Russian Propaganda

[Droog]

The orders for the collectivizations were issued either directly from the politburo in Moscow or at least according to guidelines given out by the politburo. Same goes for the executions of clergy, intellectuals etc. The migration-prohibit came DIRECTLY from Stalin. The roots are in Russia, whether you like that or not. Don't eve act as if Ukraine was in any way a souvereign country. The, as you call, it "multinational government of Ukraine" was nothing but the prolonged arm of the Soviet CPSU directed by Moscow. It's like saying the Nazis in Germany weren't responsible for what happened in Vichy-France.

Yes, the orders were given by the politburo. However the manner of execution of those orders was in the hands of local communist authorities. It wasn't ethnic Russians vs ethnic Ukrainians; it wasn't Russia vs Ukraine. It was communists against all others. Some Ukrainians fought communists and used nationalist rethoric, exactly as some Russians fought Communists and used monarchist rethoric 10 years before. But it doesn't matter!

 

[DraKon2k]

Rofl, funny how this thread turned out to be

 

[Col. John Matrix]

Rofl, funny how this thread turned out to be

That propaganda is alive and well when some people still seem to think that Stalin/extreme communism are alright. My grandfather spent 5 years of his life at the front fighting for our freedom. I'm glad that commies never liberated us from our capitalist oppressors. Better dead than red.

 

[Anubis]

That really is an awful quote to use to cite your opinion. Since it was a propaganda slogan created by Goebbels.

 

[Donut]

I love Soviet propaganda art. I like the style of the posters, but I also really like the general imagery. I'm just a big Russophile, really. ^_^

This is on my bedroom wall:

/warns Homeland Security to not let Lizardhands(hereafter reffered to as "That commie bastard") into the US
LOL! J/K!!!

 

[Bolt]

the only opinions about Stalin and his leadership's time i've met were in black-and-white tones. "stalin is bad" and period (lol, look at that poster at first page). It's so simple: Stalin shot his own people, they suffered. And when he died? Did they, people, suffered as well? All of SU population was suffering during all "the occupation" time? You know, i'm really happy that i was born in Soviet Union and not few years later, in the "free country". When i (and all of my friends, we talk about it on history lessons a lot) think about USSR, i feel something.. it'd call it patriotic feeling, i think.
Stalin and his regime was not that obvious, and i'm not even talking about SU itself.
There is only one topic about USSR bad actions with which i agree is a winter war. I can understand finns, but still cannot say that USSR was Evil empire. And you, people, are really much more brainwashed than we. I'll give you a link to a comic book from '60 a little bit later, fun reading, i assure you.
http://www.authentichistory.com/images/1960s/treasure_chest/cover_01.html "That Godless communism" comic book from '60s. Imho, the funniest part of it is where they talk about how USSR was late to fight japs in Manchuria. Really funny stuff.

 

[Lizardhands]

The Soviet Union started as a beautiful dream and it's a shame it failed. I can understand your feeling of pride, Bolt. The USSR may have had some bad leaders, but the idea in itself was essentially good. Calling the USSR an "Evil Empire" was just fear propaganda, and it's a shame a lot of Westerners (especially Americans) still think of communism as evil. Impractical, maybe, but the idea was to help the people. If a well-intentioned idea going sadly wrong is evil, I imagine most people are just that.

 

[KrazyKraut]

Wow, now why you don't read what I've written?

You tell me that if not oppression, we could easily fight back germans right at 41.
I said about France as an example - they did not kill their high staff, but lost and lost very fast. So don't say that if Stalin didn't oppress (spelling is right?) his high staff, 41 would never happen.
Well, I said that they lost because they used ww1 fighting tactic, didn't I?
Again, I want to emphasize: yes, Red Army lost a lot of good soldiers during the oppression time, and that's the worst part of SU history in my opinion, but it's NOT THE ONLY reason why we had heavy losses during first months of war.
Please read above. I did not say they were shot/imprisoned because of the old tactics. They were shot because Stalin was paranoiac. But things were so bad for us in the 41 because Red Army also used (just like France) outdated tactics. How about Italy, Spain, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Greece, Yugolsavia and Albania? There were no oppressions in those countries, right? And I don't know the correct term in English, but I think it's called "Witch hunting" - what happened in USA after the war.

