What did he do wrong? Hard mode: No moral-fagging

Pushed back the Germans at a city that was named after him and ultimately made Hitler kill himself at the end. I hate communism but this guy was pretty alpha and based.

Abolished religion and diminished the influence of the church, creating a nation of atheists, opening the gates to degeneracy.
Marxism inevitably leads to social decay because of this.

He betrayed his own people, in my opinion

Nothing. He killed plenty of communists.

>population
The population was on the rise since the 1920's, with the exception of WW2; even though many people died, may people were born, too.

>would have happened anyway
Why, should it have happened? Of course, Stalin didn't invent these technologies himself, but the state, organized by him, provided the conditions, that'd made these inventions possible, in the first place.

Attached: Population_of_former_USSR.png (1024x602, 97K)

that's the goal of (((communism))), Hans
didnt uncle adolf teach you that much?

Supported Trofim Lysenko who fucked over his own nation's scientific field.

He was based. And this is from a National Socialist who had 2 relatives in the SS. I wish the USSR was crushed by Germany, and if not Germany the Americans and the allies should have steamrolled them in 1945. All that being said, Stalin was alpha chad. But still fuck him.

Attached: stalin.jpg (1080x627, 76K)

Today's degeneracy, and yesterday's communism, is and was consequential to the materialism, established during the industrialisation and intellectual enlightenment; communism was an attempt, to overcome the already existing materialism and with it the ensuing degeneracy. Zur Zeit des Marxismus war das Kind bereits in den Brunnen gefallen.

What do you mean?

I unironically agree with this.

>The population was on the rise since the 1920's
First, population rise =/= success. See India.
Second, Slavs were like 50% of the Soviet population, hence we must look at the Slavic population separetely.

Neither does the "success" of the state equates to the happiness and wealth of the general public, which was pretty poor and often experinced starvation before, during and after the second world war.
>even though many people died, may people were born, too.
fantastic logic
>but the state, organized by him, provided the conditions, that'd made these inventions possible, in the first place.
Russia was notorious for science and technology before. Soviet system of "organisation" showed itself greatly during the events of Chernobyl lmao

Next dumb suggestion

For thisbto be true you have to presume that GDP and shit Is good which is a moral judgement. Fuck off brainlet.

I measure success in power; it's undeniable, that the USSR was one of the most powerful nations, before and certainly after WW2;

I pointed out the demographic development, because you alluded to it, initially; whatever ethnic group prevailed or was more or less successful during Stalin's regime is not relevant for me, because I'm not advocating for White nationalist or Slavic nationalist viewpoints.

>happiness and wealth of the general public
Irrelevant, since I measure success in power, exclusively.

>fantastic logic
Nonetheless, valid.

>Chernobyl
Stalin was already dead, when the Chernobyl catastrophe happened; specify, how he was responsible.

>communism was an attempt, to overcome the already existing materialism and with it the ensuing degeneracy
And how would communism accomplish that?

>GDP
I don't care about GDP; the only constant valid is power. USSR was undeniably powerful, more powerful than it'd ever been and ever would be, during Stalin's administration; therefore, he must have done something right.

>Sabotaged his own army so that more people would die
>Destroyed the Masonic Lodges after they put him in power, essentially preventing anyone from ever following in his footsteps and requiring everyone play by his retarded rules.
>Killed all his best and brightest because he feared that they would overthrow him if he didn't, crippling Russia even unto this day
>Made all these sacrifices and ultimately failed to create a system that could compete with the US, even with the clandestine support of the US's secret societies (and therefore government).
>(((CENTRAL BANKING))) -- it didn't start under him, obviously, but nobody else in Russia's history abused the bank quite like Stalin. He had an impressive knowledge of economics, especially for a communist.
Jugashvili was objectively bad for the Soviet Union, and proved that Communism is the ideological equivalent of enslaving oneself to international finance.
The only thing that can be given to him is that his country's blood and American steel were the only things that ground the German war machine to a halt, though many on Jow Forums would say that this was his ultimate failure: enabling the Zionists to mongrelize the West.
The USSR went from dirt farming to nuclear technology under him, and it looked good until he died; at which point the price of his consolidation came into full effect: there was no replacement. Stalin wasn't replaced until the KGB took control of the government and Putin took over. He destroyed all the processes by which a new "Czar" level appointment could be made, and so Russia was torn apart from within by special interests who all had their own ideas about how the government should function.
In short, if he'd been less of a paranoid sociopath, Russia would be a first-world country. But then again, what do you expect of someone who unironically believed he was a communist?

