Who is the worse person?

Discussions
User avatar
Aaron Richards
Poster
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:03 am

Who is the worse person?

Post by Aaron Richards » Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:54 pm

A guy who kills 200 chickens

or a guy who kills one Panda?

This is the dumbed down "endangered species" argument I use whenever I hear the usual "but duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude... Stalin killed like 20 million people...and Mao killed like 40 million people...but since the victims dont disproportionately own the media like (((they))) do, obviously only (((their suffering))) has priority."

Since there were 16 million Jews and 475 million Chinese alive in the 1930s, 6 million deaths (approx 40%) naturally has a more prominent role in history books than the demise of 40 million (10%).

Also, its the way they were killed.

Starving to death due to disastrous economic policies enacted by your leaders from the comfort of the capital is different to being rounded up, stuffed into ghettos, then into cattle cars, sent to a camp and gassed, shot or worked to death there for the crime of belonging to a certain volk.
Pls subscribe to my BitChute channel "Holocaust Documents": https://www.bitchute.com/holocaustdocuments/
I compile rebuttals to popular holocaust denier canards here: imgur.com/a/725A7
and here: imgur.com/a/wo09c

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19686
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:59 pm

Aaron Richards wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:54 pm
Also, its the way they were killed.
I think THAT is the key referencing GENOCIDE via intentional State Program using INDUSTRIAL approach. So.....its about the INTENT and the Procedure...hmmm...ok, the numbers too as it was a genocide that was attempted.

so.....killing one panda is worse..............cause you know........animals aren't people.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 12614
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am
Custom Title: Lost in Translation
Location: Safely stored in my own mind

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:13 pm

Aaron Richards wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:54 pm

Stalin killed like 20 million people...
That’s way too high.....
and Mao killed like 40 million people...
I think that’s probably about right.
but since the victims dont disproportionately own the media like (((they))) do, obviously only (((their suffering))) has priority."
I think that the information was suppressed and hidden more successfully than Hitler’s crimes because Germany lost. It was easier to expose the extent of those crimes than those successfully hidden away for decades. Only when the USSR fell did it become possible for researchers to look into Soviet records. Naturally the Chinese Communists still hold power so it might be years before the extent of Mao’s crimes (and others) become known.

I found in my cursory research into Stalin’s crimes that they were generally exaggerated. Deniers like to use inflated numbers for Stalin while doing the opposite for Hitler.
Also, its the way they were killed.

Starving to death due to disastrous economic policies enacted by your leaders from the comfort of the capital is different to being rounded up, stuffed into ghettos, then into cattle cars, sent to a camp and gassed, shot or worked to death there for the crime of belonging to a certain volk.
It doesn’t matter to those who died, starving to death vs being shot or gassed just means that those who starved lasted longer. All of these deaths are miserable ways to go.

Also the Germans used starvation tactics themselves, see Red Army POWs, the inhabitants of the camps and the ghettos.

But you have a point, there is a difference in neglecting your populace vs. directed killing.
Question for Groening by a reporter:
“Mr. Groening, what do you say to those who still deny the Holocaust?”

Groening:
“Nothing. They are hopelessly lost.”


Harvard Crimson (on why it refused to run an add by Bradley Smith):
“(It is) vicious propaganda based on utter BS that has been discredited time and time again.”

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 12614
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am
Custom Title: Lost in Translation
Location: Safely stored in my own mind

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:15 pm

Except when it came to things like Stalin’s Great Purge or Mao’s Cultural Revolution.
Question for Groening by a reporter:
“Mr. Groening, what do you say to those who still deny the Holocaust?”

Groening:
“Nothing. They are hopelessly lost.”


Harvard Crimson (on why it refused to run an add by Bradley Smith):
“(It is) vicious propaganda based on utter BS that has been discredited time and time again.”

User avatar
gorgeous
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5748
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by gorgeous » Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:41 pm

but...but...libs say trump is the worst person ever...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19686
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:47 pm

gorgeous wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:41 pm
but...but...libs say trump is the worst person ever...
No one has said that. .............................................. wait for it.....................................why do you make things up?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
gorgeous
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5748
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by gorgeous » Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:52 pm

oh they do...on twitter,lib talk shows....Joy Behar repeatedly says he's a nazi , facist and dictator
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
gorgeous
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5748
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by gorgeous » Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:55 pm

Ilhan Omar to Rachel Maddow: Donald Trump is the "worst president ...

https://www.salon.com/.../ilhan-omar-to ... trump-is-t...
Jul 16, 2019 - Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., called President Donald Trump the "worst" ... and values every single person in it and one that is making sure that our ...
---------------------The Worst Businessman in America | The New Republic

https://newrepublic.com/.../trump-tax-r ... an-america
May 8, 2019 - The revelations about Trump's taxes prove he was a grifter and a fraud, a braggart and a blowhard. In other words, he was the same man he is ... -----------------------------------Donald Trump is the Worst Person in the World - Home | Facebook

https://www.facebook.com › Pages › Other › Community
Donald Trump is the Worst Person in the World. 273 likes · 78 talking about this. Donald Trump.
God - Trump is the worst person on the planet. | Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/.../trump-is.. ... 6016530834...
Trump is the worst person on the planet. rare.us. Trump Just Told Widow Of Slain US Sergeant "He Knew What He Signed Up For". Army Sargeant La David ...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19686
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Aug 13, 2019 8:01 pm

Exactly G.

WHAT YOU SAID WAS: "...worst person EVER...." which NO ONE has said.

You know G: words matter. They affect how you think.............in fact.........whether or not you are thinking at all......................
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
gorgeous
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5748
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by gorgeous » Tue Aug 13, 2019 8:05 pm

celebs say it often
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19686
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Aug 13, 2019 8:10 pm

Once again G: words matter. Celebs are retards, not libs. That why you are the celeb around here.......................

WORDS MATTER. pay attention.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28615
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Location: sometimes

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by scrmbldggs » Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:04 am

"President" is an office, not a person... :roll:
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:04 pm

Ppl who bring up Mao's numbers don't usually know anything about that history beyond those numbers - i.e. for some reason they were not interested enough in that history (even after their dumb-downing aka "red pilling"). They should ask themselves why they were not impressed enough to learn more...

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11685
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by landrew » Thu Aug 15, 2019 3:18 am

scrmbldggs wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:04 am
"President" is an office, not a person... :roll:
It's a person, who is an officer, who occupies an office.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 638
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Goody67 » Thu Aug 15, 2019 4:50 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:13 pm
Aaron Richards wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:54 pm

Stalin killed like 20 million people...
That’s way too high.....
Not necessarily.

