Stalin’s popularity in Russia triples since 1990

Watched video. Your Snyder talks nonsense and you repeat it. Funny how some unknown foreigner teaches Russian history. Better read Karamzin.

 

The Russian homeland underwent what it always did, an invasion by western Europe to steal its rich earth and wealth. This time it was by Nazi Germany. They didn't intend to enslave the Russians and impose what they believed was the superior Western culture on them, since they knew the Russians didn't see them that way, so they decided to exterminate them... thus the 27 million deaths.

WWII was basically a war against Russia because Germany needed land to feed its people. The western European nations just happened to intervene. They were never Hitler's intent.

Stalin led the Russian people through the war, in the same way Churchill led the English. They were both fiends, but that's what was needed in that time and place.

 

what ´d koba do to them for this...

 

Thank you for your thorough reply N, it is quite difficult for me to understand how anyone can view Stalin as a hero since he has been compared to Hitler.

http://news.stanford.edu/2010/09/23/naimark-stalin-genocide-092310/

 

Of course the Rus of Kiev did have everything to do with Russia.
They represented the earliest organization of those Slavic people into a national identity
Russia.

Ref.: Jews / Judea ​

And the political center of Russia just moved over time from Kiev to places like Novgorod, Moscow, Petrograd. It is a continuum. Absurd to claim otherwise.

 

Well, if we can step a bit from recent events - not many people have problems with admiring Caesar, for example. Man, whose army butchered thousands of gauls, and later his fellow citizens in a civil war in which strived to establish himself as single ruler of the Roman Republic. When people do not relate themselves to the hurt side - they tend to be less passionate about those who suffered. And, as time passes, we feel less connected to events. We have our lives, our problems, and Stalin is dead for six decades. As I said, moods shift. Plus, so you understand - not every "good" opinion means people consider him being hero. He did some positive things, at least been de facto head of state, when these things happened.

PLUS! There is a bit of a trick that I actually missed at first.
http://echo.msk.ru/news/1977260-echo.html

Article's name says "Число россиян, которые положительно оценивают деятельность Сталина в годы войны, выросло за последние 12 лет на 10%"
- aka "Number of russians, who positively qualify actions of Stalin IN YEARS OF WAR, increased in last 12 years on 10%". Which means, that we do not take terror before war and repressions after it, but the years of WWII, or likely a Great Patriotic War - aka 1941-1945, only.
And according to other...
https://www.rt.com/politics/383597-stalins-popularity-in-russia-grows/
"People who like Joseph Stalin the most of all the actors in the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution now account for 24 percent of Russians, or three times more than the share of 8 percent registered in 1990. According to the poll conducted by the independent Levada research agency in March this year, 24 percent of Russians described Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin as a revolutionary with whom they sympathize." - so we can assume, uness poll had option "against everyone", likely we have Stalin there competing against Lening, Trotsky, Dzerjinsky, Kerensky, Nicholas II and others. Not that hard of a competition, considering all of them have arms elbow-deep in blood and screwed up country greatly.


So, countrary to the OP's name of thread, it is not even the general popularity of Stalin - it's just two polls about specific moments in time, that gave more positive results on Stalin. I would more be curious about fact, that people nowadays more aware about invasion in Poland in 1939, the nature of October Revolution (which, I remind you, happened after the actual revolution against monarchy, and technically was a coud d'etat against Provisional Government), and, for example, the de jure status of USSR as a literal part of Allies. The actual historical facts, that many were not very familiar with before, due to lack of interest and Internet. After all, it is much easier to learn, when you can just google something up during a ten minutes long ride in metro, just on your phone.

 

Stalin has been made a monster by those he persecuted, while Lenin who threw Russia into a civil war killing millions, including thousands of priests, monks and bishops is not...

 

Although my Russian mother-in-law was more an admirer of Khrushchev because he was like the first one to provide for "people". Housing, infrastructure, etc. My father in law liked Stalin.
He believed Russians needed a "strong man" and it was evidenced by the post USSR era.
And Stalin did lead Russia more properly the USSR to victory in the Great Patriotic War.
He supervised Russia from a 19th Century industrial power to a world leader with nuclear capabilities. And a rocket program too. Father-in-Law just did not believe a democratic USSR / Russia would work. Has it?
He likes course Oatmeal cookies today and I would buy them for him from Trader Joe's.
The ones Father Stalin provided him as a child during the Great Patriotic War had no raisins. But, he still likes a good Oatmeal cookie.

