The biggest redpill is that Stalin did more to destroy communism than most historical leaders

Attached: 1424398469749.jpg (461x356, 49.96K)

According to what I've read he actually decentralized in some areas. For example, the Leninists and the Trotskyites wanted to socialize every aspect of life, including how people eat. Under Lenin people ate in public dining halls because they wanted to separate people from the family unit. Trotsky complained because Stalin ended that practice and brought meals back to the home and put women back into the kitchen. Trotsky saw this as some sort of "slavery" and hated Stalin for trying to restore the family.

Communism was a huge success under Stalin, it was never anything but a vehicle for the exportation of jewish domination of nations.

NAZBOLS GO HOME

Of course they do, they're delusional retards who get high off of Jewish nonsense.

what if I tell you that communists are cucks and Lenin was more jewish and would have ruined Russia more so than Stalin-cuck?

let's find out more on this link:
unz.com/akarlin/lenin/

Attached: 3121379517962168.png (670x603, 162.48K)

I'd agree except I'd point out that Stalin wasn't a commie. He was a red fascist pretending to be a commie so he could keep his power so he could continue to destroy bolshevism from the inside.

Damn. Didn't know Stalin was so fucking based.

He also made abortion illegal and gave women medals based on how many children they had.

Because communism nearly destroyed Russia. Jews are a poison. Communism is secular Judaism to rule over the gentiles.

I agree. International Bankers also funded the October revolution but they got butthurt when Stalin wasn't going to work with them anymore.

fucking jews man.

Attached: Jew4.jpg (475x398, 58.81K)

I'd also like to point out that this all relates to our current problems. When Stalin kicked out the Trotskyites they came to America and were funded by the CIA and international bankers to influence culture. Reagan even gave one of them a medal. Those trots that came to America became some of the most ardent cold-warriors against the USSR because they were angry over what happened. Those trots would later become the neocons of today.

Attached: neocon trots.jpg (750x1000, 159.51K)

You should read some of the things he wrote about it. It's probably one of the most Jewish things I've ever seen. He considered fathers to be evil drunks, mothers to be evil for being religious and he wanted children to be completely taken care of by the state.

That is cool.

Attached: IMG_0304.PNG (500x500, 60.36K)

Isn't that from Plato's Republic, though?

I haven't read it. It's on my list although I wouldn't be surprised if they were influenced by Plato since most modern political ideologies go back to the original greek philosophy. Although take what I'm saying here with a grain of salt since I'm not completely sure on that.

And another interesting tidbit from wikipedia. Even Mussolini and Hitler admired Stalin during the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. Mussolini stated that Stalin had essentially turned the USSR into a Slavic fascist state and Hitler stated that he was in the process of transforming bolshevism into a form of Russian national socialism.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_fascism

Nah, he was more focused on destroying Russian and Eastern European cultures, while continuing pump marxist jewish thought into all forms of media and academia, just like his jewish handlers who appointed him had desired for the countries they wanted to control. Not much of a fascist.

Sure thing. kek

Attached: Not Kosher.jpg (800x334, 90.7K)

you need to put in more effort for a good thread

summarize your findings to entice the audience, then post the excerpts

Yeah fuck off, /leftykike/, is that also why millions of people died under his regime and why the whole of Europe was irrevocably fucked after WWII, especially with the USSR's massive land-grabs? Fuck off with your bullshit psy-ops.

Attached: f4dcb34c103f5b8f211e4acac30d55bfe761ce76f6cde27329ed07d9b89ee4a0.png (304x447, 131.45K)

Communism didn't fail only in Russia - and it failed there long after Stalin was dead & gone - but the kosher Reds and their substandard economic system failed in China (now a land of private owners) as well as each and every country of Eastern Europe. Elsewhere, Red Cuba is used to poverty for several generations' time now, and Venezuela - well, bloody, bankrupt Venezuela is plain to see…

Apologists for a failure such as Communism are jews hoping to raise a zombie from the dead. It ain't gonna happen, Shlomo.

Attached: Holod solzhenitsyn.jpg (618x381 135.82 KB, 42.15K)

Have you read anything I've posted. The guy who wrote this book is an anti-communist. No one thinks communism is a good idea. I'm saying that Stalin removed cultural Marxism from the USSR and in turn the cultural Marxists moved to America. That's why the Jews are called "Rootless Cosmopolitans".

WHAT THE FUCK

.webm is a great reading by the late Michael Collins Piper from "Common Sense", an anti-jew paper funded by Benjamin Friedman and apparently read by Solzhenitsyn. There are also unverifiable claims online that the author, Morris Horton was involved in Trotsky's assassination.

