Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 27th, 2012, 07:02 PM   #1

Landsknecht's Avatar
Archivist
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Texas
Posts: 113
How does modern Russia view Stalin


How does modern Russia and Allies nations view of Stalin; thumbs up or thumbs down?

Hey we ask about Germany about Hitler so why not this?

Last edited by Landsknecht; February 27th, 2012 at 07:09 PM.
Landsknecht is offline  
Remove Ads
Old February 27th, 2012, 07:56 PM   #2

Belloc's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2010
From: USA
Posts: 4,982

AFAIK, there is a certain nostalgia for the Stalinist period among many in Russia, stereotypically the old, although many young people feel this way. I heard a certain fascination with this period is reflected in the popularity of films set during this time.
Belloc is offline  
Old February 27th, 2012, 09:37 PM   #3

dimmit's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Texas, USA
Posts: 628

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloc View Post
AFAIK, there is a certain nostalgia for the Stalinist period among many in Russia, stereotypically the old, although many young people feel this way. I heard a certain fascination with this period is reflected in the popularity of films set during this time.
Many Russians also see Stalin as a leader when Russia (well, the USSR at that point), was strong and at a height of power.

And while Russia certainly defeated Nazi Germany, I wouldn't characterize the Russia of that period as strong. Not to take anything away from the brave Russians that fought in that terrible war but Russia had the good fortune of weather, geography and a massive population base in that war. Modern Russia, due to its immense oil and natural gas wealth and its educated population, is much stronger and richer than Russia ever was under Stalin.
dimmit is offline  
Old February 27th, 2012, 10:36 PM   #4
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: Moscow
Posts: 2,410
Blog Entries: 1

Landsknecht
Quote:
How does modern Russia and Allies nations view of Stalin; thumbs up or thumbs down?
He viewed as one of the most eminent and distinguished rulers in the Russian history by the total majority of the Russians. So it is thumbs up. As for the Allies, I believe u mean ex-Soviet countries? Well I don't know about all of the them, but in Belarus it is relatively the same as in Russia. In Ukraine it is 50/50.

dimmit
Quote:
Modern Russia, due to its immense oil and natural gas wealth and its educated population, is much stronger and richer than Russia ever was under Stalin.
And under Stalin there were no oil and gas on the Russian territory? Bloody tyrant put all Russian oil and gas to GULAG? ''Educated population'' which we have now was made by Stalin, just for the record, 90% of the universities and schools where current Russians get their education were built in the USSR and large part of them during the Stalin's period. Under Stalin Russia became industrialized country.

Quote:
Many Russians also see Stalin as a leader when Russia (well, the USSR at that point), was strong and at a height of power.
Incorrect, there are no ''height of power'' claims. Stalin seen as one of those who made Russia strong, he established the main basis of it and won the most important war in the Russia's history. As of the ''height of power'' it's a big question in the modern Russia which is largerly discussed among Russians and there are dozens of completely different points when this period was. However the point where majority usually converges is that there are 3 rulers under which Russia was drastically changing, these rulers names are Ivan Grozniy (Ivan the Terrible in your translation, but I take the original cos this translation is completely incorrect Russian word ''Grozniy'' doesn't translate as ''Terrible), Peter the Great and Stalin.

Quote:
Russians that fought in that terrible war but Russia had the good fortune of weather, geography and a massive population base in that war.
Both Russians and Germans were fighting in the same weather and geographical conditions, so they were equalized. As for the ''massive population'', this myth doesn't hold water, since 1/3 of the Soviet population was under occupation since 1941 till 1944.

Belloc
Quote:
AFAIK, there is a certain nostalgia for the Stalinist period among many in Russia, stereotypically the old, although many young people feel this way. I heard a certain fascination with this period is reflected in the popularity of films set during this time.
Currently I'd can say that youth likes Stalin much more than old generation. This fact can be explained by the simple thing. Currenty youth understood that collapse of the USSR was fruitless and unnecessary and in fact it was a tragedy which brought nothing but bad consequences and enfeebled the country, everyone already understood that territorial integrity of the country is more important than Coca-Cola and iPhones. So for the young person, the generation which is 40-45 years old now, they are some sort of people who ''allowed'' this to happen, who didn't protect their country from the collapse, whereas the generation which is now 80-90 years old, they are good for them, because they have protected the country, they made it strong and so on. That's why the youth loves Stalin even more than old people now, because there is a striking contrast between Stalinist's generation and Gorbatchev's generation, the former protected the country and won the greatest war the world ever seen so they view as victors, the latter viewed as complete loosers who didn't do anything to prevent the collapse of the country.