>I measure success in power
We already figured out that (you) are a retard. Normal people measure success in security, prosperity and happiness.
> I'm not advocating for White nationalist or Slavic nationalist viewpoints.

There are no White nationalist or Slavic nationalist "viewpoints", because those "viewpoints" are facts of basic biology.

Also, most nonwhites in the USSR were inbred inherently low intelligence (intelligence is vastly determined by ones genetics) subhumans. The quality of your population determins direction of your country. Brazil - shithole. Old school Sweden - prosperity and wealth

When placed in the same administrative region, ethnic groups won't stand together for a long period of time. RIP USSR, Yugoslavia, Austria-Hungary and so on and so on and so on
>Nonetheless, valid.
>valid
No, it's not you low iq autist.

Let's say we have some nation with 190 mil pop.

Let's say 50 mil die, but somehow 70mil are born.

Congrats, you have plenty of newbors and lack the adult population with skills
>Stalin was already dead, when the Chernobyl catastrophe happened; specify, how he was responsible.
by creating a system, where people were scared to report to their higher ups when something went wrong

How does one measure happiness exactly?

Well, it didn't accomplish it, apparently; at least, in Russia, China e.g. is another case; basically I believe, it could've been the glory and enthusiasm of a won revolution and a won WW2, that could've been the foundation myth and spirit for a new nation; opposing post-modern nihilism with nationalism and a sort of communistic republicanism, this however is partly my speculation; you'd better take it with a grain of salt.

A sense of satisfaction and purpose? Folks usually say it out loud, when they are happy

communism does not inspire nationalism, it opposes the traditional idea of a nation state. It ultimately wants to unite the workers of the whole world into a single self governing class.

I believe that in our current world, there can be no true decency without the concept of divine punishment.
You mentioned that China could pose for an example for how communism creates a society with a decent moral code. Chinese society is the opposite. It's a hyper-competitive environment filled with backstabbing egoists that do not care a single bit about their fellow countrymen, except when they are family. They know no ethics, as can be seen in their cloning experiments.

An alternative to a society that bases it's morals on a religion, could be a strong, self sufficient nationalist state, that isolates itself from the surrounding world and implements a decent moral system over many generations of persecution against those who oppose it.

if you consider killing millions of white people successful, then yes

>A sense of satisfaction and purpose
For you maybe. Hungry man is happy when he eats. Sick man is happy when cured. Measuring happiness is completely arbitrary

The Great Purge.
It was the reason the Germans got so deep into Russia, because Stalin destroyed his officer corps.

>What did he do wrong
>hard mode: dont judge on a right wrong basis

It had to be done to remove the threat of Trotsky. Many unnecessary were killed, but it had to be done.

>security, prosperity and happiness
Everything, I believe to be either a condition or a consequence, often both, of having power; therefore, since not fundamental, no valid units of measurement for "success".

>ethnic nationalist viewpoints
Well, of course, they're viewpoints; ethnics change; whether this is good or bad, is the question, where viewpoints matter. Good and bad, is, like everything, measured in "success", evaluated in power; regarding the USSR's success, power, under Stalin's rule, it'd even be rather an argument for ethnic mixing, than against it; of course, given, that the ethnic situation was, like you described.

>multi-ethnic states
True and false; they're examples for and against ethnic mixing; early Rome would, for instance, would be a strong argument for ethnic mixing; however, that's not the topic of thread.

>population with skills
Well, a system as that might lack longevity; however, in retrospect on the history of the SU, it's fair to say, that upwards from Stalin's rule it and its successor state, modern day Russia, was still outstandingly or at least in recent days moderately successful. Therefore, the system might not have been perfectly, but still reasonably durable.

>by creating a system, where people were scared to report to their higher ups when something went wrong
Fair enough. However, it'd worked well in other places: WW2, Atomic Warfare, space race, a.s.o.