Attached: Michael Collins Piper Reads 'Unwinding the Jewish Mysteries'.webm (426x240, 7.18M)

Forgot to add, the Stalin talk starts around halfway through, but the whole thing is worth listening to.

Communism cannot work on any practical level, and Trotsky was a true believer. Stalin reversed many of the policies because they were retarded and would have wrecked any chance of Russia industrializing. Stalin had him tracked down and killed because Trotsky was still a political rival, and commies did understand that exile leaves the door open for a comeback (they learned well from Lenin.) The Zig Forums line "Stalin wasn't a true communist," does have some truth to it because, and I'll say it again, communism cannot work. Really, Stalin was a supped up version of what typically happened historically in Russia. He was basically the the atheist version of Peter the Great. A leader who dragged his country into modernity, used secret police, murdered dissenters, had work camps in Siberia, and used military force to expand the empire. Stalin, however, was far more cold, brutal, violent, and the ideology he promoted was far more poisonous.

University lefties and other modern communists STILL genuinely believe that gommunism can work, but their (((puppet masters))) understand that it is best used as a destabilizing force that opens up the opportunity for a totalitarian dictatorship to violently crush all opposition.

Attached: lenin trotsky unedited orginal.png (640x456, 125.99K)

That was amazing. Thank you. His views echo my own. I've been saying for a long time for people to stop putting their faith in conservatism and liberalism. Conservatism only seeks to conserve the old aspects of the Judeo-Masonic system brought about after the french revolution. Liberalism (or progressivism) only seeks to accelerate that Semitic worldview. People falling for the left right paradigm are dopes. Many of the people who think they are "redpilled" are in essence, mindless sheep.

So is this just a stalinistxtroskyst thread?
This is to commie for me.
It still an shit ideology and a shit system with shit corrupted people to the bone.
Its like, 2018, capitalism won and even sells stalin t-shirts, the world would be much better if leftists just stopped crying and trying to create "reformists governments" just because socialism failed hard, you guys just fucking everything up, even making racism a lefty thing just to justify your brain damaged ideology.
So, just shhhh, just tears now, give up, capitalism won, let Trump save the world.

Attached: Viva.jpg (225x225, 9.27K)

Capitalism is globalism just like communism is internationalism. They're just different branches of it. One seeks to turn the world into one giant proletarian (slave) mass. The other seeks to turn the world into one giant consumerist (slave) market. You're falling for the left right paradigm pushed by the Jews. Taking pride in being "right wing" just means you're a sheep. The same with those who take pride in being "left wing". Meanwhile the Jews are laughing all the way to the bank.

Attached: 97e.png (612x612 465.96 KB, 58.07K)

So why did Hitler attack Stalin?

They had a secret pact, and then?

Stalin, in his late years, even fought the jews, just like Hitler:

> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctors'_plot

Doesn't mean, he wasn't a disgusting piece of shit tho.

Attached: 1361366518001.jpg (600x599, 46.88K)

nu/pol/ would support him because muh israel

>'fought'' the jews
He displaced one group of jew thugs on behalf of the jew thugs that owned him

Well I've heard arguments saying that Stalin had troops on Germany's border and was looking to attack Hitlers ally in Romania so he could get his oil fields. Although I've never been too sure about that theory since I've always heard that Stalin was destitute and taken completely by surprise when Hitler invaded. That doesn't sound like the behavior of someone who was prepared for, or planning a conflict with Germany. Although, I also read that Stalin had thought that conflict was coming in the 30's, although things would have undoubtedly changed to an extent by the time Barbarossa rolled around.

So I'm unsure if Stalin wanted to be friends with overtly nationalist countries (since he did help the Nationalist Chinese against the communists) with the hopes of eventually getting an alliance with fascist leaning powers. (he did sign a non aggression pact with Germany), or if he simply wanted to expand the USSR.

If Hitler didn't start the war, and kept a Germany first policy, wouldn't UK, France, USA ally with Germany to fight Russia in case they started invasion in Europe?

Yea, I know.
He wasn't an angel or savior or anthing.
He was a fucking psycho, causing irreparable damage to us all.

But what I find stunning, is that shortly after he turned on the kikes, he died as well.
And ironically he was poisoned.
Just as predicted.

So if Stalin was poisoned, and Patton assassinated, how could anyone else that will never have the power of those guys, defeat the jews?

