EDIT: @ Other "reds" in this thread: What are some of your opinions/views on Stalin? I'd particularly like to hear from Cheezy the Wiz and Traitorfish among others.
My opinion of Stalin is multifold.
First, he was one of the most capable statesmen in history, and an extremely impressive person. He rose from the absolute barest of poverty, born into an abusive family and a terrible childhood. He first sought the Georgian Orthodox priesthood, but later turned to the communist party, which he worked his way up the ranks of to become a prominent editor of Pravda before the Revolution, and political commissar to a cavalry regiment during the Civil War, and the to a division during the Polish-Soviet War. He then was elected head of the Communist Party, and jockeyed his way through throes of adversaries to become of such high standing that he was able to destroy party democracy and cement his power through what was left of that democracy by filling staff with people loyal to him. He led the country through economic and social upheaval such as had never before been seen in history, and then through the most dangerous period to Russians in their history, the Second World War, when their foe quite literally sought their absolute extinction. Even the Mongols did not pursue that end. He then navigated the post-war peace to create security for Russia such as had never existed before.
It is not particularly productive to engage in counterfactual postulations, and we cannot know how any of this might have unfolded had Stalin not been at the helm. Perhaps it might have gone better, perhaps it might have gone worse. We know, for example, that opponents of Socialism in One Country sought the internationalist end. Perhaps they might have antagonized the West in such a way that either the Soviets went to war, or were invaded, before they were capable of dealing with the imperialist threat, and the Revolution's gains were smothered? Perhaps industrialization might have been slower and the Soviets would not have been ready in June 1941? Who knows. I have my opinions, but they are just that. The fact is the Stalin led these things to success. Of course, these things were mostly not his ideas, they were stolen from other people, so it's not as if the Five Year Plans, or forced collectivization, or many other things would most definitely not have happened had Stalin not been head honcho.
However, I also think Stalin did more to
harm the future of the USSR than anyone else. Even if we postulate that all that he did was necessary, what we are left with in May 1953 is a communist party full of people completely and utterly afraid to think for themselves. This unimaginative generation proved unable to continue the Permanent Revolutionary trend forward, and continue to guide the Soviet economy through the capitalist phase toward socialism. They all thought in the same way they had learned was safe: which was what happened in the 1930s. And so they continued to act as if they were in that time, even though that was no longer appropriate for their socio-economic situation. All too few people were able to think outside the tiny box they had become accustomed to, most notably Khrushchev. I am firmly convinced that had his reforms been faithfully enforced, and had they not been undone by Brezhnev and the power behind his throne, then things might have gone much better for them through the 70s and 80s, and the troubles of those times might have been avoided. Maybe even the forces that led to dissolution. But that didn't happen, The Reformer was forced into retirement by people unable or unwilling to think for themselves, and that is a situation that Stalin created.
I also, of course, must speak about the deportations and purges. As I have said before, purges have a purpose. A purge, contrary to popular connotation, is not a mass execution of dissidents. It is the discharge from an organization of unwanted elements. There is no question that purges needed to happen in the 1930s. Lots of people had risen to power during the Civil War and NEP who were not communists, and who bore no allegiance to socialism, who could have easily become imperialist agents. They were not politically reliable, and should have been removed from their posts. But did they deserve to be executed or sent to Siberia, and their families too? Absolutely not. And there were quite obviously a great many people who were good communists and good people who met grisly ends in those years. To be a student of Russian history, and to be a champion of the October Revolution, and see so many of the people who made the Revolution, and the Soviet state, be discarded like so much rubbish by that which they had worked so tirelessly to create, is heartbreaking. In fact, as a communist, to hear people defend such actions in my own party, is
terrifying. And the deportations are indefensible.
So overall, I think Stalin did more harm than good. There is unquestionably very much good that he did, and that he presided over, but as I have said above, most of that were not things which only Stalin could have gotten done, in only the way that he did it. And as I have shown, his policies and style of rule created long-lasting structural problems which may very well have led to the end of the USSR decades later, and which even during his own time placed the USSR in very precarious positions at times. I think the worst crime of all, however, is the betrayal of one's friends, and even if all else had succeeded, the fact that he destroyed his comrades to do it is unforgivable, and as I said, an active deterrent toward joining the communist movement, and something that lurks in the back of my mind always, as I see people today rush to defend every ounce of his existence.
I think Stalin is best understood as a unique historical persona, whose persona ought to
stay historical. I do not think anyone should seek to emulate Stalin any more than I think anyone should seek to emulate Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan, even though one might marvel at their incredible achievements and their lives.
as a class so that the state could control agriculture and use capital extracted from the countryside to build industry. Tens of thousands of people were shot by Soviet state police and hundreds of thousands deported. Those who remained lost their land and often went hungry as the state requisitioned food for export. The first victims of starvation were the nomads of Soviet Kazakhstan, where about 1.3 million people died. The famine spread to Soviet Russia and peaked in Soviet Ukraine. Stalin requisitioned grain in Soviet Ukraine knowing that such a policy would kill millions. Blaming Ukrainians for the failure of his own policy, he ordered a series of measures—such as sealing the borders of that Soviet republic—that ensured mass death.
Glad to be of service! My pleasure is to teach.