On 4 February 1989, there was an article with the headline, “Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin”.

https://www.nytimes.com/1989/02/04/worl ... talin.html

https://www.ibtimes.com/how-many-people ... ll-1111789

The true number will never be known and the total figure depends on whether certain things are to be considered part of it.
“When one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.” - Robert Pirsig

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19686
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Aug 15, 2019 4:58 am

landrew wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 3:18 am
scrmbldggs wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:04 am
"President" is an office, not a person... :roll:
It's a person, who is an officer, who occupies an office.
Its a floor wax AND a breath freshener!
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Im_Not_Creative_Enough
Poster
Posts: 390
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 7:32 pm

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Im_Not_Creative_Enough » Thu Aug 15, 2019 5:21 am

My regular response to "bUt WhY nObOdY tAlKs AbOuT tHe HoLoDoMoR???!!!!!1111" comments:

Simple -
The Holodomor was, at the end of day, an INTERNAL Soviet matter. It was done BY the Soviets to SOVIET CITIZENS ONLY and ONLY ON SOVIET SOIL. In contrast, the Holocaust was commited by Germans AND many other collborators, was done against Jewish (and non-Jewish) citizens of dozens of states and took place in basically all of Europe safe from like 7 countries.

Or in short: the Holodomor had a larger body count, but it a had a way smaller scale.

The Holocaust involved many prople from diffrent culture and much more people were exposed to it when it happened - and that's without mentioning how counties who were not involved like the UK and the US were the one who ended up disocering and exposing what happened. All this while the Holodomor was, again, something that only had things to do with the Soviets, and was kept under tight wraps by them for the entire cold war.

OFF COURSE IT IS LESS TALKED ABOUT THAN THE HOLOCAUST - by the time the airon Curtain fell down and the information about it became public to westerners as well, the Holocaust already had an almost 50 years "lead" on it as a significant cultural "event".
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 12614
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am
Custom Title: Lost in Translation
Location: Safely stored in my own mind

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Thu Aug 15, 2019 11:33 am

Goody67 wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 4:50 am
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:13 pm
Aaron Richards wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:54 pm

Stalin killed like 20 million people...
That’s way too high.....
Not necessarily.

On 4 February 1989, there was an article with the headline, “Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin”.

https://www.nytimes.com/1989/02/04/worl ... talin.html

https://www.ibtimes.com/how-many-people ... ll-1111789

The true number will never be known and the total figure depends on whether certain things are to be considered part of it.
That predates the fall of the USSR. Since then historians and researchers have dug around in the archives.

I think a lot of this exaggeration comes from confusing events connected to Stalin, exaggerations from people like Robert Conquest and Solzhenitsyn and downright politicization from victim nations like the Ukraine.

Naturally the worst exaggerations I’ve seen come from deniers (66 million good Christians died under the yolk of the Judeo-Bolshevik hordes!!!!) and their fellow travelers. That lot touts Solzhenitsyn as the first, last and sole word on the issue.

Granted denying-history is the one who can give more accurate numbers on this but for me it breaks down like this:

1930’s famines:
5-7 million
Great Purge:
About 900,000
Deaths in the Gulag:
Approximately 1 million

I exclude numbers for WW II because you obviously can’t blame Stalin for deaths caused by an invasion. Yes, he was brutal to his own but without the invasion those conditions wouldn’t necessarily occurred. Nor can I blame Stalin for deaths caused by the Revolution. He wasn’t in charge and more importantly the Revolution itself was fairly bloodless. It was the counterrevolution that caused the mass casualties.

Read this by Snyder:

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/snyder.htm
Question for Groening by a reporter:
“Mr. Groening, what do you say to those who still deny the Holocaust?”

Groening:
“Nothing. They are hopelessly lost.”


Harvard Crimson (on why it refused to run an add by Bradley Smith):
“(It is) vicious propaganda based on utter BS that has been discredited time and time again.”

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 638
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Goody67 » Thu Aug 15, 2019 11:58 am

Jeff,

I'm aware that the figures have been distorted, but Stalin was responsible for the deaths of millions of people.

I want to reply mostly to your paragraph:
I exclude numbers for WW II because you obviously can’t blame Stalin for deaths caused by an invasion. Yes, he was brutal to his own but without the invasion those conditions wouldn’t necessarily occurred. Nor can I blame Stalin for deaths caused by the Revolution. He wasn’t in charge and more importantly the Revolution itself was fairly bloodless. It was the counterrevolution that caused the mass casualties
What about the deaths caused when the Soviets invaded Poland and Order No. 270?

One could quite easily argue with your statement "without the invasion those conditions wouldn’t necessarily occurred" that the Holocaust would never happened the way it did without the conditions, even Goebbels wrote:
The Fuehrer is happy over my report that the Jews have for the most part been evacuated from Berlin. He is right in saying that the war has made possible for us the solution of a whole series of problems that could never have been solved in normal times. The Jews will certainly be the losers in this war, come what may.
20 March 1943

Why can't you put any blame on Stalin for the deaths caused by the October Revolution? He was the Bolshevik Central Committee by the time the revolution happen.

The revolution itself might have been "fairly bloodless", but the aftermath was not! The Russian Civil War in 1918 shortly after the revolution resulted in the suffering of lots of people whether they were sympathetic to the revolution or not and over one million people were killed.
“When one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.” - Robert Pirsig

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 12614
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am
Custom Title: Lost in Translation
Location: Safely stored in my own mind

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:51 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 11:58 am
Jeff,

I'm aware that the figures have been distorted, but Stalin was responsible for the deaths of millions of people.
I understand that. What I strive for most is accuracy. I’m not going to exaggerate a death toll for Stalin or Hitler or anyone else. Saying Stalin was responsible for 20 million people is an exaggeration.
I want to reply mostly to your paragraph:
I exclude numbers for WW II because you obviously can’t blame Stalin for deaths caused by an invasion. Yes, he was brutal to his own but without the invasion those conditions wouldn’t necessarily occurred. Nor can I blame Stalin for deaths caused by the Revolution. He wasn’t in charge and more importantly the Revolution itself was fairly bloodless. It was the counterrevolution that caused the mass casualties
What about the deaths caused when the Soviets invaded Poland and Order No. 270?
I looked at deaths that occurred in the USSR due to the German invasion, not the joint invasion of the USSR and Germany of Poland. If you want to add Polish deaths to Stalin’s total or the number of casualties in Finland during the Soviet invasion there I have no objection to that. Naturally Katyn is added to this. But those combined totals plus what I gave above don’t equal 20 million.
One could quite easily argue with your statement "without the invasion those conditions wouldn’t necessarily occurred" that the Holocaust would never happened the way it did without the conditions, even Goebbels wrote:
The Fuehrer is happy over my report that the Jews have for the most part been evacuated from Berlin. He is right in saying that the war has made possible for us the solution of a whole series of problems that could never have been solved in normal times. The Jews will certainly be the losers in this war, come what may.
20 March 1943
I’m not sure I follow.......
Stalin didn’t cause the conditions of an invasion. He reacted ruthlessly to it and his people suffered. But that would not have happened without the German invasion. Stalin forced the mass evacuations from the front along with the evacuation of factories and anything else considered useful. His people worked under appalling conditions with very little food....but that was in response to a German invasion. That ruthlessness likely saved the USSR in the end.
Why can't you put any blame on Stalin for the deaths caused by the October Revolution? He was the Bolshevik Central Committee by the time the revolution happen.

