like any other semi-feudal agrarian country had frequent famines. Basically every time there was bad harvest because of drought, flooding, too cold weather, too hot weather etc. there was a famine in some part of the Russian empire.
This is because agriculture at that point was technologically not developed and based on small scale production which barely made a surplus. (we’re talking The Russian empire and the Soviet Union before collectivization and industrialization of the 1930s). The roads were also extremely bad and communications technology was almost nonexistent so sending aid effectively in response to famines was difficult.
The point I’m trying to make here is that famine was common before the soviets took power and the country started to rapidly industrialize in the 30s. Before that there had been famines in some part of the Russian empire almost every couple of years. There was one in 1901, 1906, 1911 and so on.
Therefore the fact that there was a famine in ukraine is not so unusual.
Secondly I’d like to briefly give my thoughts on the number of victims. The number which are not entirely invented out of thing air are often based on unscientific speculations. The cold-war era western “researchers” took the population increase from the years ’32 to ’34 and compared it to other times. They then concluded that because it was less then normally, all those people must have died.
In reality there were simply a lot less births. Granted, there were also starvation deaths but it would be foolish to think that births wouldn’t go down during a famine. I’m sure there are other problems with their methodology but I’m not going to go into that.
We’ve concluded that a famine happening in Ukraine at that time was not unusual, it was common in the situation left behind by Tsarism. We’ve concluded that the number of victims is not accurate but incredibly inflated and unreliable.
The third thing to keep in mind is that there is no evidence, documentary or otherwise to suggest the famine was intentional or man-made, as the most far-right of the anti-communists claim.
There exists no order signed by Stalin to soviet officials ordering them to starve ukraine or anything like that. There are many pictures purporting to depict the famine still circulating these days. These were in fact published by the German and American pro-Nazi Press. These pictures however, are mainly used for shock value since the existence of starvation says nothing about its causes or its severity.
I am not exaggerating when I say these pictures were published by the Nazis or their supporters such as the American Hearst Press. On top of that most of them are not actually taken where they claim to be. Many of them are from World war one, the american civil war, the great depression, or the Russian civil war. Since those days this array of fraudulent “holodomor photos” has been supplemented with pictures from the siege of Leningrad.
With the exception of these pictures and other material published by the nazis and their american supporters, there is no evidence, not even bad evidence to suggest the famine was deliberate or man-made.
The Export Data
The real key to this is question is actually even more simple. The argument goes that the soviet union deliberately starved Ukraine by exporting food grain for money, while there was a famine. The answer lies in the export data. Let’s take a look.
In the year 1930 the soviet government exported 4,846,024 tonnes.
In 1931 the number increased to 5,182,835 tonnes.
In 1932 which is the year when the famine began they exported much less. Only 1,819,114 tonnes. And actually imported 750,000 tonnes during the first half of 1932 and from late April 157,000 tonnes.
The amount of export further decreased the next year and another 200,000 tonnes was also imported.
The soviet government exported only a fraction of what they normally would have and even imported over a million tonnes to be sent as food aid to Ukraine when they realized the extent of the famine. This totally debunks the genocide-theory.
“The official statistics, however, show that the procurements taken from the 1932 harvest were less than the procurements in any other year in the 1930s”
(Professor Mark B. Tauger, “What caused famine in ukraine?”)
Soviet Industrial Revolution & the Western Blockade
But why did the Soviets export grain at all? The USSR required capital for its industrial projects, machines to be bought from the West etc. They planned to acquire this capital from two sources:
1) Selling oil, gold, minerals and other products to the West.
2) Selling consumer goods on the Soviet Union’s internal market.
The initial plan was not to export so large an amount of food grain at all. Most of it was to be sold on the internal market anyway. However, Western powers introduced blockade on Soviet oil and Soviet gold currency.
“The government collected grain and sent it to the West, but not to starve part of a country’s population to death, but because there was no other way it could pay for the supply of equipment. All of Stalin’s hopes were on a new harvest. It turned out to be a small one, however, since the country was struck by a drought. The USSR was unable to buy food in exchange for gold (the gold blockade) or currency (as a result of the embargo there was none). Attempts were urgently made to get supplies of grain from Persia, where they had agreed to accept gold. The authorities did not have time, however, as a catastrophe was already underway. Famine Victims, Kuban, 1932 Famine Victims, Kuban, 1932 Between 1932 and 1933, thousands and thousands of people died and it was only after this that the West was once again renewed to accept oil, timber and precious metals from the Soviets.”
(Oriental review, “Who Organised the Famine in the USSR in 1932-1933?”)
The USSR as an agrarian country relied on selling raw materials. The biggest items of export before the Industrialization were cotton, coal, oil and agricultural produce. Paradoxically the only way out of this trap of agrarian backwardness was to industrialize. But where to get the funds for it? It would be completely unreasonable and in contradiction with material reality to except the Soviet Union to not export at all during the 1932 to 33 period. The thing that caused problems for them were the economic blockade and the poor harvests of the early 1930s, both circumstances out of their control.
As a last ditch effort one might argue; “why not halt all industrialization and give all possible food to the citizens?” The reason should be obvious, halting all industrialization, all projects currently on the way was impossible. Also the purchases of machines had to be paid for somehow even if the bigger project was postponed.
Secondly the Soviets did halt industrialization to the degree that they cut exports when it became clear there was a severe the famine. They only exported large amounts before the famine, when it was still possible to do so without danger. This is generally forgotten when right-wing anti-communists reverse the causality of this event by claiming it was the exports which caused the famine, despite the exports being reduced and the government importing food instead when the famine hit.
Thirdly, halting industrialization wouldn’t have been a good solution to Russia’s troubles. Famine was extremely common not because of industrialization, but because of the opposite, lack of industrialization. Stopping the project to modernize the country would only have prolonged the chronic food-insecurity of the country. The only good way to solve the “grain question” as the Soviets called it, was to modernize the country and thus increase crop yields with the use of machines, scientific methods and infrastructure.