Last edited by Montage; February 27th, 2012 at 11:04 PM.
Montage is offline  
Old February 28th, 2012, 01:10 AM   #5
Scholar
 
Joined: Jun 2011
From: Germany
Posts: 577

I confirm that the views which are described by Montage are pretty common today in Russia.

Last edited by Cornelia; February 28th, 2012 at 01:17 AM.
Cornelia is offline  
Old February 28th, 2012, 08:14 AM   #6

Belloc's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2010
From: USA
Posts: 4,982

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montage View Post
Currently I'd can say that youth likes Stalin much more than old generation. This fact can be explained by the simple thing. Currenty youth understood that collapse of the USSR was fruitless and unnecessary and in fact it was a tragedy which brought nothing but bad consequences and enfeebled the country, everyone already understood that territorial integrity of the country is more important than Coca-Cola and iPhones. So for the young person, the generation which is 40-45 years old now, they are some sort of people who ''allowed'' this to happen, who didn't protect their country from the collapse, whereas the generation which is now 80-90 years old, they are good for them, because they have protected the country, they made it strong and so on. That's why the youth loves Stalin even more than old people now, because there is a striking contrast between Stalinist's generation and Gorbatchev's generation, the former protected the country and won the greatest war the world ever seen so they view as victors, the latter viewed as complete loosers who didn't do anything to prevent the collapse of the country.
Thanks for the clarification.
Belloc is offline  
Old February 28th, 2012, 08:25 AM   #7

dimmit's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Texas, USA
Posts: 628

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montage View Post
And under Stalin there were no oil and gas on the Russian territory?
It was there but modern technology has given us the ability to find and access oil and gas reserves that lay undiscovered during Stalin's time.

Stalin's Russia also didn't have the international markets and pipeline infrastructure of today. Natural gas was often treated as a nuisance and was simply burned at the source. Now, that gas is collected and sent along pipelines to domestic and international customers. None of that was available in Stalin's day.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montage View Post
Incorrect, there are no ''height of power'' claims. Stalin seen as one of those who made Russia strong, he established the main basis of it and won the most important war in the Russia's history.
I am simply reporting what I have heard from some Russian ex-pat friends here. Considering that after WWII, the USSR and Russia occupied vast swathes of Central and Eastern Europe, I don't see it is as a far-fetched assertion although, as you point out, the "height of power" is a much discussed point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montage View Post
Both Russians and Germans were fighting in the same weather and geographical conditions, so they were equalized.
Sorry, I have to disagree here. An invading army with an extended supply line is much more susceptible to poor weather conditions. Ask Napoleon.

And the geographic advantage of Russia during that war was its vast size. Russians troops could continue to fall back forcing the Nazis farther and farther into the heart of Russia (and further extending their already stretched supply lines). Again, nothing to take away from the bravery and valiant effort of the Russian soldiers in that war but they had some inherent advantages that they exploited brilliantly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montage View Post
As for the ''massive population'', this myth doesn't hold water, since 1/3 of the Soviet population was under occupation since 1941 till 1944.
The population of the USSR was enormous when compared to Germany so even though a significant proportion of the population was under occupation, they still had vast numbers of men for the Red Army.

Initially, the Red Army was outnumbered by the Axis forces on the Eastern Front. But by the summer of 1942, the Red Army has surpassed the strength of the Axis forces in pure numbers. By the summer of 1944, the Red Army was about twice the size of the Axis forces and by January of 1945, the Red Army was about three times the size. These men must have come from somewhere.
dimmit is offline  
Old February 28th, 2012, 08:34 AM   #8

Belloc's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2010
From: USA
Posts: 4,982

Concerning the "height of power" discussion, Russia was generally considered the most powerful nation in Europe after the defeat of Napoleon up until the Crimean War.
Belloc is offline  
Old February 28th, 2012, 08:41 AM   #9
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: Moscow
Posts: 2,410
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Sorry, I have to disagree here. An invading army with an extended supply line is much more susceptible to poor weather conditions. Ask Napoleon.
No differences. Humans are equal, Russians are not ''snowmen''.