The revolution itself might have been "fairly bloodless", but the aftermath was not! The Russian Civil War in 1918 shortly after the revolution resulted in the suffering of lots of people whether they were sympathetic to the revolution or not and over one million people were killed.
But again, this was in response to a counterrevolution and not internal policy.

We don’t know what the Bolsheviks would have done without it because they were not given a chance. Would all those people have died without the civil war? Who knows? But Lenin showed a lot of flexibility with some of that flexibility occurring because of the civil war and it’s aftermath.
Question for Groening by a reporter:
“Mr. Groening, what do you say to those who still deny the Holocaust?”

Groening:
“Nothing. They are hopelessly lost.”


Harvard Crimson (on why it refused to run an add by Bradley Smith):
“(It is) vicious propaganda based on utter BS that has been discredited time and time again.”

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 638
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Goody67 » Thu Aug 15, 2019 1:24 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:51 pm
I understand that. What I strive for most is accuracy. I’m not going to exaggerate a death toll for Stalin or Hitler or anyone else. Saying Stalin was responsible for 20 million people is an exaggeration.
I agree with you. But, the exact figure will more than likely forever be unknown.
I looked at deaths that occurred in the USSR due to the German invasion, not the joint invasion of the USSR and Germany of Poland. If you want to add Polish deaths to Stalin’s total or the number of casualties in Finland during the Soviet invasion there I have no objection to that. Naturally Katyn is added to this. But those combined totals plus what I gave above don’t equal 20 million.
What about the Holodomor? The total death figure is estimated between 3.3-7.5 million Ukrainians. All of that happened in 1932-1933, the latter year being when Hitler had just been appointed Chancellor and had not killed millions of Jews.

That is part of the problem when concluding a figure about how many people Stalin killed - it depends which events are to be included.

I find it very upsetting that the Holodomor is not taught to people in general, but anywhere near as much in schools as other historical genocides are generally. Everyone (I would like to think so anyway!) has heard of the unfortunate events of the Holocaust, can the same be said about the Holodomor? I don't think so.
I’m not sure I follow.......
Stalin didn’t cause the conditions of an invasion. He reacted ruthlessly to it and his people suffered. But that would not have happened without the German invasion. Stalin forced the mass evacuations from the front along with the evacuation of factories and anything else considered useful. His people worked under appalling conditions with very little food....but that was in response to a German invasion. That ruthlessness likely saved the USSR in the end.
I don't buy into the argument that Operation Barbarossa was a preemptive strike, but the two different ideologies of the Soviet Union and the Third Reich and the ruthless of the leaders made war at some point inevitable, or at the least, very, very likely. How could it have been otherwise? They were both dictators who wished to force their ideology on to others.

The way Stalin reacted after the German invasion was entirely on his own accord, and like you stated, he reacted "ruthlessly". Was that necessary? Should he not have been more caring to his "own" people?

Look at the way Stalin reacted to the invasion towards the innocent Volga Germans. Even Ian Kershaw wrote:
Suddenly, in mid-September, he changed his mind. There was no overt indication of the reason. But in August, Stalin had ordered the deportation of the Volga Germans – Soviet citizens of German descent who had settled in the eighteenth century along the reaches of the Volga river. At the end of the month the entire population of the region – more than 600,000 people – were forcibly uprooted and deported in cattle-wagons under horrific conditions, allegedly as ‘wreckers and spies’, to western Siberia and northern Kazakhstan. In all, little short of a million Volga Germans fell victim to the deportations. The news of the savage deportations had become known in Germany in early September. Goebbels had hinted in early September that they could prompt a radical reaction. It was not long in coming. Alfred Rosenberg, the recently appointed Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories, lost little time in advocating ‘the deportation of all the Jews of central Europe’ to the east in retaliation. His liaison at Army Headquarters, Otto Bräutigam, was instructed by Rosenberg on 14 September to obtain Hitler’s approval for the proposal. Bräutigam eventually succeeded in attracting the interest of Hitler’s chief Wehrmacht adjutant, Rudolf Schmundt, who recognized it as ‘a very important and urgent matter’ which would be of great interest to Hitler.

Revenge and reprisal invariably played a large part in Hitler’s motivation. But at first he hesitated. His immediate response was to refer the matter to the Foreign Office. Ribbentrop was initially non-committal. He wanted to discuss it personally with Hitler. Werner Koeppen, Rosenberg’s liaison officer at FHQ, noted on 20 September: ‘The Führer has so far still made no decision in the question of taking reprisals against the German Jews on account of the treatment of the Volga Germans.’ He was said to be contemplating making this move in the event of the United States entering the war. Koeppen’s report was, however, already out of date when he submitted it.
Did Stalin's decision to deport the Volga Germans excuse Hitler's revenge and reprisal against the Jews? Of course not.

I'm well aware that war brings out the worst in people, but you surely can't excuse Stalin's actions under the defence that they were just simply reactions to Hitler's invasion. Stalin had already behaved brutally towards his "own" people and others before the war began.

Look at the way Stalin treated his own son during the war! Stalin, like Hitler, did not care about human life in the slightest. Both were bastards.
But again, this was in response to a counterrevolution and not internal policy.

We don’t know what the Bolsheviks would have done without it because they were not given a chance. Would all those people have died without the civil war? Who knows? But Lenin showed a lot of flexibility with some of that flexibility occurring because of the civil war and it’s aftermath.
Huh? Stalin was hoping for World War I because he wanted it to bring about a fight between the different classes and possibly a civil war.

Are you saying that the monarchists and liberals should have just accepted the Bolsheviks attempting to overthrow thee government? They were fighting against aggressors who wished to overthrow the government and implement Marxism. It's called a coup for a reason! :D

Lenin, Stalin, and others wanted to force their own views on to the people of Russia and if anyone showed any sort of disagreement then he or she was going to be in trouble.
The first conquest of power by the Soviets at the beginning of November 1917 (new style) was actually accomplished with insignificant sacrifices. The Russian bourgeoisie found itself to such a degree estranged from the masses of the people, so internally helpless, so compromised by the course and the result of the war, so demoralized by the regime of Kerensky, that it scarcely dared show any resistance. ... A revolutionary class which has conquered power with arms in its hands is bound to, and will, suppress, rifle in hand, all attempts to tear the power out of its hands. Where it has against it a hostile army, it will oppose to it its own army. Where it is confronted with armed conspiracy, attempt at murder, or rising, it will hurl at the heads of its enemies an unsparing penalty.
Trotsky in 1920.

Btw, are you aware of Lenin's Hanging Order?
“When one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.” - Robert Pirsig

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 12614
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am
Custom Title: Lost in Translation
Location: Safely stored in my own mind

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:56 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 1:24 pm
quote="Jeffk 1970"
I understand that. What I strive for most is accuracy. I’m not going to exaggerate a death toll for Stalin or Hitler or anyone else. Saying Stalin was responsible for 20 million people is an exaggeration.