Fuck off Ebolion

this

I'm not too sure about that. Hitler and Mussolini showed the European establishment that Fascism could work in Europe. It threatened the power of the democratic bureaucrats (i.e. the corrupt parliamentarians). I don't think France of the UK would have ever allied with Germany. They both wanted the German people destroyed, humiliated and defeated. That's why I find it tragic that the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact didn't last. If Germany had allied itself with the east, it could have destroyed Marxism once and for all. The USSR may have called itself Marxist but it was far less Marxist than the Bankers operating out of London and New York.

I wasn't talking about Patton.
Stalin was definitely poisoned tho.
His murderer, Beria, even bragged about it:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavrentiy_Beria#Stalin's_death

Single people are vulnerable.
The masses aren't.
That's how.

Attached: 1420206792853.gif (456x522, 613.06K)

Bamp for this is Zig Forums now.

I always say it myself. Nobody killed more commies than the Germans except the commies themselves!

Stalin was a great man. He was still a filthy commie but a filthy commie that achieved great things.

Sharing isnt jewish nature. Capitalist usury is.

Attached: 1486476490830.jpg (1024x576, 77.66K)

He failed into same trap as Napoleon did

europe was too small for two superpowers

Well Old Joe only cared about being king forever so being surrounded by idiots is one way to ensure nobody dethrones you. He did kill all the opposed and insane kikes who were trying to outlaw all religious activity, make communes to replace families, push tranny shit, ect. But he also killed everybody else as well, because anybody who can rock the boat needs to go.

Oh it goes further than that, Trotsky and Lenin outlined how you wouldn't have any private property and would live in ant like communal villages wherein everybody rotated housing every week so as to not get attached. Also all children would be anonymously taken away at birth and raised by community nurses(jews or politicos?)

Also faggotry was to be encouraged and marriage eventually outlawed.

Stalin was an asshole who didn't give a shit about anybody but himself, but even he knew jewish hogshit when he saw it.

Funny enough those hard line kikes would have tanked Russia and left it defenseless for Uncle Adolf or anybody else who came along.

The really funny part is that "historians" and modern marxists claim Trotsky was some kind of military genius when in reality he sucked at everything he ever did and only won the civil war because he was funded directly by rich foreign kikes.

Stalin was planning on invading him in 43. No joke.

But trozkyst were right :^) Family is outdated bourgeois atavism and only works in traditional non developed agricultural country. Emancipation plus family means explosives mix of failing demographics and increasing social expenses on the peafowling and sex hunt. Family stops working.

Stalin lovers tend to present his polices as saving for Russian demography. But here are the FACTS. Soviet proletariat didn't reproduce! Under Stalin it only became gradually worse. Total fertility rate of the city population in the Russia abruptly fall to the 1.9 in the 1924 (below reproduction rate that is 2.05-2.1 without wars, wars? kek) and then to the 1.7 in the 1939 (Stalin stronk!).

Only saving thing for USSR demography was reproduction of rural population (where penetration and presence of emancipation and communism was weak). But this also it means that USSR was doomed in the long run. Because rural population is outdated and commies polices was to reduce it and send people to the city, to the factory. This is logical, home many rural population developed country needs for food production? 3-5%? But such progress and industrialization also means it cuts down source of workforce. Communism could only exist by sucking of resources from the peasants when commies declare proletariat as primary class. When peasantry went away USSR demographics and USSR fully keeled over.

Attached: 24324.jpg (841x778, 284.21K)

Stalin was originally a supporter of the idea of the foundation of an israel, as he believed it would be a strong socialist sattelite state in the cold war. Stalin was naive though, as he assumed the jews wouldn't betray him like kikes always do

The kikes sided with the west in the cold war, even though the soviets were a backer of the creation of their new country. When the Israeli prime minister (((Golda Meir))) visited the soviet union in 1948, thousands of jews all came out to celebrate the yid homeland and people. This is about where stalin began to realise the truth about jewish nature and how they are only loyal to themselves and not the nation they live / were born in.
Theres some good information on the kikepedia page if you are willing to sift through the kvetching.

sorry for the formatting and shit, i'm phoneposting. also i've been lurking for the past two years and have never bothered posting

Attached: 27713cdee56eac7d41cf1f2df43b0694cd0ea137e7738b8bb7d748f69249c18b.jpg (720x640, 132.32K)

Well, to be fair, of the two Stalin was the better one IMHO but only as good as being shot instead of hanged…

So all he did was drag it when normally communism was just headdiving into the mud?

Could you at please use proper filenames especially when the infograph is in squatrunes?

its the pdf screenshot.

All about USSR and Russian demographics.
demoscope.ru/weekly/archives.php
www.demoscope.ru/acrobat/ps17.pdf

Stalin killed more kikes than Hitler (((supposedly))) did

According to an user that was exactly the plot of the first successful light novel the righter of "Tanya the Evil" wrote. It was about a completely sadistic psychopath with no ideological motives that gradually ascended the communist party's ranks with universal praise.

