https://21centurymanifesto.wordpress.com/2016/04/25/polish-communists-sentenced-for-propagating-communism/
we are lucky to have people like Furr (and not many others like him, as he points out) so that we have facts and not bullied into accepting the fascist version of history
Panopticon posted:rip Nikolai Voznesensky, a better communist than anyone postin here
Stalin by the end of his life had grown distrustful of his closest comrades- Beria, Malenkov, Bulganin, Kruschev, even Molotov.
The man who he wanted to be his successor at first was Nikolai Voznesensky, a highly educated Leningrad economist, responsible for restoring conditions of the liberated Soviet territory after the Germans were pushed back. Also wrote a huge book about the Soviet economy in WW2, winning a Stalin prize for his work. This drew the attention of Stalin, who openly called him his successor, but this was a big mistake, as in 1950, The Malenkov-Kruschev-Bulganin gang (Beria may have also been part, but his son denies it) fabricated a case and killed him on trumped up charges in the infamous "Leningrad affair". Stalin wrote on the case, "I do not believe it!", but Malenkov convinced him that it was true. Stalin was very sick at the time and could not offer much resistance.
Then, according to Anatoly Lukjanov, a Soviet politician during the time, Stalin wanted to name Ponomarenko as his successor, because of his honesty and organizational ability. He prepared a Presidium on the subject, but died 1 day before it was scheduled. The documents where Ponomarenko was named as Stalin's suggested successor were destroyed by Kruschev. Ponomarenko himself was demoted to increasingly insignificant posts, such as ambassador to Nepal.
...
The fight between the "old guard" and the "new guard", backed by Stalin, is a key to understanding the events of the 1950's.
The "old guard", when it came to power, killed or politically eliminated each other with great fervor, and with Kruschev on top, eventually led to a stagnation of the country which played a part in the collapse...
If the "new guard" came to power, the USSR would have prospered without a doubt. The intelligence, deep economic understanding, and forward-thinking of an intellectual like Voznesensky combined with the organizing abilities of an honest, strong-willed and ideologically pure man like Ponomarenko would have done wonders for the USSR.
Panopticon posted:no
stop being tedious, what are you trying to say?
the bit you marked in red (and which you mutated into: "he DID plan for 80,000 people to be executed") is the lie i was referring to.
a cursory look at the document referred to shows it is an estimation of numbers & types of criminal & counterrevolutionary, saying they should be tried and that execution is an option.
if you want to show how this document backs up what you say, please do
Panopticon posted:cars posted:although i will say that last posted page is pretty hilariously bad in every single sentence its like a five alarm chili of shitty old propaganda
could you give an example
sure here's what i'm objecting to:
ignore the highlighting in red the guy who uploaded it put it in there for his own reasons
cars posted:sure here's what i'm objecting to:
ignore the highlighting in red the guy who uploaded it put it in there for his own reasons
could you take one sentence as an example and explain why it is shitty propaganda
Panopticon posted:has the rhizzone really devolved to citing wikipedia and anonymous forums posts
is this your response to my question?
where i asked you to stop being tedious?
as you know i was not citing wikipedia i was citing the text of the document you claim is proof stalin was preparing to shoot 80 thousand people
show how this supports your claims
Panopticon posted:has the rhizzone really devolved to citing wikipedia and anonymous forums posts
this is an anonymous forum though
i found that link to be clear and concise, so i shared it. i'm not claiming it's peer-reviewed or infallible or whatever, and if you dispute some aspect of it then please say so; it's well within your right, and i will of course give your remarks due consideration, which is more than it seems you're willing to give to others
this is how discussion works in an informal setting
if you want me to write like i'm submitting to a journal, then that's too bad because so far you don't seem like you even know how to use formal sources responsibly
doesn't make a whole lot of sense to waste precious hours of my life on someone who's already made up his mind to have made up his mind, you know?
EmanuelaBrolandi posted:Yea, don't waste your time.
alright, but i tried
xipe posted:i'll tell u whats sociopathic: joseph "dank meme" stalin never freed the weed
communism is ~just like all the others~
actually weed is widely available and acceptable to smoke in public in the dprk. check and mate, my undank friend.
Panopticon posted:no
Later in the book, Furr writes, "According to the evidence cited and examined by Gur'ianov and Kokurin the only prisoners executed were those convicted of or, in some cases, under investigation for, capital crimes.Most of the kulaks we're discussing here were in fact OUN members, that is, Nazi collaborators. btw
whereas the Communist leadership of the Soviet Union had differences with leaders of some parties but they had the same obvious goals as Communists in general, Communism among many nations, if for no other reason than they were the biggest power in the bloc and the politics supported it, rather than being completely opposed to their like movements like the Nazis, where the only thing that benefited them by their calculation were Nazi supporters in the extreme short term (one reason why Nazi fascism operated as this big blubbering suicide machine for its rule of Germany in that incarnation at least). Nazis could not present themselves as building a worldwide German nationalist movement of the nations in their bloc because that was incoherent by definition.
when I look at Furr's work as reviewed here I see a lot of it as a sort of frustrated hammering of that point over and over against the existing orthodoxy. like, people need to be told that some people in the areas in conflict supported Nazis and some were Communists and there was a significant political difference in even the bare self-interest of the leadership between Nazi Germany and the USSR in their response to their "allied" parties. europe was not filled with fainting damsels in distress between 1933 and 1945.
