[Ixa]

Stalin said, "We are . . . one hundred years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in ten." And this is precisely what he had done.

Stalin, starting in 1928, had concentrated on building brick factores, coal mines, cement plants, oil refineries, power stations, steel mills, and so forth. In the Urals-Kuzbadd region a new industry of iron and steel had begun. In Stalingrad an enormous tractor plant had opened. With the lenient use of labour camps, Stalin had put an end to unemployment, whilst the rest of the world had suffered from mass unemployment. The figure of the 1914 level of industrial production had increased by seven times. Stalin had nationalised all Soviet farmland. Giant farms on which workers worked collectively and efficiently had replaced the Kulaks. The USSR had become industrialised in less than ten years; it had overtaken Britain as an industrial nation by 1939.

Through the limitless genius of a single leader, and the enthusiastic willingness of a formerly exploited people, within a short space of time the USSR had escaped the confines of the mediaeval ages and settled itself in the space age.

[jaakko]

Good. It was as much of enthusiasm as it was sacrifice. But life was getting better. Still, we must avoid the idea that all this was because of Stalin. Stalin wasn't control of everything, and what he did have control on, he didn't hold it alone.

In this topic http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1318
I choose the option 'b'.

It was the relation of class forces that enabled a near genuine Marxist-Leninist leadership and building of socialism in USSR untill the mid 50's. But Stalin and comrades couldn't resist forever. The power relations between the opposed class forces (the other being for the advancement of socialism, the other for gradually turning back towards capitalism) had already changed for the benefit of the capitalists and like-minded (foreign and domestic, the latter being only 'liquidated as an economic class') when Stalin died in 1953. But it wasn't because of Stalin's death that the policies changed, this was just a suitable moment for it.

[Adrien]

But it wasn't because of Stalin's death that the policies changed, this was just a suitable moment for it.

That brings a question to my mind: could Stalin, or another person, have prepared the after-Stalin? By training someone in particular for example, or planning precise things to do after his death.

And if they did, do you think Jaako that it could have saved the true path to communism?

[CasX]

Through the limitless genius of a single leader

Oh god
What is... meh... actually I'm really beyond caring about you crazies. Worship Stalin for all I care. You're wasting your time.

[jaakko]

But it wasn't because of Stalin's death that the policies changed, this was just a suitable moment for it.

That brings a question to my mind: could Stalin, or another person, have prepared the after-Stalin? By training someone in particular for example, or planning precise things to do after his death.

And if they did, do you think Jaako that it could have saved the true path to communism?

We'll there are many 'what ifs' in history. An individual person or few couldn't have made it different. Maybe if they knew better... but it's part of history that leaders can't know and foresee and take in to account everything. It's like 'could the Axis states have won WWII?' Of course they could have if they had known every move of the enemy and made no mistakes.

I think what happened to USSR was unavoidable then, one thing led to another, as also the persons' consciousness are subjected to 'cause & effect'. Even if we take the leaders' consciousness out of it, kind of go back in time with the knowledge of today, I wouldn't be so sure if it could have been avoided.

[Din]

this time i shall agree entirly, Stalin was a great man, a terrible one, but a great man. He made the country "elasticy" in it's economy i.e the USSR could afford to lose ground, facilities, people and then still be able to keep going at 100%
upon his death people had very confused feelings, they were glad that a tyrant had gone, but also sad for everything he had done for them, making one of the strongest countries the world had every seen, he had made an industrial mecca that could shrink and still churn out the same number of machines, and equipment.

i do not worship stalin, but you do have to recognise some of the good things he did

[Jason]

Stalin had nationalised all Soviet farmland. Giant farms on which workers worked collectively and efficiently had replaced the Kulaks.

Which is of course why there were famines across great swathes of the USSR at the time and why Stalin had millions of farm workers sent to the Gulags.
How anyone who killed ... what, 20 million? ... of his own people can be considered great is utterly beyond me.