Quote:
Ask Napoleon.
He lost due to the bravery and skill of the Russian soldiers.

Quote:
And the geographic advantage of Russia during that war was its vast size.
Russians have to fight in the same vast size.

Quote:
Russians troops could continue to fall back forcing the Nazis farther and farther into the heart of Russia (and further extending their already stretched supply lines). Again, nothing to take away from the bravery and valiant effort of the Russian soldiers in that war but they had some inherent advantages that they exploited brilliantly.
Density of the troops is very little though, which gives its own drawbacks. Streched supply lines? And Russia didn't have streached supply lines? We had teleporters? Do you know that Russian mobilization was taking 10 times more time than any other European country because of the large size? You call it as ''advantage''? Check the WW I history about how Russia had to attack without mobilization.

Quote:
The population of the USSR was enormous when compared to Germany so even though a significant proportion of the population was under occupation, they still had vast numbers of men for the Red Army.
On the German side there were Italy, Hungary, Romania, Finland, Slovakia. Total population of all Axis countries was 160 million. USSR population was 190 million out of which 1/3 was under occupation for the 80% of the war period. So I don't see any ''enormous'' advantage.

Quote:
Initially, the Red Army was outnumbered by the Axis forces on the Eastern Front. But by the summer of 1942, the Red Army has surpassed the strength of the Axis forces in pure numbers. By the summer of 1944, the Red Army was about twice the size of the Axis forces and by January of 1945, the Red Army was about three times the size. These men must have come from somewhere.
So what? Do you have clear understanding of how wars go and that all these numbers are basically the conscripted statistic? By the summer 1944 Germany lost everything.

Quote:
Stalin's Russia also didn't have the international markets and pipeline infrastructure of today. Natural gas was often treated as a nuisance and was simply burned at the source. Now, that gas is collected and sent along pipelines to domestic and international customers. None of that was available in Stalin's day.
Yes, and also under Stalin there were no internet connection and iPhones in Russia.

Last edited by Montage; February 28th, 2012 at 08:49 AM.
Montage is offline  
Old February 28th, 2012, 08:54 AM   #10

xander.XVII's Avatar
Penesauri e Vaginotteri
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: Outer world
Posts: 2,442

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montage View Post
No differences. Humans are equal, Russians are not ''snowmen''.
Russians were indeed more accustomed to cold, surely Red Army as well suffered for freezing, but less than Wehrmacht.
Moreover he mentioned supplies which for Germans were a nightmare.
German supply line was a nightmarish mess, furthermore Germans had to reconvert all railway system because Russian used a different measure for track.

Quote:
He lost due to the bravery and skill of the Russian soldiers.
And due to cold, not forget it.
Russians were able to withdraw because they know they had no hopes in open field till the Napoleonic Army was at max strength


Quote:
On the German side there were Italy, Hungary, Romania, Finland, Slovakia. Total population of all Axis countries was 180 million. USSR population was 190 million out of which 1/3 was under occupation for the 80% of the war period.
Italy sedn 230,000 soldiers and was the biggest in terms of extension and geography of Axis forces therefore I seriously doubt they may have filled the gap between URSS and Germany.
xander.XVII is offline  
Closed Thread

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
modern, russia, stalin, view


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How does modern Germany view Hitler? lostmisfits European History 32 March 2nd, 2012 12:00 PM
Modern Egyptians and their view of ancient Egypt Thessalonian Middle Eastern and African History 61 February 18th, 2012 10:41 AM
Modern Russia-did it become a democracy? Historical Delusion European History 13 December 11th, 2011 05:04 AM
Russia admits Stalin ordered Katyn massacre of Poles diddyriddick War and Military History 6 December 1st, 2010 12:25 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.