>What did he do wrong?
he left no capable successor

most of russians still live in the very same houses and work in the very same factories that he built

he trusted hitler to hold his promise
he got complacent and weak by the end and thus allowed filth like khruschev to be in positions which could gain power, beria would have been so much better

Read the tread, I defined "right and wrong" above.

In theory, this is true, however in practice, the classical communist doctrine is mostly disregarded in favor of effectivity; especially in China.

>China
Whether or not China's system is in in fact "bad", can only be proven by its success; meaning, whether or not China is going to remain a powerful nation. For now, its undisputable, that China's system is effective, maybe even the most effective system today.

>religion
I see the advantages of religion and religious morals, as you've described; however, I believe it to be extremely difficult, to re-introduce God in modern-days' society. Would be interested, how you'd approach this problematic.

These are a good points.

>it'd even be rather an argument for ethnic mixing
How come if only Russian Slavs and Germans did shit in the USSR?
>early Rome would, for instance, would be a strong argument for ethnic mixing
How come? Early Rome was hell bent on maintainting Italic dominance on the mainland and separating the plebs from patricians

>Fair enough. However, it'd worked well in other places: WW2, Atomic Warfare, space race, a.s.o.
>WW2
>worked well
lol. pathetic zerg. mentality of some asian drone

>ght lack longevity; however, in retrospect on the history of the SU, it's fair to say, that upwards from Stalin's rule it and its successor state, modern day Russia, was still outstandingly or at least in recent days moderately successful.

>modern Russia
>moderately successful

LMAO

at drinking itself to death and experiencing shit like Nord Ost, Beslan, terror attacks, Kursk, mass corruption, poverty and alcoholism

>Russian Slavs and Germans in USSR
You stated, Slavs were 50% of the population, later on you stated, Whites and Non-Whites alike lived in the USSR.

>early Rome
Upwards from Romulus, when Rome was a monarchy, Romans, from the conquest of the Seven Hills of Rome, would conquer an area, inter-mix with the local population and integrate the entire tribe into the "Imperium Romanum"; this practice had been maintained for at least the conquest of Gallia in the 1st century before Christ. This specifically is the reason, why France, Spain and Romania have Latin blood and Latin culture; as far as I know, original Rome was a conglomerate of criminals, vagabonds and refugees, united under the rulership of Romulus. INB4: I do NOT draw any implications to modern times.

>modern-day Russia
Do you dispute, that Russia is world-power?

Finland got what it deserved

Fuck you. Finland did nothing wrong except not kill more commies.

Attached: SuperManlet.jpg (500x719, 123K)

>the Finland-campaign was a total failure
it was success.
all major goals were achieved, Finland barely survived. If USSR wanted to conquer whole country, he could do it.

you're making a value judgement on the success of the nation. you can say it was successful, but that does not make it good necessarily.

Well, I measure "success" in power; which is absolutely objective, imho. Which measurement do you think to be more objective?

>Slavs were 50% of the population
So? Exactly the point: half of the population were losing their lives, resources and money on nonwhite subhumans.

Ashkenazi jews are barely 20% of Israel, yet carry most of elite positions in the army, academia and business. Some ethnic groups are simply more successful than others
>Upwards from Romulus, when Rome was a monarchy, Romans, from the conquest of the Seven Hills of Rome, would conquer an area, inter-mix with the local population and integrate the entire tribe into the "Imperium Romanum"; this practice had been maintained for at least the conquest of Gallia
those are European groups of same Italic race you are talking. Can't be compared to outright interracial shitholes.
>Do you dispute, that Russia is world-power?
Have nukes = you are a world power

Difference being is that am not asiatic-minded subhuman like you that happens to judge success by ones national ability to bomb.

Most people on earth would prefer to live in irrelevat Denmark than in relevant and "powerful" Russia
go squat on a bottle, homo soveticus

Do you deny that most ethnic Russians live in poverty?

>lol. pathetic zerg. mentality of some asian drone
It cooperated with nazis.

