• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Stalin's Order No. 270

They probably would have won it a lot quicker if half of his officers hadn't been purged before the war.

I agree. But then comes the question what would happen if the USSR didnt proceed with quick and fast industrialization techniques?
 
1.)Its not my position
2.)Its not racist and nor is it my position
3.)It equates to the position of "some people are not ready for democracy"


Look, man, we heard all that crap before. We heard it about slaves, blacks, women, gays and other minorities. One would think a modern person with even just a basic education would understand that "they like it that way" is a disgusting position void of ethics, perspective and even humanity.

What kind of a scumbag looks at the oppressed and claims "they like it that way".

Horrible, just horrible. It's really the person making that claim who is inhuman, not the subject of their demonization and moral callousness.
 
Look, man, we heard all that crap before. We heard it about slaves, blacks, women, gays and other minorities. One would think a modern person with even just a basic education would understand that "they like it that way" is a disgusting position void of ethics, perspective and even humanity.

What kind of a scumbag looks at the oppressed and claims "they like it that way".

Horrible, just horrible. It's really the person making that claim who is inhuman, not the subject of their demonization and moral callousness.

1.)Its not my position
2.)Its not the same position if certain people within a country are ready for democracy.
3.)Its the position if the country is stable enough for democracy, economically stable enough for democracy, and if the elections themselves will be free and fair
 
I agree. But then comes the question what would happen if the USSR didnt proceed with quick and fast industrialization techniques?

Which could have been achieved without totalitarianism (or even authoritarianism for that matter) , i fail to see why its a prerequisite
 
I agree. But then comes the question what would happen if the USSR didnt proceed with quick and fast industrialization techniques?

That would have happened regardless of Stalin. The USSR progressed despite Stalin, not because of him.
 
Which could have been achieved without totalitarianism (or even authoritarianism for that matter) , i fail to see why its a prerequisite

The Czar certainly wasnt into the whole interest of massively industrializing the country. He seemed pretty content staying power with a basic feudal/peasant economic system.
 
That would have happened regardless of Stalin. The USSR progressed despite Stalin, not because of him.

On an industrialized scale? No it was not. If it was it was going very slow and if they didnt the USSR probably would of been overrun by the Nazis when they invaded.
 
1.)Its not my position
2.)Its not the same position if certain people within a country are ready for democracy.
3.)Its the position if the country is stable enough for democracy, economically stable enough for democracy, and if the elections themselves will be free and fair

It's the position of "they like it that way". And I'm surprised someone with a highschool education would indulge in that scumbag demonization of their fellow man.

I see what side of the civil rights era you would have been on. You would have been with the "they're not ready for freedom and democracy" camp.
 
On an industrialized scale? No it was not. If it was it was going very slow and if they didnt the USSR probably would of been overrun by the Nazis when they invaded.

Nonsense. You're just giving Stalin credit for the natural course of global development. You're crediting him with the fact that time brings progress. As I noted above, the USSR progressed DESPITE Stalin and not because of him. What you're doing is no different than claiming Bush is responsible for hybrid cars.
 
It's the position of "they like it that way".
No. Nor did i ever say that. Its a stability question.

And I'm surprised someone with a highschool education would indulge in that scumbag demonization of their fellow man.
1.)Have more than a high school education
2.)Again this ISNT MY ****ING POSITON. Im surprised with someone with more than a high school education like yourself cant see that ive said that multiple times. Im simply bringing this position up to debate because its often debated on.
3.) I have not demonized anyone.

I see what side of the civil rights era you would have been on. You would have been with the "they're not ready for freedom and democracy" camp.
:doh
Read the ****ing post.
1.)Its not my position
 
There is very much a debate around this idea. Such as if Stalin was so brutal to his own people would they have in fact won WW2 with a less totalitarian brutal leader. Also there is very much a debate if the majority of the Middle East can infact be stable without autocratic or totalitarian leaders. Its very much up in the air for debate and the debate has been going on in history and political science.

Stalin was a piece of **** murderer who, with the help of Mao and Pol Pot, took a huge **** on socialism. They ****ed up so badly that even corporate neo feudalism looks good in comparison. His corpse should be marinated in piss and buried upside down.
 
Read the ****ing post.

I read the post. It's the same crap racists and misogynists claimed during the civil rights era. It's apologism for oppression and ethically void. It rests, fundamentally, on the claim that some people are less than human.
 
Nonsense. You're just giving Stalin credit for the natural course of global development.
1.)I hate Stalin and his rapid industrialization of the USSR using workers as mere slaves for quick personal gain
2.)I hate Stalin for his vast confiscation of grain and using hunger as a political tool
3.)I hate Stalin for eliminating political enemies and anyone he deemed had to go because of his parnoia like the whole cadre of Old Bolsheviks
4.)I would of much rather of seen Trotsky come to power after Lenin died
5.)I think war and the Nazis could of been stopped from rising to power if Trotsky came to power and worked with the German Socialists and communists in Germany during the German Revolution by using Trotky's theory of World Revolution instead of Stalins policy of Socialism in One Country
6.)Stalin was no military genius and got rid of his whole officer corps and often ignored intelligence on the Germans once the war began
-So no im not giving Stalin credit im merely trying to spark debate-

You're crediting him with the fact that time brings progress. As I noted above, the USSR progressed DESPITE Stalin and not because of him. It's no different than claiming that Bush is responsible for hybrid cars.
But the USSR did not progress as quick. The USSR industrialized very quickly under the first 2 five year plans.
 