Tanya on the other hand was the reincarnation of a cutthroat atheist businessman that despite of her nearly sociopathic utilitarian views she really disliked killing and hated war. Ironically in her efforts to end the war as quickly as possible and guarantee a safe privileged life for herself (and to spite the supernatural being that presented itself as God and reincarnated her as a loli into the World War world) through nationalist meritocracy she ends up being viewed as a high-minded patriot, an inspiring and fatherly-figure leader of her military subordinates and a champion of the people and God.

tl;dr: based nip writer presents communism as a glorification of the worst elements of humankind and nationalism as a system that can bring out the best for society out of the most egomaniac individualist assholes in a format that eludes the political correctness radar

Attached: cheerful tanya2.jpg (638x4320 1.1 MB, 362.68K)

Thank ya kindly.

Invalid comparison. Hitler was a vegetarian sweetheart and Stalin was a murderous psychopath.

If uncle Adie what the same mentality as the Georgian steel-golem he would have burnt the whole world, as he could, and rule its ashes.

Attached: hitler naturalism.jpg (639x405 16.92 KB, 115.49K)

German economy was on the verge of collapsing. It was either war or going back to Weimar once again. The Third Reich was running out of food and oil. War was at this point inevitable. It was either Hitler taking the initiative and invading the Soviet Union or doing nothing and facing the consequences of overblown social programs and the rapid rearmament. All Soviets had to do is put a stop on selling cheep gas and foodstuffs to Germany and the Third Reich would be toast. After all, Germany was already embargoed by the United States and the UK.

look up operation thunder with key word soviet union you fucking idiot

...

In the mid-1930s mortality rates in Germany increased substantially in almost every age group, even when compared with those in 1932, the worst year of the Great Depression. Moreover, children's heights —an indicator for health and quality of nutrition (that's why for example African niggers are shorter on average, lack of good quality foodstuffs) — were generally stagnating between 1933 and 1938, but had increased significantly during the 1920s. Persecution alone cannot explain such an acute crisis in biological well-being. Rearmament expenditures increased at the expense of public health measures. Food imports were curtailed, and prices of many agricultural products were controlled. There is ample evidence that this set of policies had an adverse effect on the nutritional status and the health of the German population. Specifically, suffering most from the policy of restricting imports of protein-rich agricultural products were the highly developed regions with large urban sectors and the coastal regions of the Northwest.

Attached: mortality.JPG (859x532 37.28 KB, 61.57K)

Attached: 1526766365225.jpg (569x584, 147.64K)

Remember, comrade, eating your own children is a barbaric act!

Attached: 1493505948458.jpg (900x1261, 666.9K)

god has never belonged in schools or governments in the first place

The last pic is interesting, but probably the result of the embargoes themselves.
I'm interested in the first and second chart.
You can't prove starvation like that, since the second statistic only indicates BEEF. Germany is pork land, not beef land.

Unless you would like to elaborate further.

You can still disprove his post if he is incorrect you know. Hone your critical thinking skill please. Hitler would love that.

Attached: Based German druid.png (472x690, 295.88K)

You realize 3rd image almost contradicts your claim, right Schlomo?

Attached: 1524944615928.png (1153x945, 26.39K)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icebreaker_(Suvorov)
Stalin was massing for a direct attack against Germany. His units were stationed far forward, with for example a major airfield being within 800 meters of the border, and giant supply depots being placed similarly far forward. This was not solely Stalin's plan, he had lots of help from international jewry and did not turn it down. What caught Stalin off-guard was how quickly the Germans were able to launch their preemptive attack and completely overrun the forward positions.

Stalin is not some good guy, nobly trying to free mother Russia of the jew. He's not even Russian he's Georgian and he's a proven psychopath, so the best bet is that he was simply power-hungry. If he wanted to get rid of the jews, it was probably because he saw them as a threat to his power and he overreached. Similarly, him destroying the retarded jewish policies like free love and state-run families makes sense from the standpoint of a leader trying to consolidate power, because a weak nation is of no use to an egomaniac. This simply shows the inherent benefit of having a permanent ruler, which is that they look after the long-term health of their domain so that they may enjoy it's fruits during their whole life, rather than having short-term elected officials who care only about immediate gain. In Russia's case, this was largely offset by the dead weight that is communist central planning.

Germany didn't even go into a war economy until 1943. Try again, kike.

how stupid can you be?

Icebreaker was not a solid plan, it was a theory from a historian way later.

You can literally check Wikipedia on that.

Sounds like today's problem.