He liked to put things in his pooper

intelligence isn't determined by genetics fuck nuts.
researchgate.net/publication/8089268_Intelligence_Race_and_Genetics
The majority of anthropologists today consider race to be a sociopolitical phenomenon rather than a biological one, a view supported by considerable genetics research (anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1525/tran.2000.9.2.19. ; nature.com/articles/ng1439) The current mainstream view in the social sciences and biology is that race is a social construction based on folk ideologies that construct groups based on social disparities and superficial physical characteristics. Race realists have yet to account for the flynn effect and the gap between groups closing when socioeconomic conditions are made more equitable, not to mention how IQ tests test acquired knowledge and are culturally skewed in their presentation. "Racial" groups neither represent sub-species nor distinct evolutionary lineages, and that therefore there is no basis for making claims about the general intelligence of races (Templeton, 2001).
Intelligence is a polygenic trait. This means that intelligence is under the influence of several. However, a review of candidate genes for intelligence published in Deary, Johnson & Houlihan (2009) failed to find evidence of an association between these genes and general intelligence, stating "there is still almost no replicated evidence concerning the individual genes, which have variants that contribute to intelligence differences" In 2001, a review in the Journal of Black Psychology refuted eight major premises on which the hereditarian view regarding race and intelligence is based (journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0095798401027002004)

>wether China's system is good or bad can only be proven by success.
I'd answer to this but I don't believe that a system is good only because it works well. Guess it depends on basic philosophic principles one believes in.

>How to implement religion into a modern society.
Sadly, force might be the only way. We would surely have to abolish the current system that promotes freedom of thought and freedom of expression.
A state religion will be declared, the law system will be altered with it accordingly, resistance to it will not be tolerated, and after generations, deviants will be filtered out.
Some people are so disconnected from God that they can not be reasoned with.

he killed my personal hero

>intelligence isn't determined by genetics
LMAO

leave your pop "science" and tell that to James Watson

It could've been an argument (not even mine, but a suggested one) for ethnic mingling: Since the SU was most successful, during the time of the assumed ethnic mixing, it could be implied, that ethnic mixing is in fact advantageous.

>ethnic groups more successful than other ethnic groups
Yes, true, but how does this relate to Stalin's power or the success of the USSR?

>same Italic race
Well, one might suggest, that the "Italic race" didn't exist before the Roman conquest; or that, similar to today's national differences, regional differences existed; however, this irrelevant to the main point, that the Imperium Romanum had been a "multi-cultural" entity and developed into a "mono-cultural entity" owing to its conquest strategy; the larger the empire, the more peripheral this process, of course.

>outright interracial shitholes
I didn't compare it to it; even explicitly said it. I simply stated, that there are examples, in which "multi-cultural" societies's ethnicities developed not apart but towards one another; merging into a new race.

>have nukes
A basic condition of it, certainly; however, NK, for instance, is not a world-power, but a regional power. There's more to it.

>ability to bomb
That's what it's all about, if you like it or not. Could Britain bomb the entire world, without retaliation, then the entire world would be British. Simple as.

>prefer to live
This is true; but only because Denmark is militarily protected by the US; the day it isn't, that day Denmark IS Russia. People prefer Denmark, because Denmark is in a better position of power, than Russia, for now; besides it's not about preference, but about the power to realize the preference;

>works well
Even a religious society, if it doesn't "work well", would be going to fade, because it'd be conquered by societies, "working better"; the reason for the existence of religions is its societal effectivity.

>It could've been an argument
for extermination of nonwhites on territories of the USSR so money and resources are not wasted on useless biomass. *

>Well, one might suggest
One can't suggest. Those groups were incrediblyh simmilar in terms of genetics and lingusitics.

>the day it isn't, that day Denmark IS Russia.
lmao. what a binary-minded simpleton

when Denmark is no longer allied with the US, it will stop getting brainwashing programmes about multiracialism and muh refugees backed by the State Department. The Cold War is over, nobody wants to split Europe in pieces

>for
... what I've stated above.

>incredibly similar
[pic related]; have you read any historical documentation from 100 v. Chr to 40. v Chr.; the ethnicities, living around the "Mare Nostrum", were incredibly diverse: Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, Carthaginians, Celts...; every cultivating its own traditions, religions, languages, a.s.o.; anyways, proving, whether or not these ancient Mediterranean ethnicites were more familiar to each other, than the USSR's ethnicities wasn't the point, at all, see:
>examples, in which "multi-cultural" societies's ethnicities developed not apart but towards one another; merging into a new race.

