Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Now see, when I said tankies that wasn't quite what I meant.

[Sergarr]

Stalin is objectively one of the worst people in history, and his continued veneration by segments of the Russian populace is disquieting.

He was one of the worst people in history, but he was one of the better rulers of Russia, in terms of how much was achieved during his rule, in education, in technology, in construction. Such is a paradox of power - a good person is oftentimes not a good ruler, and visa versa.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The greater paradox is probably that of historical analysis. How long after a person's death is it fair to keep weighing the echos of their life? As you yourself said, Stalin can also be attributed the catastrophic self-destruction of Russia later on. And time keeps on slipping. Technically the ripples of any person's actions will continue out into the rest of humanity and the universe for as long as either continue to exist, but how long do they remain significant, especially for someone who distorted everything and everyone he encountered to circle him like some kind of social black hole?

[smjjames]

The greater paradox is probably that of historical analysis. How long after a person's death is it fair to keep weighing the echos of their life? As you yourself said, Stalin can also be attributed the catastrophic self-destruction of Russia later on. And time keeps on slipping. Technically the ripples of any person's actions will continue out into the rest of humanity and the universe for as long as either continue to exist, but how long do they remain significant, especially for someone who distorted everything and everyone he encountered to circle him like some kind of social black hole?

Probably once the generation that knew him dies out. Or maybe once the generation that remembers the Communist era dies out.

Basically, probably not for a very long time.

[Sergarr]

I personally think it's gonna be the moment when some political figure of similar importance will come to power in Russia. Putin, despite all the fancy propaganda, is not even close to that.

[smjjames]

Hopefully it'll be someone like Abraham Lincolin or George Washington or Teddy Roosevelt, or perhaps FDR rather than a dictator.

Maybe a better example would be Peter the Great rather than the American examples. Actually, a Russian version of Teddy Roosevelt would be cool, smashing corruption and trying to clean things up.

...

I think I'm accidentially pushing American values on you Sergarr. Sorry.

[Sergarr]

Maybe a better example would be Peter the Great rather than the American examples. Actually, a Russian version of Teddy Roosevelt would be cool, smashing corruption and trying to clean things up.

...

I think I'm accidentially pushing American values on you Sergarr. Sorry.

Funny about that. Peter the Great was seen as a brutal dictator by the people of his time, for his (successful) de-Russification and Europeanization of nobility (iconicly depicted as him shaving away boyar's (ancient Russian noble title) beards) and for making Orthodox Church into a government institution and reforming its key doctrine. There was a major civil unrest, hordes of people were fleeing away into deep forest due to not wanting to submit to the "reformed faith", the Europeanization of nobility was so great that for the next two centuries, the nobles oftenly were unable to speak Russian at all, but spoke fluent French, etc.

He also modernized Russian military, industry and reformed Russian management system, which allowed him to train an army and construct a fleet capable of rivalling - and defeating - that of the European (well, in so much as Sweden can be called Europe) country.

He's a pretty controversial figure.

[Bohandas]

The greater paradox is probably that of historical analysis. How long after a person's death is it fair to keep weighing the echos of their life? As you yourself said, Stalin can also be attributed the catastrophic self-destruction of Russia later on. And time keeps on slipping. Technically the ripples of any person's actions will continue out into the rest of humanity and the universe for as long as either continue to exist, but how long do they remain significant, especially for someone who distorted everything and everyone he encountered to circle him like some kind of social black hole?

Probably once the generation that knew him dies out. Or maybe once the generation that remembers the Communist era dies out.

Basically, probably not for a very long time.

http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff2000/fc01950.htm

[Mr. Strange]

He was one of the worst people in history, but he was one of the better rulers of Russia

Russian history 101.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Hmmm.... Stalin... let me think...

-Guy who caused death of millions putting a dent in Russian demographics for decades
-Guy who almost lost the war he should have won in few months (good job eliminating talented generals and putting asslickers in charge.)
-Guy who ruined lives and careers of talented engineers and scientists that got good education in Russian empire or during 1920s when education wasn't fully reformed. At least he managed to squeeze something from them.
-Guy who killed farming by destroying potential farmers
-Guys who made corruption a norm in a whole law enforcements chain. Same goes for potential small business.

PS. The whole idea "Russia was destroyed by a civil war" is a nonsense. Railroads and other construction infrastructure was mostly intact. Mines and oil rigs were there. Forests and fertile lands never disappeared. 30-50% of lost GDP is not destroyed.

[Sergarr]

While I can agree with points 3, 4 and 5, points 1, 2 and P.S. do not share their fate:

Hmmm.... Stalin... let me think...

-Guy who caused death of millions putting a dent in Russian demographics for decades

Aside from two world wars killing a significant percentage of population, I see no dents here.

-Guy who almost lost the war he should have won in few months (good job eliminating talented generals and putting asslickers in charge.)

These "talented" generals could not take over Poland. The very idea of these losers defeating Nazi Germany within a "few months"... You must be joking, right? Right?

PS. The whole idea "Russia was destroyed by a civil war" is a nonsense. Railroads and other construction infrastructure was mostly intact. Mines and oil rigs were there. Forests and fertile lands never disappeared. 30-50% of lost GDP is not destroyed.

That's why I've said "half-destroyed". 50% of lost GDP is indeed "half-destroyed", thank you for proving my point for me!

P.S. I really hope that you were joking about the "talented" generals (who were, again, unable to take over fucking Poland) defeating Nazi Germany within a few months, because this is some conspiracy level shit.

[smjjames]

*points out the fact that Stalin himself fought in that war as a commander as well, got blamed for losing two battles too*

We'd have to refer to a military historian for in depth analysis of whether Stalin was (rightly or not) to blame since I can't tell for sure from wikipedia only.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

50% of lost GDP is indeed "half-destroyed", thank you for proving my point for me!

No. 50 of lost GDP means 50% less produced stuff in year B than in year A

Half destroyed is - half of buildings turned into a rubble. Same for roads, bridges,  ports and all other infrastructure. Do you want to say that 1914-1924 decade caused anything like this?

[Sergarr]

50% of lost GDP is indeed "half-destroyed", thank you for proving my point for me!

No. 50 of lost GDP means 50% less produced stuff in year B than in year A

Half destroyed is - half of buildings turned into a rubble. Same for roads, bridges,  ports and all other infrastructure. Do you want to say that 1914-1924 decade caused anything like this?

Let's just say that you have a different definition of "half-destroyed" from what I have.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Aside from two world wars killing a significant percentage of population, I see no dents here.

Even if exclude genocides of non-Russians and pretend that there were no millions repressed (you know, males that spend 25 years in prison are bad in creating families) - Stalin's incompetence (or rather ineffectiveness of the state) caused most of the loses in WW2.