The first cause of the famine: weather
Let us now discuss actual causes of this famine.
Like most famines particularly in less technologically developed countries, like the USSR certainly was at the time, the main cause is bad weather conditions, which lead to poor harvests.
“In 1927, a drought shortened the harvest in southern areas of the Ukrainian SSR and North Caucasus. In 1927–28 the winter tillage area was badly affected due to low snow levels. Despite seed aid from the State, many affected areas were not re-sown. The 1928 harvest was affected by drought in most of the grain producing areas of the Ukrainian SSR”
There was also another terrible drought that lasted through the entirety of 1932-1933 in Ukraine as well as crop diseases such as grain rust, but going into detail about this is beyond the scope of this article.
“The evidence that I have published and other evidence, including recent Ukrainian document collections, show that the famine developed out of a shortage and pervaded the Soviet Union, and that the regime organized a massive program of rationing and relief in towns and in villages, including in Ukraine, but simply did not have enough food. This is why the Soviet famine, an immense crisis and tragedy of the Soviet economy, was not in the same category as the Nazis’ mass murders, which had no agricultural or other economic basis.”(Tauger, Ibid.)
The second cause of the famine: kulak terrorism
It may seem like a stretch to some, that sabotage by a minority of the population could play a part in a famine. It needs to be stated that they only contributed to the already difficult situation, they did not cause the famine.
But how influential were the rural capitalists known as kulaks? They were about 10 or 11 percent of the population, and in fact Ukraine had a larger kulak population then most of the USSR.
Kulaks had aquired control of a large amount of the village plots during the NEP period of 1920 to 1927 and kulak speculation on the food market caused a shortage already in 1927 when the marketed share of grain was only one third of the pre-war years although production had exceeded pre-war figures.
In 1920 when the NEP was implimented and the Soviet Union moved from War-Communism, to a temporary stage where a free market existed, the much feared consequences of the market became evident. Despite the previous land reform nearly 3 million peasants, were quickly once again without land, because the kulaks had driven them bankrupt and then bought their land cheaply. This resulted in 10-11% of the population (kulaks) owning so much land and also horses and machinery compared to the rest of the peasant population that they produced 56 percent of the marketed food. The kulaks largely decided if the towns would eat or not.
Most peasant holdings were so small they produced no marketable grain. All their produce was consumed by the peasant families themselves. Kulak farms however, produced a lot of surplus. They were large plots, employing many farm workers and using horses and tractors.
In 1927 the government began the grain procurement policy as a response to kulaks refusing to sell their grain at the regulated price. This was class struggle, the kulaks knew they had an advantage because they effectively controlled food supply and expected the government to surrender to their demands and increase food prices, thus increasing kulak profits. Instead the government chose to forcibly take the grain.
In response the kulaks refused to farm more then a minimal amount. This way there’d be no grain to procure. This sparked resentment among the landless peasants and the collective farm (obschina) movement was re-kindled. The Bolsheviks had supported the peasantry’s demand for seizing unused landlord and kulak land since 1905 and now they issued a decree making it legal for the poor peasants to do the same, take kulak land and farm it. The kulak response was murderous, they killed many communist organizers and collective farmers. The government responded with deportations of kulaks.
Finally to prevent their property falling into the hands of the poor the kulaks began destroying it. It is a good concrete example of this terrorism and how it could impact the food growing to look at the amount of machinery, food and particularly livestock deliberately destroyed by the kulak saboteurs and the segment of the well-to-do middle peasants who were fooled into doing so by the kulaks. This was escalation of the on-going class struggle in the countryside between the rural poor and the rural rich. The hatred for the kulaks had accumulated over decades, but now the poor peasants were in a position to do something about it. Finally the government proclaimed its policy of “eliminating kulaks as a class”, that is, taking away their wealth & status, reducing them to common farmers. The kulaks launched their final desperate offensive:
The kulak capitalists owned most of the livestock and machinery, while most peasants only owned one horse or cow and 27 million peasants, more then a third of the entire population who owned not a single horse. The devastation was most extreme in the case of cattle and work horses which the kulaks owned the largest share of but also bulls, oxen, pigs, sheep and goats. Particularly the shortage of horses for plowing contributed to the famine.