>binary-minded simpleton
Exaggerated, to display reality more drastically; a stylistic device.

Attached: Rome.gif (310x295, 43K)

>Finnish government is very right wing
>very anti-communist
>bans communist party
>Stalin asks for some small amounts of land to protect his flank and establish some military bases, fearing a german attack
>Offers much more land in return than he is asking for
>Negotiates with them 8 times, 6 times in person
>can clearly tell they're doing it on purpose

the winter war was one of the least bad things he ever did, and his fears were justified when the germans attacked and the fins joined them

He agitated for genocide in foriegn countries to gain power, effectively helping jews destroy massive amounts of human capital only for them to poison him.
He is a walking avatar of psychopathic vainglory.

>Do you deny that most ethnic Russians live in poverty?
We certainly don't.
80% of population have own real estate.
How many people in UK own a home or a flat and couldn't be thrown away on the streets?
Hundreds thousands homeless in NYC or California and millions living on foods stamps, how ya doing folks? Is it prosperty over there?

free medical care
Literally anyone get it, if some central-asian worker got sick in Moscow, he will, if needed, get free surgery, which could easily cost hundreds thousands $ in US.

free education
free no loan, no debt. if you capable - learn and live.

Most of russians dont even know about shitty western life style with constant debts, problems with aquiring real home and.

Stopped at Berlin.

Attached: 20190518_171118.jpg (720x1214, 489K)

He trusted Hitler
wow people died in a war

>Hundreds thousands homeless in NYC or California and millions living on foods stamps
niggers and spics are not people
>if some central-asian worker got sick in Moscow, he will, if needed, get free surgery,
which means that RUSSIAN money are wasted on subhumans. fantastic

иди и пocмoтpи нa бaбoк, кoтopыe пиздятьcя в мaгнитe зa pыбy пo aкции. тyпoй вaтник

Attached: hereyougo.jpg (2560x1440, 387K)

>He trusted Hitler
keked.
Stalin knew that WW2 is imminent and everyone of top tier politician knew it.
He never trusted Hitler.
Right after nazi came to power USSR started to cut ties with Germany.
Because socialism and nazism is mutually antagonistic ideologies.

>He trusted Hitler
no he didn't.

telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/3223834/Stalin-planned-to-send-a-million-troops-to-stop-Hitler-if-Britain-and-France-agreed-pact.html

EW MAN

Attached: 1527842452240.png (280x291, 88K)

Sucessful, because he was prepped up by, what he claimed were his enemies. The Eastern block was a laughing stock in that regard.

>On the whole the following conclusion can be drawn: that without these Western shipments under Lend-Lease the Soviet Union not only would not have been able to win the Great Patriotic War, it would not have been able even to oppose the German invaders, since it could not itself produce sufficient quantities of arms and military equipment or adequate supplies of fuel and ammunition.

- Boris Vadimovich Sokolov

>Stalin stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany's pressure, and we would have lost the war

- Nikita Khrushchev

Attached: KrushchevMemoirs.jpg (332x499, 30K)

The nazi's favorite cope

>Lend lease sent to the USSR:

Aircraft - 7.411 (CW) + 14.795 (US) = 22.206
Automotive:
--- 1.5 ton trucks 151.053 (US
--- 2.5 ton trucks 200.662 (US)
--- Willys Jeeps 77.972 (US)
Bren Gun Carriers - 2.560 (CW)
Boots - 15 million pairs (US)
Communications equipment:
--- Field phones - 380.135 (US)
--- Radios - 40.000 (US)
--- Telephone cable - 1.25 million miles (US)
Cotton cloth - 107 million square yards (US)
Foodstuffs - 4.5 million tons (US)
Leather - 49.000 tons (US)
Motorcycles - 35.170 (US)
Locomotives - 1.981 units (US)
Rolling stock - 11.155 units (US)
Tanks - 5.218 (CW) + 7.537 (US) = 12.755
Tractors - 8.701 (US)
Trucks - 4.020 (CW) + 357.883 (US) = 361.903

Note: most of these were old, outdated equipment or failed production models, like the Air Cobra.