France lost, because of outdated tactics and because the Wehrmacht was able to completely use its Blitzkrieg tactic. Russia from the beginning of '41 right through the end of the year was suffering the same fate: defeat after defeat. And on a much more global scale than France. The mere reason the tides turned right in front of Moscow was that they had a well fortified position there and that the German supplies diminishing due to the extreme distances. Russia simply was too big for a Blitzkrieg. This had little to do with the fact that the officers were dead. And still, why not simply remove the Generals? Why kill them altogether? Because Stalin was afraid of them, that's why. Not because of their abilities. But in your book murder is alright as long as long as it serves a purpose I see. Besides "oppression" is not the right word for murder.

From the countries you mentioned only really the US, Italy and maybe Spain are called Western, the others are mostly eastern. I would even agree with the two fascist countries, but the Witchhunt under McCarthy is a joke compared to the purges of Stalin: A total of sixteen people were called before the commitee and NOONE WAS KILLED. Some actors were "banned" from Hollywood for sometime but again NOONE was killed. McCarthyism and Stalinism are two completely different leagues.

And comic books from the 60s aren't valid today. I don't think every Communist was an evil murderer and so don't most others: but Stalin certainly was.

 

[Droog]

I don't think every Communist was an evil murderer and so don't most others: but Stalin certainly was.

Why are you so obsessed with Stalin and Stalin alone? In the Soviet leadership at the time, all of them, absolutely all of them were "evil murderers" of their political opponents. Find a good book on political repressions in Russia from 1918 to 1930, Stalin's "mass murders" in 1930ies will pale in comparison...

 

[Bolt]

France lost, because of outdated tactics and because the Wehrmacht was able to completely use its Blitzkrieg tactic. Russia from the beginning of '41 right through the end of the year was suffering the same fate: defeat after defeat. And on a much more global scale than France. The mere reason the tides turned right in front of Moscow was that they had a well fortified position there and that the German supplies diminishing due to the extreme distances.
Russia simply was too big for a Blitzkrieg.

Well, I agree and disagree at the same time. First of all, not Russia, but Soviet Union. Yes, it was big, and that's one of the reasons why Germans did not win the war. But there are also other reasons: soviets learned how to fight (when you are punched hard, you get far more experience, than when you just practice), they were fighting to the last men, especially near Moscow - well-known Panfilovcy etc. Also we can't forget that before the Barbarossa Germans were used to widely use roads and Soviet Union in the autumn had none.

This had little to do with the fact that the officers were dead. And still, why not simply remove the Generals? Why kill them altogether? Because Stalin was afraid of them, that's why. Not because of their abilities. But in your book murder is alright as long as long as it serves a purpose I see. Besides "oppression" is not the right word for murder.

I already said two times: Stalin was a paranoiac, I don't disagree. And it's a shame that so many officers (not generals, most of them.. well, they would not save SU in 41, that's for sure) were oppressed (iirc, the number of oppressed officers is about 1.8% of all oppressed people in 1937-1938, not all of them were shot, btw).
I would keep silent if people (now I'm not talking about specifically you, KrazyKraut, don't get me wrong - I mean media, my government etc) while talking about Stalin were also recalling what happened in neighbor-countries near SU at that time. For example, Poland at the moment wants retribution from Russia because of the Katyn, but they act as there were no camps for soviet POWs, where death-rate was quite high, I must say. And that's almost anytime people talk about Stalin's time - they use double-standards, "Stalin is bad", while Franko was, well, normal (I say so because it's what I've read from history book for under-graduates).

From the countries you mentioned only really the US, Italy and maybe Spain are called Western, the others are mostly eastern. I would even agree with the two fascist countries, but the Witchhunt under McCarthy is a joke compared to the purges of Stalin: A total of sixteen people were called before the committee and NOONE WAS KILLED. Some actors were "banned" from Hollywood for sometime but again NOONE was killed.

http://images.newsru.com/pict/id/large/362336_20011205204402.gif
Those people were executed. The Rosenbergs. And iirc, about 500 people were interrogated by the committee. Some of them committed suicides. And it doesn't matter, that the mentioned countries are in Central or Eastern Europe. They are still european and it is they who talk crap about soviets of that (well, any) time, while their government wasn't any better.

 

[Howard GB]

The Soviet Union started as a beautiful dream and it's a shame it failed. I can understand your feeling of pride, Bolt. The USSR may have had some bad leaders, but the idea in itself was essentially good. Calling the USSR an "Evil Empire" was just fear propaganda, and it's a shame a lot of Westerners (especially Americans) still think of communism as evil. Impractical, maybe, but the idea was to help the people. If a well-intentioned idea going sadly wrong is evil, I imagine most people are just that.