Hope that gives you some perspective of why they like Stalin.

Moi

r > g

Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic,
regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.​

 

The Vikings or Varangians first appeared at Constantinople around the 9th century, and they were called Rus... or so I believe.

 

If you read it on the internet it must be true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rurik

Rurik or Riurik (Old Church Slavonic: Рюрик, Old Norse Hrœrikr; c. 830 – 879) was a legendary Varangian chieftain who according to the 12th-century Primary Chronicle gained control of Ladoga in 862, built the Holmgard settlement near Novgorod and established the Kievan Rus'. He is the founder of the Rurik Dynasty which ruled the Kievan Rus' and its successor states, including the Grand Duchy of Moscow and the Tsardom of Russia, until the 17th century.

There is a debate over how Rurik came to control Ladoga and Novgorod. The only information about him is contained in the 12th-century Primary Chronicle, which states that Chuds, Eastern Slavs, Merias, Veses, and Krivichs "...drove the Varangians back beyond the sea, refused to pay them tribute, and set out to govern themselves". Afterwards the tribes started fighting each other and decided to invite the Varangians, led by Rurik, to reestablish order.

The Rurikid dynasty went on to rule the Kievan Rus', and ultimately the Tsardom of Muscovy, until 1598. Numerous noble Russian and Ruthenian families claim a male-line descent from Rurik, and via Anne of Kiev, wife of Henry I of France, Rurikid ancestry can also be argued for numerous Western European lineages.

What part do the "Rus Ain't Russia" folks not get?
Remember the rivers and steppes and comprende how the rule followed the geographical path it did.

Moi

r > g

Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic,
regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.​

 

I don't know.

Stalin killed so many people in the Great Purge that it is remarkable that anyone was left to do the killing. Former comrades, artists and intellectuals, military officers, clergymen, dissidents, outcasts and normal Russian men and women were slaughtered in a tidal wave of blood. What is striking is not just who Stalin killed but who he spared. While hundreds of thousands of innocents were massacred, Lavrentiy Beria, who was not just a bloody killer but a known rapist, received generous promotion.

Having carved up Eastern Europe with Adolf Hitler, and oppressed its beleaguered inhabitants with such atrocities as the Katyn massacre, where 22,000 men from the Polish officer corps and intelligensia were shot in cold blood, Stalin was himself subjected to invasion. The Red Army fought with startling courage and conviction to prevail, but as the West looked on they became embarrassed. A storm of rape and murder followed the Soviets, carried out by callous and vengeful soldiers. The Nazis in Eastern Europe were replaced with cruel and subservient Stalinist officials. Bierut in Poland, Hoxha in Albania, Rákosi in Hungary and Gottwald in Czechoslovakia kept their people mired in poverty and persecution.

The Soviets inspired others. Mao took power in China and launched a sweeping campaign of modernisation that left millions of expendable victims starved or killed. Juche arose in North Korea, wrapping itself around the country in a chokehold that has persisted to the present day. Pol Pot butchered almost a quarter of Cambodians. Mariam mass-murdered in Ethiopia. Perhaps the most successful of the communist states was Cuba, where, at least, there was not large-scale killing or famine.

http://quillette.com/2017/05/08/hundred-years-communism/

 

You are joking, right? stalin nearly got russia destroyed; the germans were withing just a few KM of moscow at one point. The only things that saved russia were:

1-the russian weather in late 1941 and conditions, including mud that slowed/trapped the german tanks
2-the distance between germany and moscow (stretched supply lines) - had hitler the moron not made enemies of Ukraine...
3-greater population to throw into the flames of the war - russia had twice the german population
4-uncle joe, unlike hitler the fool, allowed quality generals like Zhukov who knew what they were doing to run the war effort.
4-Western military aid

russia was was saved by the above, not by anything uncle joe the moron did on his own.

 

We disagree.
It seems you would have it that Stalin did nothing right.
He did somethings right. Like moving Siberian troops to Moscow with equipment that was better suited for the winter than the Nazis had.
And moving factories to the Urals and getting them back in production.
And the most major thing he did right was being a strong leader.

Hope - Change.
Sound familiar ​

Considering Russians look at the Georgian, Stalin with more favoritism should
translate to us as trying to understand "why". Not just a major "diss".
I never understood why the French consider Napoleon such a hero.
If you really want some tyrants who killed, try Napoleon and Abe Lincoln.
Yet they are glorified. I can understand why although I do not agree with it.
Let's "understand" why Stalin is popular. It ain't just about chic. Is it?