I agree with you. But, the exact figure will more than likely forever be unknown.
That’s true of any history that involves numbers. The best we can do is estimate based upon what we have.
I looked at deaths that occurred in the USSR due to the German invasion, not the joint invasion of the USSR and Germany of Poland. If you want to add Polish deaths to Stalin’s total or the number of casualties in Finland during the Soviet invasion there I have no objection to that. Naturally Katyn is added to this. But those combined totals plus what I gave above don’t equal 20 million.

What about the Holodomor? The total death figure is estimated between 3.3-7.5 million Ukrainians. All of that happened in 1932-1933, the latter year being when Hitler had just been appointed Chancellor and had not killed millions of Jews.
I tend to go towards lower numbers when it comes to anything. I think 3.3 million for the Ukraine with a total of around 7 million for the famines in the 1930’s is probably the best estimate we have. It’s the same for the Great Purge, probably between 700,000-900,000 people died. Snyder points out that a very large percentage of those people, around 200,000, were ethnic Poles.
That is part of the problem when concluding a figure about how many people Stalin killed - it depends which events are to be included.
I look at it this way, at what point did Stalin become the unquestioned leader and not just a first among equals. There was a power struggle throughout the 1920’s where there was maneuvering between Stalin and the others. Even his grip wasn’t assured until the Great Purges ended but he was certainly the driving force for collectivization. That led to the famines. Those famines extended throughout the USSR but were particularly harsh for the Ukraine. It was his policies and his lapdogs that carried it out.
I find it very upsetting that the Holodomor is not taught to people in general, but anywhere near as much in schools as other historical genocides are generally. Everyone (I would like to think so anyway!) has heard of the unfortunate events of the Holocaust, can the same be said about the Holodomor? I don't think so.
I agree. Which is why I favored changing the name of this subforum to include other acts of violence and other genocides.

Now whether or not what is being taught about the Holocaust is worth a damn is another subject entirely.
I’m not sure I follow.......
Stalin didn’t cause the conditions of an invasion. He reacted ruthlessly to it and his people suffered. But that would not have happened without the German invasion. Stalin forced the mass evacuations from the front along with the evacuation of factories and anything else considered useful. His people worked under appalling conditions with very little food....but that was in response to a German invasion. That ruthlessness likely saved the USSR in the end.

I don't buy into the argument that Operation Barbarossa was a preemptive strike,
I agree. Stalin wanted to avoid war at that point.
but the two different ideologies of the Soviet Union and the Third Reich and the ruthless of the leaders made war at some point inevitable, or at the least, very, very likely. How could it have been otherwise? They were both dictators who wished to force their ideology on to others.
I agree. There’s no way to know with any certainty but a powerful Nazi Germany was a threat to the safety of the USSR. I think Stalin wanted to play for time when he thought the USSR was ready. An equally plausible explanation is Stalin wanted the combatants to wear each other out and then take advantage of the circumstances that evolved from that. IOW play peacemaker and benefit from what happened as a consequence.
The way Stalin reacted after the German invasion was entirely on his own accord, and like you stated, he reacted "ruthlessly". Was that necessary? Should he not have been more caring to his "own" people?
That’s hindsight. All Stalin knew was that he was beaten badly at the start and needed to salvage whatever he could. That included sending out peace feelers to see what Hitler’s grievances were and trying to accommodate.

The circumstances drove Stalin’s behavior and in the end they worked. It’s also worth pointing out that when Germany captured the Ukraine it cut the USSR’s food production. It got better with Lend/Lease but it took a couple of years.

We could look at German behavior in the USSR as a comparison. Was it necessary for them to treat Soviet citizens so badly? Well, we have the racial component but there were also the circumstances. Germany was desperately short of food and raw materials. Could they have treated the Soviet citizens better? Absolutely but to some degree the circumstances drove them to behave the way they did. The Germans knew they couldn’t supply their army with the food to keep them going so it required the army to live off the land. It helped that the Soviets were of no consequence to them except as raw labor. Anyone else who couldn’t work could starve.
Look at the way Stalin reacted to the invasion towards the innocent Volga Germans. Even Ian Kershaw wrote:
Suddenly, in mid-September, he changed his mind. There was no overt indication of the reason. But in August, Stalin had ordered the deportation of the Volga Germans – Soviet citizens of German descent who had settled in the eighteenth century along the reaches of the Volga river. At the end of the month the entire population of the region – more than 600,000 people – were forcibly uprooted and deported in cattle-wagons under horrific conditions, allegedly as ‘wreckers and spies’, to western Siberia and northern Kazakhstan. In all, little short of a million Volga Germans fell victim to the deportations. The news of the savage deportations had become known in Germany in early September. Goebbels had hinted in early September that they could prompt a radical reaction. It was not long in coming. Alfred Rosenberg, the recently appointed Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories, lost little time in advocating ‘the deportation of all the Jews of central Europe’ to the east in retaliation. His liaison at Army Headquarters, Otto Bräutigam, was instructed by Rosenberg on 14 September to obtain Hitler’s approval for the proposal. Bräutigam eventually succeeded in attracting the interest of Hitler’s chief Wehrmacht adjutant, Rudolf Schmundt, who recognized it as ‘a very important and urgent matter’ which would be of great interest to Hitler.

Revenge and reprisal invariably played a large part in Hitler’s motivation. But at first he hesitated. His immediate response was to refer the matter to the Foreign Office. Ribbentrop was initially non-committal. He wanted to discuss it personally with Hitler. Werner Koeppen, Rosenberg’s liaison officer at FHQ, noted on 20 September: ‘The Führer has so far still made no decision in the question of taking reprisals against the German Jews on account of the treatment of the Volga Germans.’ He was said to be contemplating making this move in the event of the United States entering the war. Koeppen’s report was, however, already out of date when he submitted it.
Did Stalin's decision to deport the Volga Germans excuse Hitler's revenge and reprisal against the Jews? Of course not.
How would Stalin know the Volga Germans would remain loyal? In fact the German occupiers preferred to use ethnic Germans because they thought they could trust them more.

I’m not excusing Stalin’s behavior but let’s face it, the man was the pinnacle of paranoia. To his mind having that many ethnic Germans available for use as a supply of troops, spies, etc. was an unacceptable risk.
I'm well aware that war brings out the worst in people, but you surely can't excuse Stalin's actions under the defence that they were just simply reactions to Hitler's invasion. Stalin had already behaved brutally towards his "own" people and others before the war began.
I’m aware of Stalin’s record and I won’t excuse it. But circumstances drove Stalin to push his people beyond any point of sanity. In the end he got the tanks, planes and weapons he needed to hold off and push the Germans back. Do the ends always justify the means? I hesitate to say that because there are no absolutes. In the end it worked.
Look at the way Stalin treated his own son during the war! Stalin, like Hitler, did not care about human life in the slightest. Both were bastards.
Actually what Stalin did was the very essence of “Socialism.” He held his son to the same standards as any Red Army soldier who surrendered.

Look, you’ll get no argument from me about both men. They were bastards. But would it been necessary for Stalin to forcibly uproot his population and send then East without adequate supplies without the German invasion? No. Did this happen before the war? Yes. But not to the numbers that did move East after the invasion.