[Mark Tyson]

The only way Stalin accomplished so much industrialization was through the forcible relocation of agriculture workers. Some of those famines, by the way, were deliberate - famine was used as a weapon against Ukrainian partisans.

[ZoltanVarga]

Some of those famines, by the way, were deliberate - famine was used as a weapon against Ukrainian partisans.

I suppose by that you assume all "partisans" were Ukranians and all Ukranians were "partisans"?

Also how did Stalin personally plan and oversee such "deliberate famines", given that you somehow know this to be the case?

[Jason]

Also how did Stalin personally plan and oversee such "deliberate famines"

I refer you to the answer given by the post that started this disscusion

Through the limitless genius of a single leader

If people wish to credit Stalin with wonderful vision in (allegedly) successful policies, maybe you should give him the credit for his mass murders.
Also as any dissent from Stalin's ideas resulted in death and iniative was certainly not encouraged, and sometimes punished by death, I don't see who else can get the blame.

[Fidel Nico]

"Efficiently" in relation to what it had been in it's "medieval" state, but far less efficiently than a competitive system.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. The majority of all farm produce in the UK for example is produced by the Co-operative Group. Much of the inefficies of the collectivised system in the USSR was due to either the lack of any decent peasant farmers left, the lack of incentives or the legacy of the collectivisation process.

Anyway put into context IMHO:

What 'Stalin' did in 10 years is however impressive if put in relation to the deaths amounted to the industrialisation of European countries over a period 100-200 years. The figure you provide of 20million is only of one historian, others have put it at 9 million.

However one thing I cannot justify is the Terror especially after 1936 and upto the war. I see not point in that, other than manifestation of Stalin's own personal problems and fears. Also unfair prision labour usually peasants from collectivisation or victims of terror. Also I see nothing wrong with prision labour for legitamate criminals - it means society gets back what the criminal has inflicted on it - hes paying the social cost for his crimes.

It must also be noted that it is not due to Stalin that such feats are created, but the workers, and often forced labour - collective work industrialised the USSR - not Stalin sitting in the Kremlin I fell.

[Huzington1]

If people wish to credit Stalin with wonderful vision in (allegedly) successful policies, maybe you should give him the credit for his mass murders.

"Allegedly successful"? Even the most fanatical anti-Communists "scholars" acknowledge that his policies were sucessful. Why are you saying allegedly successful?

And what mass murders? There were not any mass murders. There is no evidence whatever for mass murders. Do not be silly.

[Nox]

And what mass murders? There were not any mass murders. There is no evidence whatever for mass murders. Do not be silly.

Somebody needs to get a history book out (and read it) before some of us makes them look "silly".

Nox

[Huzington1]

And what mass murders? There were not any mass murders. There is no evidence whatever for mass murders. Do not be silly.

Somebody needs to get a history book out (and read it) before some of us makes them look "silly".

Nox

I constantly read about Soviet history. And I have read your Capitalist sources (Black Book of Communism, etc). Evidently I know far more about the subject than you do. There is not an event in Soviet history about which I do not know. Ukrainian so-called famine, so-called great purges, etc., etc., etc. I know about all these. I memorise the statistics of capitalist sources.

And what I have found, after constant study and source-checking, that the Capitalist version of the whole thing is wrong. There is no evidence for Stalin murdering a single person . . . anywhere. Even Trotsky was killed by his own friend who was getting sick and tired of Trotsky's egotism and self-love.

[Nox]

There is no evidence for Stalin murdering a single person . . . anywhere. Even Trotsky was killed by his own friend who was getting sick and tired of Trotsky's egotism and self-love.

You are now playing with semantics. While I may conceed the point that Stalin was not actually the person who pulled the trigger (I do not remember ever having read that) ... there were millions who were either killed or died as a result of his orders.

Now in court, Stalin would be just as guilty as any and all of the trigger persons.