Conclusions
The famine was not deliberate or man-made. It was caused by difficult weather conditions and the general backwardness left by tsarism in the country. As there exists no evidence of deliberate genocide, and the case relies entirely on the false assumption that the USSR kept exporting more and more food grain, completely disregarding the famine, I can confidently say that the holodomor has been debunked as a myth and a fabrication.
It is revealing to look at who the people spreading this myth are. In the 1930s they were the Nazi press & their American collaborators. In the modern era their work was carried out by cold-war anti-communists and far-right ukrainian emigres. The myth is still widely propagated those elements, together with Ukrainian neo-nazis. The holodomor myth is the work of Goebbels.

https://mltheory.wordpress.com/2014/06/07/facts-about-the-holodomor-and-why-its-fake


Good luck


I'm not judging you, you raise really good points but the top of the iceberg is this:

Stalin was part of the same group as HITLER, CHURCHILL AND ROOSEVELT

The whole war was a giant scam

These 3 guys are war criminals , their crimes will be revealed as soon as the curtain falls

You have one point right - History was written by the allies and it's all wrong, one side had to be demonized and one side to be angelized so the psyops can rise and grow to what it is today

As I stated many times - this conspiracy is multi-level and multi-dimensional - so complex its crazy -if you won't deal with it at the very top at each level, then, yo"ll get lost in endless debates and ideas

That's why I cannot make Thunderian comprehend I'm pro Israel and I love the Jewish community, but as long as WE DONT SEE THE PUPPETEERS AND ONLY THE PUPPET SHOW we won't go anywhere.

Free youselfes from your chaines and start seing the big picture
 






Last edited:

SkepticCat

Veteran
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
559
Etagloc, communism doesn't work. It has been tried many times and it consistently fails. Why? Well look at the current situation. We have a group able to erect a stone that says this:



- been sitting there for decades. Are people concerned? No. What about when they see this:



Nope, still not concerned. This, then?