Attached: 1524846945052.jpg (700x499, 57.24K)

That is retarded.

The plan itself is speculative, the troop concentrations are not. There's no sane defensive posture that puts airfields and supply depots within spitting distance of the border, that is a purely offensive move.

How trozkyst aren't right? Since emancipation family fails to deliver sustainable birthrates world ide. As result relative numbers of shitsksin who don't into emancipation rises. (this was case for USSR too).

Its either remove emancipation
or
Turn birthing into state's service. USSR already had mandatory military conscription why not extend it on the childbearing? Tthis is natural path for Communism who forces citizens into serving society. Why make exemption from women from serving the Motherland? WTF is this bourgeoisie crap?

It was the case of Stalin been dumb non educated fag who completely can't into theory so he just followed other philosophers without thought and bought into European "le freedom for women is a progress" meme.

I mean, the germans do the same.

Both were in Poland either ways, there's an argument that the troops are there to deter the others.

Soviet military doctrine was defeating enemy on enemy territory to reduce damage to soviet infrastructure. PR slogan "(fight) with small losses on enemy territory" was everywhere. So even pure defensive war USSR supposed to fight in the Poland and Germany.

Yes it sounds like "jew cries when he strikes you" but this is how in the twisted soviet mind preparation for defensive war looked like.

Those are all objective facts. How new are you?

If Hitler waited wouldn't they develop the atomic bomb before Stalin could reach Berlin?

Quoting Marx: "when two equally developed industrial countries fight no secret weapon can remain monopoly of one side". So Communism is not afraid of any technology in enemy hands.

Attached: Bunker Dance.webm (854x480, 2.42M)

maybe you should figure out how to read books that were not written by comrade trotsky

rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royptb/367/1589/657.full.pdf

The anthropological record indicates that approximately 85 per cent of human societies have permitted men to have more than one wife (polygynous marriage), and both empirical and evolutionary considerations suggest that large absolute differences in wealth should favour more polygynous marriages. Yet, monogamous marriage has spread across Europe, and more recently across the globe, even as absolute wealth differences have expanded. Here, we develop and explore the hypothesis that the norms and institutions that compose the modern package of monogamous marriage have been favoured by cultural evolution because of their group-beneficial effects—promoting success in inter-group competition. In suppressing intrasexual competition and reducing the size of the pool of unmarried men, normative monogamy reduces crime rates, including rape, murder, assault, robbery and fraud, as well as decreasing personal abuses. By assuaging the competition for younger brides, normative monogamy decreases (i) the spousal age gap, (ii) fertility, and (iii) gender inequality. By shifting male efforts from seeking wives to paternal investment, normative monogamy increases savings, child investment and economic productivity. By increasing the relatedness within households, normative monogamy reduces intra-household conflict, leading to lower rates of child neglect, abuse, accidental death and homicide.

theoccidentalobserver.net/2013/04/08/monogamy-and-the-uniqueness-of-european-civilization/

The Supreme Court, in Reynolds v. United States (1878):

Polygamy has always been odious among the northern and western nations of Europe, and, until the establishment of the Mormon Church, was almost exclusively a feature of the life of Asiatic and of African people. At common law, the second marriage was always void (2 Kent, Com. 79), and from the earliest history of England polygamy has been treated as an offence against society.

It also asserts the uniqueness of European civilization—that its culture and traditions are quite separate from those of Asia and Africa and that monogamy is a defining feature of the West. In this the court is quite right. Traditional European culture is the only civilization where monogamy is the norm

goodreads.com/book/show/15707651-sex-and-culture

"The whole of human history does not contain a single instance of a group becoming civilized unless it has been absolutely monogamous, nor is there any example of a group retaining its culture after it has adopted less rigorous customs."

looks like you are the "dumb non educated fag"

Attached: ethics-of-conjugal-love-and-sexuality-81-638[1].jpg (638x426, 135.33K)

Most other powers had long ago adopted the concept of a defense in depth. If it is doctrine it is a stupid one, but that's believable for the Red Army. I don't have the pasta now, but I've heard stories of soldiers having to swim across icy rivers and be deployed on both sides of it because a General drew a straight line on a map, and it was death to disobey.

Still, the (((people))) who argue against Icebreaker are the same type that scream anti-semitism the moment they hear it, and the Soviets were legendary for burying or altering any documents that put them in a bad light, so they're a much less trustworthy source than the Germans. Also, German strategy has always been to avoid a 2-front war at all costs, so the fact that Hitler attacked while Britain was not yet pacified (and the Battle of Britain had been a strategic draw or loss) means that he had some compelling reason to attack ASAP.