To compare the lend lease to the USSR's production (Lend Lease / Russian product)

aircrafts: 14,795/134,100
tanks: 7,056/102,800
artillery cannons: 8,218/825,200
oil: 2,670,000/110,600,000 (tons)
steel: 1,500,000/39,680,000 (tons)
food: 733,000/64,121,000 (tons)

Very clearly a minority of the materials that the Soviets had, and Soviet industry could have made up the losses without.

>bu-bu-stalin said!

Stalin was not a military genius, and he was trying to be courteous to his western allies, nothing more. You would have lost the war anyway.

>what did he do wrong
>don't talk about morals
You seem VERY confused.

Am Ende steht nur der Sieg; wie er erreicht wurde, interessiert kaum jemanden.

See:

How could you possibly define wrong action without using morality.

Again here:

Communism did nothing else than wrecked havoc, raped and murdered civilians left and right
>Oy vey! I wuz a good boy why ban

Meanwhile on the german side, the great military strategy:

>Even before the Russian prospects had come to naught, Romania had developed into Germany’s chief overland supplier of oil. From 2.8 million barrels in 1938, Romania’s exports to Germany increased to 13 million barrels by 1941, a level that was essentially maintained through 1942 and 1943.7 Although the exports were almost half of Romania’s total production, they were considerably less than the Germans expected. One reason for the shortfall was that the Romanian fields were being depleted. There were other reasons as well why the Romanians failed to increase their shipments. Foremost among these was Germany’s inability to make all of its promised deliveries of coal and other products to Romania. Furthermore, although Romania was allied with Germany, the Romanians wished to husband their country’s most valuable resources. Finally, the air raids on the Ploesti oil fields and refineries in August 1943 destroyed 50 percent of the Romanian refinery capacity. Aerial mining of the Danube River constituted an additional serious transportation impediment. Even so, Romanian deliveries amounted to 7 million barrels in the first half of 1944 and were not halted until additional raids on Ploesti had been flown in the late spring and summer of 1944.

Literally relying on a single country to keep them going. What could possibly go wrong.

But one has to figure in such circumstances. It's not a coincicdencs that the Soviet Union and the Eastern Block does not exist anymore. Even after the war the "class enemy" and coopoeration was needed. It never matched the west, other than in the military.

>niggers and spics are not people
In UK every 10th of thousands dies in sleep from freezing because they so prosperus, that couldn't pay for heat.

>иди и пocмoтpи нa бaбoк, кoтopыe пиздятьcя в мaгнитe зa pыбy пo aкции. тyпoй вaтник
Clips from Black Friday in US/UK are way better. Anyone can agreed that these people is happy, healthy, especially mentally, and of cause verry successfull, that's why they smashing each other for UHD panels and iPhones.

Moжeт быть eщe кaкoe-нибyдь эпизoдичecкoe явлeниe выбepeшь, a тo кaк-тo cтыднo, coвecтливo и гaдливo нa дyшe cтaлo, кaк из дyшa oкaтилo.
Ecли нe пoнимaeшь paзницы мeждy чacтным cлyчaeм и cиcтeмoй, тo кaк ты oбpaзoвaниe пoлyчил?
Или ты в UK пo квoтe нa пocyдoмoeв жиpyeшь? Или мoжeт ты пo бeзвизy caльнoмy пpиcкaкaл c мaдaнy нeзaлэжнocти oт ycпeхoв нeнькиных?

Thoughts on the finnish bolshevik?

youtu.be/K0SSqb7uHKg

Well, Eastern societies today are demographically, militarily (at least for Russia) and even economically more stable than their western counterparts, don't you think?

Saw Airforce symbol as Finnish army symbol, holy fucking shit what an edgelord. His facts are his own makebelief, he doesn't talk anything about the crimes what the reds did in Finland.

You should get out of that starbucks, shutdown your macbook and get a fucking job. If your daddy didn't give you enough weekly allowance, that doesn't mean the answer is communism.

He started going after the kikes far too late, too bad they got him in the end.

>First, population rise =/= success. See India.

The USSR under Stalin is one of the most unprecedented successes in world history under just about any measurable standard. Just a reminder it also saw the quickest increase in life expectancy ever experienced. GDP/Economic growth? Yes. Military/Geopolitical? Yes. Standard of living for 95% of the population? Yes. ect ect.

bump