Nox

[Huzington1]

There is no evidence for Stalin murdering a single person . . . anywhere. Even Trotsky was killed by his own friend who was getting sick and tired of Trotsky's egotism and self-love.

You are now playing with semantics. While I may conceed the point that Stalin was not actually the person who pulled the trigger (I do not remember ever having read that) ... there were millions who were either killed or died as a result of his orders.

Now in court, Stalin would be just as guilty as any and all of the trigger persons.

Nox

No, there is no such evidence. There is evidence that terrible exploiters who broke the law were executed as a result of the PARTY'S orders, but even that number does not exceed one million. Stalin was not a dictator.

Do tell me, what event have you in mind in which Stalin supposedly ordered thousands or millions dead? Or are you talking about the Ukrainian so-called artificial so-called famine, which has already been refuted, even by American capitalists?

[Nox]

No, there is no such evidence. There is evidence that terrible exploiters who broke the law were executed as a result of the PARTY'S orders, but even that number does not exceed one million.

Yes there is and it comes below. I have edited the article to bring out only the Stalin material.


Source List and Detailed Death Tolls for the Twentieth Century Hemoclysm
List of Recurring Sources
Alphabetical Index

 Elsewhere, I defined the Hemoclysm as that string of interconnected barbarities which have made the Twentieth Century so fascinating for historians and so miserable for real people. Here, I have listed the sources for determing the body count for the Big Four -- the First and Second World Wars, Communist China and the Soviet Union -- which together account for maybe ¾ of all deaths by atrocity in the 20th Century.
2. Soviet Union, Stalin's regime (1924-53)
o There are basically two schools of thought when it comes to the number who died at Stalin's hands. There's the "Why doesn't anyone realize that communism is the absolutely worst thing ever to hit the human race, without exception, even worse than both world wars, the slave trade and bubonic plague all put together?" school, and there's the "Come on, stop exaggerating. The truth is horrifying enough without you pulling numbers out of thin air" school. The two schools are generally associated with the right and left wings of the political spectrum, and they often accuse each other of being blinded by prejudice, stubbornly refusing to admit the truth, and maybe even having a hidden agenda. Also, both sides claim that recent access to former Soviet archives has proven that their side is right.
o Here are a few illustrative estimates from the Big Numbers school:
 Adler, N., Victims of Soviet Terror, 1993 cites these:
 Chistyakovoy, V. (Neva, no.10): 20 million killed during the 1930s.
 Dyadkin, I.G. (Demograficheskaya statistika neyestestvennoy smertnosti v SSSR 1918-1956 ): 56 to 62 million "unnatural deaths" for the USSR overall, with 34 to 49 million under Stalin.
 Gold, John.: 50-60 million.
 Davies, Norman (Europe A History, 1998): c. 50 million killed 1924-53, excluding WW2 war losses. This would divide (more or less) into 33M pre-war and 17M after 1939.
 Rummel, 1990: 61,911,000 democides in the USSR 1917-87, of which 51,755,000 occurred during the Stalin years. This divides up into:
 1923-29: 2,200,000 (plus 1M non-democidal famine deaths)
 1929-39: 15,785,000 (plus 2M non-democidal famine)
 1939-45: 18,157,000
 1946-54: 15,613,000 (plus 333,000 non-democidal famine)
 TOTAL: 51,755,000 democides and 3,333,000 non-demo. famine
 Wallechinsky: 13M (1930-32) + 7M (1934-38)
 Cited by Wallechinsky:
 Medvedev, Roy (Let History Judge): 40 million.
 Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr: 60 million.
 MEDIAN: 51 million for the entire Stalin Era; 20M during the 1930s.
o And from the Lower Numbers school:
 Nove, Alec ("Victims of Stalinism: How Many?" in J. Arch Getty (ed.) Stalinist Terror: New Perspectives, 1993): 9,500,000 "surplus deaths" during the 1930s.
 Cited in Nove:
 Maksudov, S. (Poteri naseleniya SSSR, 1989): 9.8 million abnormal deaths between 1926 and 1937.
 Tsaplin, V.V. ("Statistika zherty naseleniya v 30e gody" 1989): 6,600,000 deaths (hunger, camps and prisons) between the 1926 and 1937 censuses.
 Dugin, A. ("Stalinizm: legendy i fakty" 1989): 642,980 counterrevolutionaries shot 1921-53.
 Muskovsky Novosti (4 March 1990): 786,098 state prisoners shot, 1931-53.
 Gordon, A. (What Happened in That Time?, 1989, cited in Adler, N., Victims of Soviet Terror, 1993): 8-9 million during the 1930s.
 Ponton, G. (The Soviet Era, 1994): cites an 1990 article by Milne, et al., that excess deaths 1926-39 were likely 3.5 million and at most 8 million.