But again, this was in response to a counterrevolution and not internal policy.

We don’t know what the Bolsheviks would have done without it because they were not given a chance. Would all those people have died without the civil war? Who knows? But Lenin showed a lot of flexibility with some of that flexibility occurring because of the civil war and it’s aftermath.


Huh? Stalin was hoping for World War I because he wanted it to bring about a fight between the different classes and possibly a civil war.
OK.
Are you saying that the monarchists and liberals should have just accepted the Bolsheviks attempting to overthrow thee government?
Some of them did. And Kerensky was failing badly by continuing the war. The Bolsheviks stepped into a tailor made situation.
They were fighting against aggressors who wished to overthrow the government and implement Marxism. It's called a coup for a reason! :D
Let’s not sugarcoat this and hold these counterrevolutionaries up as shining beacons of idealism. Had they done a better job of assuring the populace about their motives then it’s possible they could have won. Many of them wanted to replace the liberal government with a monarchy. They also committed atrocities against the populace and stirred up pogroms against the Jews.
Lenin, Stalin, and others wanted to force their own views on to the people of Russia and if anyone showed any sort of disagreement then he or she was going to be in trouble.
And the counterrevolutionaries didn’t? Many of them were unrepentant Czarists. How well did that work out for the commoners before the revolution?
Neither you nor I know what would’ve happened had the revolution continued unopposed or relatively unopposed.

The first conquest of power by the Soviets at the beginning of November 1917 (new style) was actually accomplished with insignificant sacrifices. The Russian bourgeoisie found itself to such a degree estranged from the masses of the people, so internally helpless, so compromised by the course and the result of the war, so demoralized by the regime of Kerensky, that it scarcely dared show any resistance. ... A revolutionary class which has conquered power with arms in its hands is bound to, and will, suppress, rifle in hand, all attempts to tear the power out of its hands. Where it has against it a hostile army, it will oppose to it its own army. Where it is confronted with armed conspiracy, attempt at murder, or rising, it will hurl at the heads of its enemies an unsparing penalty.

Trotsky in 1920.

Btw, are you aware of Lenin's Hanging Order?
Yes.
Question for Groening by a reporter:
“Mr. Groening, what do you say to those who still deny the Holocaust?”

Groening:
“Nothing. They are hopelessly lost.”


Harvard Crimson (on why it refused to run an add by Bradley Smith):
“(It is) vicious propaganda based on utter BS that has been discredited time and time again.”

User avatar
TJrandom
Has No Life
Posts: 12179
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Custom Title: Salt of the earth
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by TJrandom » Fri Aug 16, 2019 12:04 am

scrmbldggs wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:04 am
"President" is an office, not a person... :roll:
They both start with a 'P', which is as far a Gorgeous could read...

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Fri Aug 16, 2019 6:27 am

Goody67 wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 4:50 am
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:13 pm
Aaron Richards wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:54 pm

Stalin killed like 20 million people...
That’s way too high.....
Not necessarily.

On 4 February 1989, there was an article with the headline, “Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin”.

https://www.nytimes.com/1989/02/04/worl ... talin.html

https://www.ibtimes.com/how-many-people ... ll-1111789

The true number will never be known and the total figure depends on whether certain things are to be considered part of it.
That headline is not relevant evidence.

If we expand the definition to "was criminally responsible for the deaths", i.e. basically include manslaughter (but I think everybody does that with Hitler already) then maybe it's up to 10m.

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Fri Aug 16, 2019 6:30 am

As for who is worse, Lenin's phrase used by Stalin comes to mind: "Both are worse".

That said, Hitler was ultimately more *harmful*.

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 638
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Goody67 » Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:08 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:56 pm
I tend to go towards lower numbers when it comes to anything. I think 3.3 million for the Ukraine with a total of around 7 million for the famines in the 1930’s is probably the best estimate we have. It’s the same for the Great Purge, probably between 700,000-900,000 people died. Snyder points out that a very large percentage of those people, around 200,000, were ethnic Poles.
That's fair enough. But, do you do that for other genocides e.g. does that also include for the figures given of the number of Jews killed during the Holocaust? Hilberg calculated 5.1 million Jews in the early 1960s, that is 900,000 fewer Jews than the generally accepted figure of 6 million Jews - that is not just one or two Jews, it is a significant difference.
I look at it this way, at what point did Stalin become the unquestioned leader and not just a first among equals. There was a power struggle throughout the 1920’s where there was maneuvering between Stalin and the others. Even his grip wasn’t assured until the Great Purges ended but he was certainly the driving force for collectivization. That led to the famines. Those famines extended throughout the USSR but were particularly harsh for the Ukraine. It was his policies and his lapdogs that carried it out.
Stalin had become the leader of the Soviet Union in 1929 and after that he should be regarded as being fully responsible for what happened, including the Holodomor and the Great Purges during the 1930s. Stalin was ordering the general line for the Great Purges. How can you say otherwise? Look at what happened to people who disagreed with Stalin - Trotsky being a prime example. Stalin by the 1930s was an absolute maniac who had blood on his hands.

So, if we compare that with Hitler's unquestioned leadership, Hitler did not become the Führer until 2 August 1934, by then plenty of people had been put into concentration camps and the infamous Night of the Long Knives had happened, does that mean Hitler should be exempt from taking full responsibility for those events since he was not the unquestioned leader during those times?

I find your sentence, "It was his policies and his lapdogs that carried it out" troublesome. Those were carried out under his orders and he was fully responsible for those famines. Let me counteract that argument with how the Nazis worked, Hitler himself neither visited a concentration camp nor witnessed any Jews being massacred, does that mean he was not responsible? He was clever enough, like Stalin, to get his cronies to do his dirty work for him. They were both pathetic cowards and {!#%@} leaders. In both cases, the Germans and the Russians could have chosen better leaders.
Now whether or not what is being taught about the Holocaust is worth a damn is another subject entirely.
Which aspects of the Holocaust do you think should be taught more extensively in schools?

If we're being honest, I don't think too many people these days are interested in history as a whole, let alone the Holocaust.
I agree. There’s no way to know with any certainty but a powerful Nazi Germany was a threat to the safety of the USSR. I think Stalin wanted to play for time when he thought the USSR was ready. An equally plausible explanation is Stalin wanted the combatants to wear each other out and then take advantage of the circumstances that evolved from that. IOW play peacemaker and benefit from what happened as a consequence.
Arguably a powerful USSR was a threat to the Nazis. Hitler wanted living space in the East and knew that he was not going to be able to conquer the lands without force.

Look at what happened after the war - the Soviets occupied most of Eastern Europe for a few more decades without the approval of the Poles and others. The British and the French betrayed the Czechs, Slovaks and Poles before and after the war.
That’s hindsight. All Stalin knew was that he was beaten badly at the start and needed to salvage whatever he could. That included sending out peace feelers to see what Hitler’s grievances were and trying to accommodate.