An excellent point. Sadly the 'American Dream' (as I believe it is known) has also dwindled and is sadly still a dream. 1/3 of Americans are overweight, 1/3 of that are clinically obese (magic maths powers) which is roughly 13.5 million people, all due to a corporate takeover of the most powerful country in the world. And you can't forget that the average American 10 year old does not know where, Iraq, the UK or Japan are, and if you have seen 'Supersize Me' you will know that a group of 7 year olds do not know who George W.Bush is but do know exactly who Ronald McDonald is. McDonalds makes a US tv show/advert type thing that subconsciensly appeals to kids to eat thier product. And atleast Russian food standard agencies aren't allowed t be owned by the meat companys themselves like in the US, so this leads to atrocious standards of food. The average American beefburger contains atleast 1 rat dropping.

This is the sort of thing Stalin's regime tried to stop (and succeeded). It was a fantastic idea that got corrupted and tainted like many good ideas in the world. Fascism was a very good thing for Germany (a country torn apart by war) and it needed a totalitarian dictator to straighten it out, yet again a good idea gone bad when Hitler decided to start WW2. History is full of similar stories; the Greeks, Mesopotamians, and Romans all tried forced their civilisation on others, a good thing for the world because of advancements in technology but then repressing these cultures lead to the fall of one of the mightiest empires ever known; These are a few examples of a past rich in mistakes stemming from good ideas.

And these ideas need help spreading and cultivating into an ideological mindset. Civilisations have been feeding their people lies and exagerations for hundreds of years, in an attempt (sometimes successful) to control their minds and thoughts, Stalin and Hitler were masters at this which is why they ruled virtually unopposed for so long, giving the people delusions of grandeur: propoganda, the opiate of the masses.

 

[Lizardhands]

I would say that, while Hitler did a lot to fix Germany, Fascism was an ugly idea to start with. That was my point about the Soviet Union -- people compare Stalin to Hitler, but the difference is that hatred was part of Nazi ideology, while Stalin was just a paranoid nutter.

agitprop

 

[Droog]

I would say that, while Hitler did a lot to fix Germany, Fascism was an ugly idea to start with. That was my point about the Soviet Union -- people compare Stalin to Hitler, but the difference is that hatred was part of Nazi ideology, while Stalin was just a paranoid nutter.

agitprop

That's because in modern democracies the practice of silencing of political opponents is quite alright even to this day (recent Wilson case is quite vegetarian but murder is OK too - like CIA plans to assasinate Castro, for example), while racial discrimination is a crime.

 

[Nyu]

Funny how Democracy is the leading type of government today eventhough, if my memory serves me right, Plato said that it was the worst type of government.

 

[Donut]

An excellent point. Sadly the 'American Dream' (as I believe it is known) has also dwindled and is sadly still a dream. 1/3 of Americans are overweight, 1/3 of that are clinically obese (magic maths powers) which is roughly 13.5 million people, all due to a corporate takeover of the most powerful country in the world. And you can't forget that the average American 10 year old does not know where, Iraq, the UK or Japan are, and if you have seen 'Supersize Me' you will know that a group of 7 year olds do not know who George W.Bush is but do know exactly who Ronald McDonald is. McDonalds makes a US tv show/advert type thing that subconsciensly appeals to kids to eat thier product. And atleast Russian food standard agencies aren't allowed t be owned by the meat companys themselves like in the US, so this leads to atrocious standards of food. The average American beefburger contains atleast 1 rat dropping.

This is the sort of thing Stalin's regime tried to stop (and succeeded). It was a fantastic idea that got corrupted and tainted like many good ideas in the world. Fascism was a very good thing for Germany (a country torn apart by war) and it needed a totalitarian dictator to straighten it out, yet again a good idea gone bad when Hitler decided to start WW2. History is full of similar stories; the Greeks, Mesopotamians, and Romans all tried forced their civilisation on others, a good thing for the world because of advancements in technology but then repressing these cultures lead to the fall of one of the mightiest empires ever known; These are a few examples of a past rich in mistakes stemming from good ideas.

And these ideas need help spreading and cultivating into an ideological mindset. Civilisations have been feeding their people lies and exagerations for hundreds of years, in an attempt (sometimes successful) to control their minds and thoughts, Stalin and Hitler were masters at this which is why they ruled virtually unopposed for so long, giving the people delusions of grandeur: propoganda, the opiate of the masses.

