this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2025
24 points (85.3% liked)

theory

847 readers
22 users here now

A community for in-depth discussion of books, posts that are better suited for !literature@www.hexbear.net will be removed.

The hexbear rules against sectarian posts or comments will be strictly enforced here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

debatable if it's slop or theory, but probably comrades will soon meet these arguments in the wild, and not that one has to abandon all theoretical considerations over geopolitical realism of the 20th century.

although it's all rather useless, treatlerism stays undefeated whether one thinks stalin was correct or not, got money from cia or not, decided to become culture critic or not

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cowbee@hexbear.net 15 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Yep, absolutely. Stalin wasn't conciliatory towards the west. I understand the fire and desire people have to engage in open warfare with the west, but coming out of the Great Patriotic War, the number 1 task was to rebuild and not fall behind in nuclear technology. Stalin already planted the seeds for future soviet foreign policy. That's not even getting into the fact that the USSR was comprehensively democratic and not simply ruled over by those in the politburo.

[–] Alaskaball@hexbear.net 15 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I always tell people the first martial policy Stalin implemented after achieving victory over the nazi regime was an immediate demobilization of construction workers, teachers, engineers, farm workers, everyone necessary to begin immediate post-war rebuilding. There was literally zero desire to continue fighting beyond the defensive war among the Soviet people

[–] Cowbee@hexbear.net 14 points 4 weeks ago

Yep, as would make sense. You lost 27 million people to a genocidal war, and came out victorious at great human cost. Who would continue fighting?