 MEDIAN: 8.5 Million during the 1930s.
o As you can see, there's no easy compromise between the two schools. The Big Numbers are so high that picking the midpoint between the two schools would still give us a Big Number. It may appear to be a rather pointless argument -- whether it's fifteen or fifty million, it's still a huge number of killings -- but keep in mind that the population of the Soviet Union was 164 million in 1937, so the upper estimates accuse Stalin of killing nearly 1 out of every 3 of his people, an extremely Polpotian level of savagery. The lower numbers, on the other hand, leave Stalin with plenty of people still alive to fight off the German invasion.
o Although it's too early to be taking sides with absolute certainty, a consensus seems to be forming around a death toll of 20 million. This would adequately account for all documented nastiness without straining credulity:
 In The Great Terror (1969), Robert Conquest suggested that the overall death toll was 20 million at minimum -- and very likely 50% higher, or 30 million. This would divide roughly as follows: 7M in 1930-36; 3M in 1937-38; 10M in 1939-53. By the time he wrote The Great Terror: A Re-assessment (1992), Conquest was much more confident that 20 million was the likeliest death toll.
 Adam Hochschild, The Unquiet Ghost: Russians Remember Stalin: directly responsible for 20 million deaths.
 Brzezinski: 20-25 million, dividing roughly as follows: 7M destroying the peasantry; 12M in labor camps; 1M excuted during and after WW2.
 Tina Rosenberg, The Haunted Land: Facing Europes Ghosts After Communism (1995): upwards of 25M
 Britannica, "Stalinism": 20M died in camps, of famine, executions, etc., citing Medvedev
 Daniel Chirot:
 "Lowest credible" estimate: 20M
 "Highest": 40M
 Citing:
 Conquest: 20M
 Antonov-Ovseyenko: 30M
 Medvedev: 40M
 Courtois, Stephane, Le Livre Noir du Communism: 20M for the whole history of Soviet Union, 1917-91.
 Essay by Nicolas Werth: 15M
 Time Magazine (13 April 1998): 15-20 million.
o AVERAGE: Of the 15 estimates of the total number of victims of Stalin, the median is 30 million.
o Famine, 1926-38
 Green, Barbara ("Stalinist Terror and the Question of Genocide: the Great Famine" in Rosenbaum, Is the Holocaust Unique?) cites these sources for the number who died in the famine:
 Nove: 3.1-3.2M in Ukraine, 1933
 Maksudov: 4.4M in Ukraine, 1927-38
 Mace: 5-7M in Ukraine
 Osokin: 3.35M in USSR, 1933
 Wheatcraft: 4-5M in USSR, 1932-33
 Conquest:
 Total, USSR, 1926-37: 11M
 1932-33: 7M
 Ukraine: 5M
 Second World War (1937-45)
H. Stalin:
 Deported nationalities:
 Harff and Gurr:
 Chechens, Ingushi, Karachai, Balkars, Kalmyks: 230,000 d. (1943-57)
 Meskhierians, Crimean Tatars: 57,000 - 175,000 d. (1944-68)
 Aleksandr Nekrich, The Punished Peoples (1978): Net population losses, 1939-59, after allowance for wartime losses.
 Chechens: 590,000
 Kalmyks: 142,000
 Ingush: 128,000
 Karachai: 124,000
 Balkars: 64,000
 [TOTAL: 1,048,000]
 Davies: 1,000,000 Volga Germans, Chechens, Ingush, Crimean Tatars, etc.
 Axis POWs never returned:
 Brzezinski: 1,000,000 total (incl. 357,000 Germans, 140,000 Poles)
 Davies: 1,000,000
 Katyn Massacre:
 Dictionary of 20C World History: 14,000 Polish officers systematically killed. 4,500 bodies discovered by Germans.
 30 July 2000 Sunday Telegraph [London]: 15,000 k.
 Paul Johnson: 15,000 -- a third at Katyn, the rest in Sov. conc. camps.
 Returning Soviet POWs killed after the war:
 Harff and Gurr: 500,000 - 1,100,000 repatriated Soviet nationals killed (1943-47)
 Harper Collins: 1,000,000 POWs
 Davies: 5-6M deaths, screening of repatriates and inhabitants of ex-occupied territory
 Total killed by Stalin during the war years:
 Davies: 16-17,000,000 non-war-dead
 Rummel: 18,157,000 democides
 Although the number of civilian deaths in the Soviet Union during the war is far from certain, the estimate of 7 million has gained wide acceptance, and it is repeated by Keegan, Hammond, Anchor, Encarta and Britannica. Since many of these deaths would have been caused by Nazi brutality or the simple bad luck of war, as well Stalinist repression, it seems exceedingly difficult to reconcile a total of 7 million civilian deaths with estimates of 16-19 million deaths from Stalinist brutality during the war years.
 Some recent demographic studies suggest that 26-27 million Soviet citizens disappeared during WW2 (Davies), but this number has not been widely accepted by mainstream historians.
My Estimate: Very roughly, I'd say that Stalin murdered 1M enemy POWs, 1M of his own soldiers, and some 2-4M Soviet civilians during the War. These numbers are consistant with Conquest's estimate of 10M killed by Stalin, 1939 to 1953, and they easily fit into the 7M civilian deaths, leaving room for 1M Jews and several million

