Pic related. I can be quite ☭TANKIE☭, but I think I'll forever be undecided over it, even if the realist in me knows I shouldn't be. On the one hand they were Soviets and had a fair list of demands, but on the other they were directly challenging the established Bolsheviks, during/right after a disastrous conflict to boot.
Polarizing events and/or decisions
Benjamin Allen
Other urls found in this thread:
Wyatt Sanchez
If Bukharin had prevailed, it never would have happened. Lowkey Bukharin was the best choice to succeed Lenin.
Gabriel Peterson
...
Parker Cruz
we're not talking about China right now.
Jeremiah Ross
This word has lost all meaning
Eli Clark
Read Lenin's post civil war works, that was his plan.
Aaron Stewart
For me it's Stalin going a bit too hard on nationalism during WW2: glorifying tsarist generals, reinstating officer ranks, ministers instead of people's commissars, replacing the Internationale, being buddy buddy with the church and so on.
I am pretty much convinced Stalin didn't do anything wrong as far as his alleged """crimes""" are concerned and USSR under him was definitely real socialism, but I can't help but feel like bringing back all that tsarist paraphernalia eroded revolutionary consciousness and led to the nomenklatura larping as White Guards in the 80s and ruining everything.
I need Tomokoposter to tell me why it was good.
Brayden Garcia
China Barely had any industry in the 80s and was decades behind in technology
thus a much more comprehensive and long lasting NEP is essential to build the economy
Meanwhile the USSR in the 20s was under constant attack and needed to industrialize rapidly to stop counter revolution
Christian Rivera
i don't know how to respond to generalizations of that sort other than
not saying that there were no issues and developments resulting from any of his policies that needed revision, and just flat out denying mistakes or problematic decisions, it's not like i'm an idealizing Stalinist
but it's nothing really worth of condemnation imo
even if i cared to write a proper effort post in response, which you probably deserve, it'd essentially come down to just that same conclusion
honestly you should ask any other proper ML for that sort of stuff, but me
the very few times i care enough to go past messing with idiots literally anyone does a better job than what i could do
theres literally no reason to ask for my take other than that i'm a faggot you happen to recognize, be it "tomoko fag" or "angry stache", and thats a really bad one, so don't
Jason Wright
Meh, you seem knowledgeable enough and well-versed on defending Stalin so I just wanted to know if you have some particular take on Stalins adoption of the more nationalist rhetorics and aesthetics in the 40s. Any perspective'd help to sort it out in my head. Not putting you on the spot or anything.