The circumstances drove Stalin’s behavior and in the end they worked. It’s also worth pointing out that when Germany captured the Ukraine it cut the USSR’s food production. It got better with Lend/Lease but it took a couple of years.

We could look at German behavior in the USSR as a comparison. Was it necessary for them to treat Soviet citizens so badly? Well, we have the racial component but there were also the circumstances. Germany was desperately short of food and raw materials. Could they have treated the Soviet citizens better? Absolutely but to some degree the circumstances drove them to behave the way they did. The Germans knew they couldn’t supply their army with the food to keep them going so it required the army to live off the land. It helped that the Soviets were of no consequence to them except as raw labor. Anyone else who couldn’t work could starve.
Like I stated, Stalin's policies showed how very little he cared for human life. I mean, read the following from his infamous order:
Can we put up with in the Red Army cowards, deserters who surrender themselves to the enemy as prisoners or their craven superiors, who at the first hitch on the front tear off their insignia and desert to the rear? No we can not! If we unleash these cowards and deserters they, in a very short time, will destroy our country. Cowards and deserters must be destroyed.
Thus, people who did not want to fight were ordered to be "destroyed".

The Nazis were absolute morons when it came to the amount of manpower in the Soviet Union lands and their racial policies. Initially the Germans were welcomed as liberators in certain parts of the Soviet Union, particularly parts of Ukraine, that mood was short-lived due to the Nazis racial policies. It should be worth noting that Rosenberg and Goebbels did favour giving some leeway to the Ukrainians and others and allow them some sort of independence with co-operation, but the likes of Hitler, Himmler, Koch, Bormann and others were strongly against such things. Eventually, when it was too late, the Nazis eased their racial restrictions on the Waffen-SS, but by then the damage was done and the war was lost. The Nazi propaganda slogan "crusade of Europe against Bolshevism" to most people fell on deaf ears.
How would Stalin know the Volga Germans would remain loyal? In fact the German occupiers preferred to use ethnic Germans because they thought they could trust them more.
He never, the same way as the advancing Red Army treated ordinary German citizens in 1945 as enemies too. However, in both cases innocent people suffered for no reason whatsoever other than being X.
I’m not excusing Stalin’s behavior but let’s face it, the man was the pinnacle of paranoia. To his mind having that many ethnic Germans available for use as a supply of troops, spies, etc. was an unacceptable risk.
Which is exactly the same sort of way the crazy Hitler thought about the Jews. They were both paranoid maniacs. In fact, 'paranoid' is probably an understatement.
I’m aware of Stalin’s record and I won’t excuse it. But circumstances drove Stalin to push his people beyond any point of sanity. In the end he got the tanks, planes and weapons he needed to hold off and push the Germans back. Do the ends always justify the means? I hesitate to say that because there are no absolutes. In the end it worked.
Someone could use a similar argument for Hitler's ruthless towards Poland. He wanted Danzig (and more as we all know), the Poles rejected his offer (a phony 'offer') so he reacted with such brutality that even Germans were complaining!
Actually what Stalin did was the very essence of “Socialism.” He held his son to the same standards as any Red Army soldier who surrendered.
Huh? Stalin's concept of socialism was way different to the conventional definition of it. He propagated 'socialism in one country', well socialism is generally internationalist. Trying to have socialism in one country (a nation-state) is what the Nazis claimed they were doing by combining nationalism and socialism. In both cases, it was an oxymoron.
We don’t know what the Bolsheviks would have done without it because they were not given a chance. Would all those people have died without the civil war? Who knows? But Lenin showed a lot of flexibility with some of that flexibility occurring because of the civil war and it’s aftermath.
The Soviets themselves tried to dramatise the revolution to have been more violent and dramatic, especially with the likes of "The Storming of the Winter Palace". But, in the aftermath of the revolution, violence and terror did happen.

Lenin was also a dictatorship, not in the same sense as Stalin, but he always thought he was right and acted ruthlessly towards people he perceived as his (and the working class) enemies.



Interesting opinions from modern-day Russians about the revolution.
Some of them did. And Kerensky was failing badly by continuing the war. The Bolsheviks stepped into a tailor made situation.
The idea that the Bolsheviks were just defending themselves is absurd, they were the aggressors who were attempting to overthrow all of the existing forms of government.
Let’s not sugarcoat this and hold these counterrevolutionaries up as shining beacons of idealism. Had they done a better job of assuring the populace about their motives then it’s possible they could have won. Many of them wanted to replace the liberal government with a monarchy. They also committed atrocities against the populace and stirred up pogroms against the Jews.
I'm not, I'm just stating the obvious fact that the way the Bolsheviks were behaving was obviously going to provoke a reaction from people who opposed their ideas.

Unfortunately anti-semitism was rife in many parts of Eastern Europe in the early 20th century. A lot of people forget that many locals in Eastern Europe collaborated with the Nazis during their reign of terror.
And the counterrevolutionaries didn’t? Many of them were unrepentant Czarists. How well did that work out for the commoners before the revolution?
Neither you nor I know what would’ve happened had the revolution continued unopposed or relatively unopposed.
Pre-revolution living standards: Russia 1888-1917
Yes.
Well since you're aware of the order then you should be quite well informed about the ruthless that Lenin was happy to see happen as long as he got his own way.

On the topics we are currently discussing, I want to recommend you the following books:

Alan Bullock, Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives
Ian Kershaw & Moshe Lewin, Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison
Anthony Read & David Fisher, The Deadly Embrace: Hitler, Stalin and the Nazi-Soviet Pact, 1939-1941
Timothy Snyder, Bloodlands: Europe between Hitler and Stalin
Bertram Wolfe, Three Who Made a Revolution: A Biographical History of Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin
Orlando Figes, A People's Tragedy: The Russian Revolution
“When one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.” - Robert Pirsig

User avatar
Goody67
Regular Poster
Posts: 638
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:55 pm

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Goody67 » Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:15 pm

Sergey_Romanov wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 6:27 am
That headline is not relevant evidence.
It's not, but it goes to show that different figures have been given at different times.
Sergey_Romanov wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 6:30 am
As for who is worse, Lenin's phrase used by Stalin comes to mind: "Both are worse".
Because Lenin was such a saint... :glare:
That said, Hitler was ultimately more *harmful*.
That depends on whom you ask.
“When one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.” - Robert Pirsig

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 12614
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am
Custom Title: Lost in Translation
Location: Safely stored in my own mind

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Fri Aug 16, 2019 3:24 pm

I’ll have more to say later but:
Goody67 wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:08 pm


On the topics we are currently discussing, I want to recommend you the following books:

Alan Bullock, Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives
Read it.
Timothy Snyder, Bloodlands: Europe between Hitler and Stalin
Read it. I liked it more than others on this forum. The numbers I gave you in a previous post were his, BTW. Snyder dwelled on the famine in the Ukraine while neglecting that other regions suffered from famine. I agree with his assessment that Stalin targeted the Ukraine with particular harshness and that his policies led to things becoming much worse than they needed to be. While to some extent I understand Snyder’s division, how he came up with the regions he called “Bloodlands” but I think he needed to mention other areas like Yugoslavia and Greece and places like Siberia where famine also prevailed.
I also read Applebaum’s “Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine.” I liked it but denying-history was much more critical of it. He studied the Holodomor pretty extensively and even dealt with Holodomor deniers on-line so I tend to believe him when it comes to this.
Orlando Figes, A People's Tragedy: The Russian Revolution
Read it, in fact, thinking about reading it again.