Stalin was not a dictator.

Really? (This is your chance to save face.)

Nox

[elijahcraig]

The only way Stalin accomplished so much industrialization was through the forcible relocation of agriculture workers. Some of those famines, by the way, were deliberate - famine was used as a weapon against Ukrainian partisans.

You are aware that at the time the party had calculated for 20% collectivization, the poor peasants had done it at a rate of 60%?

Random numbers Nox? Nice. You are [A valued member of this forum where we don't make personal attacks].

[SF edit.]

[Nox]

Random numbers Nox?

No. These are numbers from the people who did the research.

Nice.

Thank you.

[SF:above post edited].

WOW! An insult. You have 4 whole posts and figured me out already. Don't worry pal ... I'm not interested in insulting you in return. I do not know you (nor you me). I will most likely never meet/see you. It is possible that we will exchange ideas/opinions/facts on this board. Unfortunately, we will not agree always (possibly never), but you have shown a propensity early on to forget one HUGE point ... IT'S POLITICS, NOT PERSONAL. And whether you like it or not ... that is not pathetic.

Nox

[elijahcraig]

WOW! An insult. You have 4 whole posts and figured me out already. Don't worry pal ... I'm not interested in insulting you in return. I do not know you (nor you me). I will most likely never meet/see you. It is possible that we will exchange ideas/opinions/facts on this board. Unfortunately, we will not agree always (possibly never), but you have shown a propensity early on to forget one HUGE point ... IT'S POLITICS, NOT PERSONAL. And whether you like it or not ... that is not pathetic.

Yes it is. RANDOM numbers.

Where’s Payne? I’m sure he’d be labeled a “guy who did the research” as well?