RedRalph
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 20,708
No, but it was the one that did. Credit whe its due.
USSR Like it or not?
- Thread starter Russian Soviet
- Start date
- Status
No, but it was the one that did. Credit whe its due.
aronnax
Let your spirit be free
Okay, fine let me rephrase. A lot less damage, for a lot better, Russia could have achieve if its ideology did not follow Authorative Communism.
As much as the Soviet Union did create history as it is today, if It wasnt for the butterfly effect, I would have personally gone back and shot Lenin in the head.
West 36
Can count up to 4
Just cut right to Stalin then? Well sir, you are quite the devious one.
I find fact that most progress was made during Stalin´s rule quite disturbing. Other nearly 40 years were years of stagnation and lost way. Yeah somebody will tell how 70s were good too, but think about it, USSR since Stalin wasnt developing in comparision with countries with which wanted compete.
Monarchs are a hell of a lot less competent though. Which is why they have so many revolutions that result in so many dead people.
Sharwood
Rich, doctor nephew
Not all monarchs are incompetent. There are many dictators considerably less competent than you're average evil monarch. Mugabe comes to mind right now.
Evil monarchs also tend to have Roman numerals after their names, making them sound more imposing. And titles, too, like 'the Invincible', 'the Gloriously Triumphant', the 'God Manifest', or even plain old 'the Great'.
Sharwood
Rich, doctor nephew
The 'God Manifest?' That's awesome. Who had that name, and where can I subscribe to his newsletter?
Mugabe the Gloriously Triumphant. Expect it any day now.
This dude. He may be familiar from the story of the Maccabees.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
There's a reason they called him "Epimanes" 
Actually, Antiochus IV was probably one of the sanest and best of the rulers of the Seleucid Empire, and has even been described as a 'statesman' by some historians of the period. He wisely avoided confrontation with Rome (constantly maintaining good diplomatic relations with them, and withdrawing from Egypt at Eleusis due to the threat of the Roman envoy Popillius Laenas) and did his best to rebuild the mess that had resulted from Magnesia, including dispatching Eucratides to Bactria in hopes of rousing the populace there to revolt (which they did successfully; Eucratides, however, wasted the opportunity by invading India). The Jewish revolt was largely a provincial matter, and mostly not his concern. He was dubbed 'Epimanes' largely because he hung out with commoners, kinda like Nero in a way. The assumption of 'Epiphanes' as a title is largely attributable to a need to be legitimized after coming to the throne under rather shady circumstances.There's a reason they called him "Epimanes"
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
Hence my comment in the "declare your love for posters" thread. 
Sharwood
Rich, doctor nephew
Cool. Although how I, of all people, would know anything from the story of the Maccabees, I don't know. The first time I heard the word 'Maccabee,' I assumed McDonalds had an animated bee spruiking Happy Meals.
Richard Cribb
He does monologues
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2003
- Messages
- 4,291
Well said, except that Stalin wasn't the devil.
The man sure had (lot of) blood on his hands, but I think the final verdict on him is still to come.
As for the main topic, one of our best writers once said that all evil people hate the USSR... I think that that is both a correct observation and food for thoughts.
I will elaborate on this later if I feel for it.
Sharwood
Rich, doctor nephew
The final verdict on the man is yet to come? He essentially murdered around 30 million people, many of them for the sole purpose of retaining power. Unless you're in the "Stalin was clinically insane, and therefore not responsible for his actions" set, the man was pretty damn close to pure evil.
RedRalph
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 20,708
I dont think the jury is still out on him, I think what he did is (mostly) well known and it's up to each to weigh up the good and the bad. Frankly, he did a lot of evil things, which everyone knows about, but he did a lot of good things too, which most people dont. I think the world would be a worse place without him, but I think its easy to see why so many people hate him. some of the horrible things he did actually achived things, industrialisation, defeat of Hitler etc, but some was pointless.
Don't leave us hanging. I really want to know who could have been that much out of touch with reality. I know Hamsun was institutionalized later in his life, but he was more a national socialism fan as far as I know...
I doubt I can imagine it, because lets face it I would be in prison or dead if I were in the USSR,
Aversion to authority: Check.
Aversion to god-worship/state worship: Check.
Aversion to propaganda: Check.
Skepticism: Check.
Family history: Check.
Counter-Revolutionary thoughts: Check.
Find Marx boring: Check.
Ideological Purity? Nil: Check.
Hmm.
Australia:
Guaranteed pension: Check.
Health care: Check [Granted Australia's system is not focused on preventative care, but arguably we have free health care for most things, I doubt the Soviet Union had quite as advanced a system as we did either].
Education: Check [Basically free up to Uni: 0% interest, high minimum wage, government assistance you have to have some serious issues if you can't pursue Uni education here]
Affordable housing: Not exactly check [Applies to rural Australia, high government incentives to purchase/build a house, up to 70k for low-middle income earners with many states having subsidized loan services, willing to trade for right of association, freedom of the press however]
Democratically Run Business: Not check [Prefer my other political rights over some pseudo rights when the government can put a proper gun to my head to get me to work should I disagree with the States appointees]
On the balance of facts presented before me, it doesn't seem to bad. Of course once you start looking at nice things like the Gulags, the Penal Code and its actual application, the Soviet Unions rather "pleasant" treatment of its minorities, its large body count, and its general trend to crush by military force dissent... you get a picture of a state I don't terribly like.
Other key issue with the USSR, a lack of ability to stomach criticism.
We should also wonder if this writer happened to be some party apparatchik, I'm sure I would have written it as well, if my ration cards could be confiscated, or if I could be locked up in some charming prison cell, or lose the ability to write, or any number of fun things.
It's not black or white, its some sort of murky ideological gray. I tend to hearken to the knowledge imparted on me by members of that Union who fled the Bloc when it collapsed. "Never ever go back to that thing".
Mugabe could as well. I also wonder what that had to do with the massive casualties of the First World War, Civil War and Second World War. Rather easy to pick the best land and raise the overall production of each and every peasant worker, add in a few tractors from the factories and you have a ready made growth in living standards, of course how many hungry mouths and subsistence farmers on marginal land had to die for that? Just a thought.
Commie uniforms are a close second to ahem a certain mustached German's uniforms, I'm a sucker for high collars.
I will also grant that Soviet vehicles are almost indestructible. Although all those Yank cars driving around Havana are interesting in themselves.
- Status