Edited by cars ()
xipe posted:Panopticon posted:
has the rhizzone really devolved to citing wikipedia and anonymous forums posts
is this your response to my question?
where i asked you to stop being tedious?
as you know i was not citing wikipedia i was citing the text of the document you claim is proof stalin was preparing to shoot 80 thousand people
show how this supports your claims
go ahead and count up the table that follows this explanation
II. PENALTY repressed and the amount of BE repression.
. 1. All repressible kulaks, criminals and other anti-Soviet elements are divided into two categories:
a) The first category includes all of the most hostile of the above elements. They are subject to immediate arrest and, in consideration of their cases on threes - execution.
b) The second category includes all the other less active but nonetheless hostile elements. They are subject to arrest and imprisonment in the camp for a period of 8 to 10 years, and the most vicious and socially dangerous of them, concluded on the same terms in prison, by definition, three.
2. According to the presented credentials Republican People's Commissar of the NKVD and the heads of the NKVD territorial and regional departments is approved subject to the following number of repression:
original text
II. О МЕРАХ НАКАЗАНИЯ РЕПРЕССИРУЕМЫМ И КОЛИЧЕСТВЕ ПОДЛЕЖАЩИХ РЕПРЕССИИ.
1. Все репрессируемые кулаки, уголовники и др. антисоветские элементы разбиваются на две категории:
а) к первой категории относятся все наиболее враждебные из перечисленных выше элементов. Они подлежат немедленному аресту и, по рассмотрении их дел на тройках — РАССТРЕЛУ.
б) ко второй категории относятся все остальные менее активные, но все же враждебные элементы. Они подлежат аресту и заключению в лагеря на срок от 8 до 10 лет, а наиболее злостные и социально опасные из них, заключению на те же сроки в тюрьмы по определению тройки.
2. Согласно представленным учетным данным Наркомами республиканских НКВД и начальниками краевых и областных управлений НКВД утверждается следующее количество подлежащих репрессии:
swampman posted:Panopticon posted:
Later in the book, Furr writes, "According to the evidence cited and examined by Gur'ianov and Kokurin the only prisoners executed were those convicted of or, in some cases, under investigation for, capital crimes.Most of the kulaks we're discussing here were in fact OUN members, that is, Nazi collaborators. btw
convicted by whom, chekist troikas or the ordinary courts system?
Panopticon posted:go ahead and count up the table that follows this explanation
these are prospective numbers for immediate arrest. nobody here is making any argument to the contrary on this point. what xipe is saying is that the document also explicitly qualifies that execution is presented as a penalty pending the further consideration of the cases of those subject to arrest
it very clearly is not, as you and getty seem to believe, an approval of an approximate number of executions but an approval of an approximate number of arrests that could be met with execution, pending trial
unless you can provide substantiation that the entirety of any such trials ultimately did end in the verdict of execution, and that stalin gave his approval based on his intuitive anticipation of this fact, that argument has no leg to stand on
you might claim that any of such trials would be necessarily illegitimate due to their particular administration, but that's a completely different argument
blinkandwheeze posted:Panopticon posted:
go ahead and count up the table that follows this explanation
these are prospective numbers for immediate arrest. nobody here is making any argument to the contrary on this point. what xipe is saying is that the document also explicitly qualifies that execution is presented as a penalty pending the further consideration of the cases of those subject to arrest
it very clearly is not, as you and getty seem to believe, an approval of an approximate number of executions but an approval of an approximate number of arrests that could be met with execution, pending trial
unless you can provide substantiation that the entirety of any such trials ultimately did end in the verdict of execution, and that stalin gave his approval based on his intuitive anticipation of this fact, that argument has no leg to stand on
you might claim that any of such trials would be necessarily illegitimate due to their particular administration, but that's a completely different argument
this might be a reasonable argument to make if stalin hadn't decided ahead of time the proportion of executions and incarcerations to be handed out. almost as if the guilt and innocence of the targets weren't relevant to his actions.