I’d also add “Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar.” Read that a few years ago, probably need to read it again.

I also think “Stalin, Volume 1: Paradoxes of Power, 1878-1928” and “Stalin: Waiting for Hitler, 1929-1941”
by Stephen Kotkin
are well worth a read. I’ll look into the others you suggested. I did read a book about the Great Purges from a bottom up perspective. I need to track that down, can’t remember the title but I’ll see if I have it somewhere.
Question for Groening by a reporter:
“Mr. Groening, what do you say to those who still deny the Holocaust?”

Groening:
“Nothing. They are hopelessly lost.”


Harvard Crimson (on why it refused to run an add by Bradley Smith):
“(It is) vicious propaganda based on utter BS that has been discredited time and time again.”

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Fri Aug 16, 2019 3:38 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:15 pm
Sergey_Romanov wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 6:27 am
That headline is not relevant evidence.
It's not, but it goes to show that different figures have been given at different times.
Since it has never been doubted that different figures have been given (this can be said about almost any event), this comment brings no new information and is thus hardly relevant to the discussion of the veracity of the 20 mln. estimate.
Because Lenin was such a saint... :glare:
Not sure why you would think that he was a saint, but to each his own, I guess.

User avatar
Denying-History
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2169
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Denying-History » Fri Aug 16, 2019 7:38 pm

Goody67 wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 4:50 am
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:13 pm
Aaron Richards wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:54 pm

Stalin killed like 20 million people...
That’s way too high.....
Not necessarily.

On 4 February 1989, there was an article with the headline, “Major Soviet Paper Says 20 Million Died As Victims of Stalin”.

https://www.nytimes.com/1989/02/04/worl ... talin.html

https://www.ibtimes.com/how-many-people ... ll-1111789

The true number will never be known and the total figure depends on whether certain things are to be considered part of it.
These figures have no basis. Here is a quick break down for anyone interested:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special settler death toll:

Approximately 200,000 dead between 1930-31

389,521 dead between 1932-1940

[The History of the Gulag: From Collectivization to the Great Terror p.327]

287,770 dead between 1945-1953

[The Stalinist penal system p.133]

Total: 877,291 deaths in special settlements excluding those who died on route. Can probably be rounded up to a million.

Gulag death toll archival: 1,590,384
https://www.alexanderyakovlev.org/fond/ ... oc/1009320

[According to Red Holocaust. In it the author claims Wheatcroft found the NKVD put the death toll between at 1930–1953 for the camps was 1,347,770 and for settlements 519,766. (From an unpublished paper “Assessing the Victims of Repression 1930–1945”) These figures however appear to be too low based on the fact he updated them in his response to Conquest.]

Famine 1932-1934 victims according to the latest study from 2016: 8,731,900

Note on the above figure; I deliberately used the highest figure Ik of (that is based on demographic data) to prove a point. Wheatcroft and Davies suggest a figure of 5.5-6.5 million which seems to be the most reasonable. However if you accept this figure (which cannot be easily dismissed) it still shows Stalin's death toll could be no where close to 20 million.

[Famines in European Economic History p.214]

Katyn: 21,857 pow and officers shot. (21,768 confirmed according to IPN)

[Katyn: Stalin’s Massacre and the Triumph of Truth p.X]

Executions: 823,456 for 1921-1953

(If my math is correct, I haven’t double checked and don’t plan to.)

[Wheatcroft in “The anatomy of terror” p.304-5]
« The Terror here is a horrifying fact. There is a fear that reaches down and haunts all sections of the community. No household, however humble, apparently but what lives in constant fear of nocturnal raid by the secret police. . .This particular purge is undoubtedly political. . . It is deliberately projected by the party leaders, who themselves regretted the necessity for it. »
Joseph E. Davies

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Fri Aug 16, 2019 8:51 pm

> pow and officers s

And prisoners.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has No Life
Posts: 12614
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am
Custom Title: Lost in Translation
Location: Safely stored in my own mind

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Jeffk 1970 » Sat Aug 17, 2019 4:16 am

Goody67 wrote:
Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:08 pm
I tend to go towards lower numbers when it comes to anything. I think 3.3 million for the Ukraine with a total of around 7 million for the famines in the 1930’s is probably the best estimate we have. It’s the same for the Great Purge, probably between 700,000-900,000 people died. Snyder points out that a very large percentage of those people, around 200,000, were ethnic Poles.

That's fair enough. But, do you do that for other genocides e.g. does that also include for the figures given of the number of Jews killed during the Holocaust? Hilberg calculated 5.1 million Jews in the early 1960s, that is 900,000 fewer Jews than the generally accepted figure of 6 million Jews - that is not just one or two Jews, it is a significant difference.
I look at six million as an estimate, not a concrete number. There are a range of estimates, from Reitlinger to Snyder. I’ve always felt it more appropriate to say 5-6 million Jews died.
I look at it this way, at what point did Stalin become the unquestioned leader and not just a first among equals. There was a power struggle throughout the 1920’s where there was maneuvering between Stalin and the others. Even his grip wasn’t assured until the Great Purges ended but he was certainly the driving force for collectivization. That led to the famines. Those famines extended throughout the USSR but were particularly harsh for the Ukraine. It was his policies and his lapdogs that carried it out.

Stalin had become the leader of the Soviet Union in 1929
There was still collective leadership until the end of 1937.
and after that he should be regarded as being fully responsible for what happened, including the Holodomor and the Great Purges during the 1930s. Stalin was ordering the general line for the Great Purges. How can you say otherwise?
I didn’t. What I said was “he was the driving force for collectivization.” I said it was his policies. In another post I said I agreed with Snyder that ultimately Stalin’s actions made famine worse.
Look at what happened to people who disagreed with Stalin - Trotsky being a prime example. Stalin by the 1930s was an absolute maniac who had blood on his hands.
Argh.
“Maniac” is a term I hesitate to give to anyone. It immediately strips away any ability to look at the person and what motivated them to the actions they took. It’s too easy to call someone like Stalin or Hitler a maniac. Why bother to figure out if they are a “maniac?”
So, if we compare that with Hitler's unquestioned leadership, Hitler did not become the Führer until 2 August 1934, by then plenty of people had been put into concentration camps and the infamous Night of the Long Knives had happened, does that mean Hitler should be exempt from taking full responsibility for those events since he was not the unquestioned leader during those times?
You misunderstood what I wrote. Of course Stalin is responsible, I said he was the driving force behind collectivization and later said his policies made it worse.
I find your sentence, "It was his policies and his lapdogs that carried it out" troublesome.
Why?
Those were carried out under his orders and he was fully responsible for those famines.
If something is his policy (collectivization) how is this any different than what you said?
Let me counteract that argument with how the Nazis worked, Hitler himself neither visited a concentration camp nor witnessed any Jews being massacred, does that mean he was not responsible? He was clever enough, like Stalin, to get his cronies to do his dirty work for him. They were both pathetic cowards and {!#%@} leaders. In both cases, the Germans and the Russians could have chosen better leaders.
Why does it feel like we are having difficulties In communicating? If something is a policy set down by Stalin and his people carry that out how is this any different than what Hitler did? I’m essentially saying the same thing you are:
If Stalin set something in motion and had his people carry it out then of course he is responsible. In fact based upon what I’ve read Stalin was far more involved than Hitler was. The Holocaust occurred during the war and that war was Hitler’s main focus. Of course he knew and ultimately that fault lies with him. The hatred of Jews and their ultimate destruction lay at the very bedrock of National Socialist ideology. But individuals took far more initiative under Hitler than they ever did under Stalin because that is how Hitler functioned. There was no need for Hitler to meddle because he had Himmler and others to carry out his ultimate wish in this matter.
Now whether or not what is being taught about the Holocaust is worth a damn is another subject entirely.