Moi

r > g

Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic,
regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.​

 

1. Soviet Army was in the same weather conditions as German Army, so it is strange to point out to weather as a reason for failure. Apparently, Russian Army was better prepared for battles in winter. So it is the merit of Stalin as a chief commander.
2. You consider Ukraine as a separate state from the rest of Soviet Union, which is not correct. Germans could not make friends by invading Ukraine by definition.
3. USSR had more human resources, but at the begining of the war Germany had better military equipment and more military experience than USSR.

 

Since when did Russia start running dead guys for president?

 

Since his death in 1953, Muscovites have never been the free men like you and me, the Mongolian slaves who need a brutal Mongol Khan (czar in the Mongol term for great Khan)

 

You have never been a free man. In Stalin times you did what Moscow ordered you to do. Now in Lithuania you do what your big patron from the US tell you to do. You have only illusions about your freedom.

 

one more troll from Olgino? your friend called you?

 

Sorry, these are pure facts litwin. But history is not otherwise in matter of "ratings" as other science at least ... means, ask 3 experts about something and you got 5 different point of views / conclusions / ratings about! Which one you prefer to believe is at least your own decision and opinion...

 

Correct is that the German Army was ill prepared and equipped for the autumn and winter fight and the Red Army was far better prepared. But is not true that it was Stalin merit of being CinC for it, because Stalin failed as Cin C totally in WW-2, but made one important thing better as Hitler:
he let the fingers out of things where he was no expert of and let it do the Army leaders. The merit for the German fail of 1941/1942 winter was a merit of Shukov and some other commanders... combined with Hitlers BS orders too which made some victories easier and cause many unnecessary losses too.

USSR is standing for (in English) "Union of Socialistic Soviet Republics" and Ukraine was one of them. Ukraine suffered heavy under Stalin in the 1930's and so German units were often welcome as liberators too, what is an undeniable fact, as it is same fact that there were many Ukrainian militias fighting as SS or part of the SS too later.
Even I still learned that there still people denying that Stalin did a spark evil at all and so for sure nothing evil in the Ukraine they say ... I have no desire to discuss it with them as I have same way no desire to discuss with Neo Nazis about if Holocaust happens, what these idiots deny.

Also not true, sorry. In matter of equipment red Army was minimum equal, if not better, but for sure had much more as Germans. If wee take as example the tanks, the Germans fought with Panzer I, II, III and IV, as well Panzer 35(t) and 38(t). What hat the Red Army here? Masses of T-26 and masses of the BT tanks of different versions (BT-5, BT-7 etc.), as well these useless monsters as T-28 (3 turrets) and T-35 (5 turrets). Latters aside, T-26 and BT tanks were not really inferior to the named and used German models in matter of armor and gun power, as well mobility ... and I let the still there in use being T-34 and KV-1 and KV-2 ntanks aside, which were totally superior to the German tanks.
Where the Germans were superior was leadership and tactic, because the Red Army made is same way lousy as the French in 1940 until they changed it after heavy losses of million killed, wounded and as POW lost soldiers and masses of equipment lost.

 

no, you dont understand the base "rus" is a multi - vector term. it means very different things, between them 10000 miles and 100 and 100th years. one for sure Muscovy , (even name rossia was created only in 18s by Petska the sodomite) had nothing to do with European - Rus´

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Russia

Study, it'll do you good.

 

Litwin, you take too much Absolute that you see trolls everywhere

 

Thank you for the nice detailed post.
As to the first point. The ability to properly organize, coordinate the things and choose appropriate people- this was the most important thing from Stalin, so I still beleive that finally this is his merit that Soviet Army was better prepared for winter war. Noone, of course deny the talents of the generals and marchalls, including Zhukov.
Second point. I do not know about which Ukraine you are talking about. As there were two parts of Ukraine- the western part (Lvov, Uzhgorod) which was annexed in 1939 and where people had not experienced the same difficultes as other Ukranians in 1930s, but where people indeed welcomed German Army. And there was Ukraine to the East of Kiev: Donbass, Odessa etc, where German Army was not welcomed at all, yet at the same time they suffered most from Stalin.
The last point is that I disagree with you simply because most of the military equipment, including tanks, airplanes where destroyed in the first several days of the war. Many Soviet airplanes, for example did not even have a chance to get to the air and were destroyed at the airbases.