(these estimated numbers were shown to be quite accurate when these reactionary elements started spontaneously lynching jews and poles in 1941)
you need to show what % of those arrested after this order were a) convicted and b) executed, thanks
xipe posted:you need to show what % of those arrested after this order were a) convicted and b) executed, thanks
i am happy with getty's arguments and conclusions. cheers.
xipe posted:no the report gives estimated numbers of reactionary elements who should be tried.
it gives numbers who are to be executed and imprisoned. this was prior to their trials, prior to any establishment of guilt or innocence, prior to considerations of severity, recidivism, mitigating circumstances, or past record.
xipe posted:(these estimated numbers were shown to be quite accurate when these reactionary elements started spontaneously lynching jews and poles in 1941)
alternatively people began to oppose stalin and were turned into anti-communists after having 400,000 of their friends and family murdered on the basis of class affiliation
Panopticon posted:xipe posted:you need to show what % of those arrested after this order were a) convicted and b) executed, thanks
i am happy with getty's arguments and conclusions. cheers.
i'm not
Panopticon posted:i am happy with getty's arguments and conclusions. cheers.
getty doesn't actually provide any substantial argument here. he interprets the document as suggesting that the number provided is a proposal for executions pending arrest. xipe is explaining that the document does not actually say this, it is a proposal for arrests that may result in execution pending further trial
neither you nor getty actually argue for or substantiate this interpretation. getty just blithely asserts it, and xipe has demonstrated that the evidence he cites actually contradicts him
Panopticon posted:it gives numbers who are to be executed and imprisoned. this was prior to their trials, prior to any establishment of guilt or innocence, prior to considerations of severity, recidivism, mitigating circumstances, or past record.
this is at least the third time you've simply reiterated getty's assertion in place of actually addressing the counterpoint that is being raised. it does not give any number of individuals to be executed. yet again, it provides a proposal of numbers to be arrested that may be subject to execution pending further trial
Panopticon posted:to be quite honest i don't think stalin really cared about individual guilt or innocence, given his stated goal was the destruction of the kulaks as a class
His stated goal was the elimination of a class?? Wow no true communist would want that.
So what should he have done about the estimated ~80k reactionary terrorists actively trying to bring about the destruction of the soviet state, ask them nicely to stop? Arresting them and executing the worst of them seems like an extremely good idea. Also, fuck you
Petrol posted:Panopticon posted:
to be quite honest i don't think stalin really cared about individual guilt or innocence, given his stated goal was the destruction of the kulaks as a class
His stated goal was the elimination of a class?? Wow no true communist would want that.
So what should he have done about the estimated ~80k reactionary terrorists actively trying to bring about the destruction of the soviet state, ask them nicely to stop? Arresting them and executing the worst of them seems like an extremely good idea. Also, fuck you
i wish y'all stalinists would make up your minds. did ezhov murder innocents to discredit stalin? did stalin ask for the suspects to be properly investigated? was 80k murders a reasonable price to pay for socialism?
you're suggesting that stalin conceived of the repression and liquidation of the kulaks as a class as being conducted through their execution. you substantiate this by pointing to stalin supposedly dictating numbers to be executed prior to any consideration or trial
when it is pointed out that stalin's directions did not actually indicate this, you intuit that they must have implied it because stalin conceived of the liquidation of the kulaks being conducted through execution
you say that stalin was not clairvoyant enough to know the extraordinary powers he was giving the local cheka/party troikas would be abused. but apparently he was clairvoyant enough to know that at most 80,000 kulaks had committed serious enough crimes to warrant execution. what a bizarre limitation to place on your troikas when you are concerned with guilt and innocence!
oh of course, he wasn't concerned with guilt. he was concerned with "hostility", something that was not technically a crime and therefore required the extraordinary powers he was doling out to the sociopaths beneath him
Panopticon posted:i wish y'all stalinists
What does the word "stalinist" mean?
Panopticon posted:if they didn't, he wouldn't have felt the need to specify quantities of executions vs imprisonments prior to investigations.
i have been attempting to explain you repeatedly that these directions do not specify quantities of executions vs. imprisonments prior to investigations. they specify quantities that may be considered as subject to these penalties, pending further trial, following arrest
yet again you are simply repeating this blithely without indicating that you have so much as even read the replies you have received
Edited by blinkandwheeze ()
blinkandwheeze posted:Panopticon posted:
if they didn't, he wouldn't have felt the need to specify quantities of executions vs imprisonments prior to investigations.
i have been attempting to explain you repeatedly that these directions do not specify quantities of executions vs. imprisonments prior to investigations. they specify quantities that may be considered as subject to these penalties, pending further trial, following arrest
yet again you are simply repeating this blithely without indicating that you have so much as even read the replies you have received
either stalin was interfering with legitimate investigations by placing these constraints on them (were the investigators meant to let murderers and terrorists go free if they would exceed their limit by arresting them? what a ridiculous position), or they were not legitimate investigations, they were politically motivated to ensure the destruction of the kulak class, and stalin knew this and specified executions and incarcerations without regard for guilt and innocence.