/packs bong with propaganda papers...

 

[PilotPirx]

yep,very good ideas.... http://www.hro.org/editions/karta/mapgulag_1.jpg
http://www.osa.ceu.hu/gulag/f.htm
and "find ten differences..." http://www.okay.com/dunc/gulag.htm
My opinion is,that this is not stalin phenomenon.Already in 1920 in Soviet Russia was more than 90 concentration camps.And also executions by shootings of hostages - by authority practised.

 

[Lizardhands]

Funny how Democracy is the leading type of government today eventhough, if my memory serves me right, Plato said that it was the worst type of government.

Well we call it "democracy", but it's really a long way off.

 

[KrazyKraut]

Why are you so obsessed with Stalin and Stalin alone? In the Soviet leadership at the time, all of them, absolutely all of them were "evil murderers" of their political opponents. Find a good book on political repressions in Russia from 1918 to 1930, Stalin's "mass murders" in 1930ies will pale in comparison...

Well, apart from Stalin, not many of the Soviet leadership up to 1953 are known in the west. Stalin and Lenin represent the pre-Krushchev Communists. Just like Hitler represents the German Nazis (although admittedly Goebbels, Goering and Bormann should also ring a bell) or Mussolini and Franco the Italian and Spanish Fascists. And since the Lenin-era was kind of Russia-internal it simply doesn't spill over to other countries as much. If Hitler hadn't invaded a dozen countries, maybe a purely German-internal Holocaust would have never gotten as much attention as it did.
[/QUOTE] And it's a shame that so many officers (not generals, most of them.. well, they would not save SU in 41, that's for sure) were oppressed (iirc, the number of oppressed officers is about 1.8% of all oppressed people in 1937-1938, not all of them were shot, btw).[/QUOTE]Now that's a very misleading figure you got there: 1.8% of the oppressed people were officers, now how many of the Soviet people were officers at all? Not much more than 1.8% i guess. So you might aswell make that nearly 100% of all Soviet officers were "reppressed".
But to quote Wikipedia:

The purge of the army removed 3 of 5 marshals, 13 of 15 army generals, 8 of 9 admirals (the purge fell heavily on the Navy who were suspected of exploiting their opportunity for foreign contacts), 50 of 57 army corps generals, 154 out of 186 division generals, 16 of 16 army commissars, and 25 of 28 army corps commissars.

http://images.newsru.com/pict/id/lar...1205204402.gif
Those people were executed. The Rosenbergs. And iirc, about 500 people were interrogated by the committee. Some of them committed suicides. And it doesn't matter, that the mentioned countries are in Central or Eastern Europe. They are still european and it is they who talk crap about soviets of that (well, any) time, while their government wasn't any better.

Okay I admit I'm far from an expert on the McCarthy-era, so I might be wrong on some facts. I apologize. I'm still convinced that far less people were murdered or arrested for political reasons during that time than were in the Soviet Union under Stalin.

 

[Bolt]

Wait, wait...
You definitely cannot say that 100% of officers were oppressed. Not even half of them, or a third. To clear things up: when I say "officer", I mean not only generals and admirals, but also lieutenants etc. Again, if I remember correctly, in 37-38 about of 8000 officers were oppressed (or shot, I am a little confused - the text where I take those numbers has too much bureaucratic words, sorry. ) And also 9000 officers were fired (a lot of them were forgiven in 40).
Now you can say that this still is huge numbers. Yes, they are. You can say that nacist Germany cared for its army more. And what did Hitler have in 44?
And what would be with SU, if there were a conspiracy against Stalin in 41, which succeeded, when you could actually hear German cannons from Moscow?

 

[KrazyKraut]

Well I only know about the high ranking officers. And the numbers in wikipedia add up to 269 of 316 high ranking officers, which means 85.1%. Not saying these are necessarily 100% correct, but i doubt historians would call it "the great purge of the army ranks" if it hadn't been a majority.

Now you can say that this still is huge numbers. Yes, they are. You can say that nacist Germany cared for its army more. And what did Hitler have in 44?

What exactly are you implying here? That it is due to the Nazi's caring for their army more (which in case of Hitler and Goering is very debatable to say the least) that they had lost so many men until 1944? Don't be rediculous. The German losses were a result of the brutal war they had been fighting for five years and sure as hell not a result of too much pampering their politicians. If anything the opposite is the case: without the many "hold until the last man"-orders given out by Hitler, the German losses would have been significantly lower.