Stalin was a piece of **** murderer who, with the help of Mao and Pol Pot, took a huge **** on socialism. They ****ed up so badly that even corporate neo feudalism looks good in comparison. His corpse should be marinated in piss and buried upside down.

And i agree.
Just trying to bring forward points of discussion
 
I read the post. It's the same crap racists and misogynists claimed during the civil rights era. It's apologism for oppression and ethically void. It rests, fundamentally, on the claim that some people are less than human.
Appaently you cant read because none of that was my POV im merely bringing up points of discussion.
 
But the USSR did not progress as quick. The USSR industrialized very quickly under the first 2 five year plans.

They would have industrialized much more quickly under a democratic system. History has made clear that democracy and human rights leads to development. As I've noted many times, but still you seem unable to grasp this: the USSR progressed despite Stalin and not because of him.

When you give Bush credit for hybrid cars, your position will at least be consistent, if just as inane.
 
The Czar certainly wasnt into the whole interest of massively industrializing the country. He seemed pretty content staying power with a basic feudal/peasant economic system.

Whos to say Alexander Kerensky wouldn't have done the same had he not been left in power? This would also have the benefit of the Civil war, the Winter War and the Polish Soviet war a lot less likely. Leaving the Soviet Union in a far stronger position. Furthermore had Stalin not sabotaged the Republican cause in Spain the balance of power in Europe would have been far more favorable.

But again where I don't see your logic is where you make the link between totalitarianism and industrialization, how are they related?
 
Was Stalin worse than Hitler?
 
They would have industrialized much more quickly under a democratic system. History has made clear that democracy and human rights leads to development. As I've noted many times, but still you seem unable to grasp this: the USSR progressed despite Stalin and not because of him.
What progresses happened under the Czar? Would the USSR have been as industrialized under the Czar or the interm government?
Would there have been less human rights abuses? Yes. Would it of been democratic? Yes. Do i think it would of been as industrialized? No.

When you give Bush credit for hybrid cars, your position will at least be consistent, if just as inane.
Note to make. Our economy is not centrally state planned therefore no one can give Bush credit.
The USSR was centrally planned. Therefore Stalin can get his ****ed up credit for industrializing the country vastly.
 
Appaently you cant read because none of that was my POV im merely bringing up points of discussion.

And you cling to these "points of discussion" as if they have any merit.

Anyway, it is not a "point of discussion". It's morally abject garbage spewed by racists, misogynists and bigots of every shade. It's the basis for bigotry the world over. It's "they like it that way" and "they're not ready for freedom". These calls for oppression were common during the civil rights era. They were just as disgusting then as they are today.
 
And you cling to these "points of discussion" as if they have any merit.
Any point of discussion backed up by history and data has merit.

Anyway, it is not a "point of discussion". It's morally abject garbage spewed by racists, misogynists and bigots of every shade. It's the basis for bigotry the world over. It's "they like it that way" and "they're not ready for freedom". These calls for oppression were common during the civil rights era. They were just as disgusting then as they are today.

:doh
They are not equated what so ever.
 
Whos to say Alexander Kerensky wouldn't have done the same had he not been left in power?
I agree and this is left up to debate. Im simply trying to spur debate. This is not my POV that Stalin was good or anything like that.

This would also have the benefit of the Civil war, the Winter War and the Polish Soviet war a lot less likely. Leaving the Soviet Union in a far stronger position. Furthermore had Stalin not sabotaged the Republican cause in Spain the balance of power in Europe would have been far more favorable.
I agree 100%


But again where I don't see your logic is where you make the link between totalitarianism and industrialization, how are they related?
That nobody knows if that Kerensky or Lenin or even if Trotksy came to power that they were willing to industrialize the nation.
 
Any point of discussion backed up by history and data has merit.

So, like the racists and misogynists of the civil rights era, you DO believe that some people are just not ready for freedom and democracy?

You believe there is evidence for this? During civil rights, your position (avocation of this "history and data") would have been touting the studies that "proved" blacks were not ready for freedom and democracy.

Do you support studies that "prove" women are not fit for the workplace, or that they are not fit for politics? That they're just not ready for it?

Tell us, who else is like a monkey and incapable of appreciating freedom and democracy.
 
So, like the racists and misogynists of the civil rights era, you DO believe that some people are just not ready for freedom and democracy?

You believe there is evidence for this? During civil rights, your position (avocation of this "history and data") would have been touting the studies that "proved" blacks were not ready for freedom and democracy.

Do you support studies that "prove" women are not fit for the workplace, or that they are not fit for politics? That they're just not ready for it?

Tell us, who else is like a monkey and incapable of appreciating freedom and democracy.

This is a system of governance issue.
This is not a equality issue or a civil rights issue, or being treated equal under law issue.
 
This is a system of governance issue.
This is not a equality issue or a civil rights issue, or being treated equal under law issue.


I suppose we should not be surprised that someone with an avatar modeled on Maoist propaganda supports oppression.

mao-propaganda.jpg


30 million people, in the name of progress.
 
Back
Top Bottom