Nope, still not concerned. How about this:



Still no reaction. How about now?



Nah, this will probably be alright, too. Wait! How about this:



... doesn't care. It probably isn't real anyway. Maybe.

---

With this kind of apathetic, immoral, egotistical society, how on Earth could a society based on selflessly and idealistically sharing the fruits of labor ever work? It will inevitably result in the breaking down of productivity with resulting rampant poverty, famine and the like. Which is exactly what historically happened.

Thinking these communist leaders, and especially Stalin - one of the worst mass murderers and oppressors of all time - are some kind of enlightened heroes, seems just absurd. If anything, there's every bit of reason to suspect these leaders are part of the NWO agenda and have helped push civilization into the state of degeneracy in which it now finds itself embroiled. Chances are you are now trying to get us interested in the exact kind of ideology these Jewish-Masonic conspirators are hoping for us to be stupid enough to accept. I'm not buying it.














(^ idolatry)


Communism is an absolute evil; not only practically and economically but also spiritually, ethically and socially. Communism is a NWO wet dream. Is it not clear that giving up all personal freedoms [and responsibilities] and maximizing state power can only result in disaster? Or are you going to tell me the Chinese Cultural Revolution, the famines or all of Stalin's psychotic policies never happened?

And your point is? Everyone is converging towards a single personality these days. Trump, Andrew Jackson, Stalin, Putin, Jesus, Corneliu Codreanu, Hitler, Lincoln Rockwell, etc. That says nothing about whether they actually know the personality. This is merely a manifestation of unconscious collective desire for a true leader, in light of the increasing revelation that democracy breeds false leaders. The people are grasping in the dark for someone to unify them. It's hardly a reboot of fascism or monarchism.

Besides:
"The majority of respondents acknowledged that Stalin’s radical policies had caused millions of casualties among innocent Soviet citizens and mass violations of human rights. Two thirds of respondents agreed that Stalin was a tyrant and about half said that Stalinist purges were crimes."


There is only one to follow and that is our GOD and KING.

 






Last edited:
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
1,732
Despite the propaganda... I think Lenin and Stalin were traitors to the people and the revolution. Lenin might have started with good intentions but things went south quick.
Because communism will always fail b/c someone will take advantage of it. Read Animal Farm if you want to know more.
 






Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
1,732
The other vice.... the other reason.... is this.

People love the ideas of justice and equality. All that sounds great.

But they don't want to sacrifice. They want a revolution without being personally inconvenienced.

This is exactly why the left is so sissified.

Look at this.

Look at the leftists. They're wimpy. Look at the right-wingers. They're delusional but at least they have backbone.

This is exactly why people don't want to rock with the left. Because they see a bunch of wimps.

Because the leftists are COWARDS. They're sissies. They're soft. They are oh so terrified of guns and anything which hints of masculinity.

One day the left will need to develop a spine. A backbone.

They hate figures like Stalin and they hate Marxism and all that.... because they are selfish and cowardly and want the revolution without their cozy lives being inconvenienced.
You're right about the left, but with right-wingers. You do realize I am a right-wing person. There's no such thing as a middle-ground
 






Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
1,732
The other vice.... the other reason.... is this.

People love the ideas of justice and equality. All that sounds great.

But they don't want to sacrifice. They want a revolution without being personally inconvenienced.

This is exactly why the left is so sissified.

Look at this.

Look at the leftists. They're wimpy. Look at the right-wingers. They're delusional but at least they have backbone.

This is exactly why people don't want to rock with the left. Because they see a bunch of wimps.

Because the leftists are COWARDS. They're sissies. They're soft. They are oh so terrified of guns and anything which hints of masculinity.

One day the left will need to develop a spine. A backbone.

They hate figures like Stalin and they hate Marxism and all that.... because they are selfish and cowardly and want the revolution without their cozy lives being inconvenienced.
Actually the left loves communism and socialism. Us right-wingers hate those systems.
 






Top