Which aspects of the Holocaust do you think should be taught more extensively in schools?
The basics to start with, what the camps were, how the Holocaust started, the mass shooting, the Action Reinhard Camps, Chelmno, what Auschwitz was. People garble up so much that it wouldn’t surprise me if you asked someone on the street what the Holocaust was they would tell you that the Nazis gassed six million Jews in the ovens at Auschwitz.
If we're being honest, I don't think too many people these days are interested in history as a whole, let alone the Holocaust.
I agree.

Some of them did. And Kerensky was failing badly by continuing the war. The Bolsheviks stepped into a tailor made situation.

The idea that the Bolsheviks were just defending themselves is absurd, they were the aggressors who were attempting to overthrow all of the existing forms of government.
Why?
Essentially they stepped into a vacuum. It’s absurd to think that revolutionaries wouldn’t....revolt.
Look, someone was going to step in. The Bolsheviks stepped in because they were organized to do this. Much of this was very spontaneous because the Russians (and others) were fed up with the war, with starving, with the Czar, they were ripe for this and the Bolsheviks stepped in.
Now we don’t know what they the Bolsheviks would have done without opposition. Maybe the violence would’ve happened anyway with them eliminating “class enemies.”
Let’s not sugarcoat this and hold these counterrevolutionaries up as shining beacons of idealism. Had they done a better job of assuring the populace about their motives then it’s possible they could have won. Many of them wanted to replace the liberal government with a monarchy. They also committed atrocities against the populace and stirred up pogroms against the Jews.

I'm not, I'm just stating the obvious fact that the way the Bolsheviks were behaving was obviously going to provoke a reaction from people who opposed their ideas.
I can’t disagree with that. But there are differences in isolated opposition and full-blown civil war.


And the counterrevolutionaries didn’t? Many of them were unrepentant Czarists. How well did that work out for the commoners before the revolution?
Neither you nor I know what would’ve happened had the revolution continued unopposed or relatively unopposed.

Pre-revolution living standards: Russia 1888-1917
Interesting but your author even says that the two cities studied don’t necessarily translate to the country as a whole.


Yes.

Well since you're aware of the order then you should be quite well informed about the ruthless that Lenin was happy to see happen as long as he got his own way.
Lenin issued that order as a result of insurrection. He didn’t simply order it just to murder random people.
Question for Groening by a reporter:
“Mr. Groening, what do you say to those who still deny the Holocaust?”

Groening:
“Nothing. They are hopelessly lost.”


Harvard Crimson (on why it refused to run an add by Bradley Smith):
“(It is) vicious propaganda based on utter BS that has been discredited time and time again.”

User avatar
sandhurst
New Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:15 am

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by sandhurst » Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:10 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Sat Aug 17, 2019 4:16 am
I’ve always felt it more appropriate to say 5-6 million Jews died.
What you think is appropriate may not tally with real history, only a fantasy.
The Holodomor was a man-made famine in Soviet Ukraine in 1932 and 1933 that killed millions of Ukrainians.
During an international conference, "Holodomor 1932-1933 loss of the Ukrainian nation", which took place on 4 October 2016 at the National University of Kiev Taras Shevchenko, it was claimed that during the Holodomor 7 million Ukrainians were killed, and in total, 10 million people died of starvation in the entire USSR.
You can decide who was the worse person, but to do this you have to balance real information with possible information.
It has been also considered that most of the holocaust-ed Jews said to have been killed was a result of starvation, disease and lack of normal provisions due to war. Can you compare and contrast this to Holodomor?

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27616
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:44 am

sandhurst wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:10 am
It has been also considered that most of the holocaust-ed Jews said to have been killed was a result of starvation, disease and lack of normal provisions due to war. Can you compare and contrast this to Holodomor?
Considered by whom? Whoever . . . it isn't true. Most of the Jews who perished in the genocide carried out by the Germans and some of their allies during WWII were killed - by shooting or from gassing with a sizable number also killed by means of intentional privation (food withheld, not normal wartime lack) and lethal working conditions in camps and ghettos.

"Holocaust" is a noun; it is only used as a verb by Holocaust deniers and Internet trolls trying to be offensive.
Last edited by Statistical Mechanic on Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:55 am, edited 2 times in total.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
sandhurst
New Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:15 am

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by sandhurst » Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:53 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:44 am
Considered by whom? Whoever . . . it isn't true. Most of the Jews who perished in the genocide carried out by the Germans and some of their allies during WWII were killed - by shooting or from gassing with a sizable number also killed by means of intentional privation and lethal working conditions in camps and ghettos.

"Holocaust" is a noun; it is only used as a verb by Holocaust deniers and Internet trolls trying to be offensive.
I am not interested in your semantics or even Semitic propositions. I simply asked: " It has been also considered that most of the holocaust-ed Jews said to have been killed was a result of starvation, disease and lack of normal provisions due to war. Can you compare and contrast this to Holodomor? "
In other words compare and contrast this holocaust to the Ukrainian holodomor.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27616
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:58 am

No semantics - but I will note anti-Semitic cracks when people make them. I don't know what a "Semitic proposition" is. Pray tell.

And I responded to one statement you wrote, where you made a general claim in the passive voice that was not accurate about Jewish deaths during WWII. Your statement was erroneous, misstating the Jewish deaths part of the comparison you want. Deal with it.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

User avatar
sandhurst
New Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:15 am

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by sandhurst » Sun Aug 18, 2019 10:03 am

Statistical Mechanic wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:58 am
No semantics - but I will note anti-Semitic cracks when people make them. I don't know what a "Semitic proposition" is. Pray tell.

And I responded to one statement you wrote, where you made a general statement in the passive voice that was not accurate about Jewish deaths during WWII. Your statement was erroneous, misstating the Jewish deaths part of the comparison you want. Deal with it.
It would seem that you cannot discuss and compare the Russian atrocities with the Jewish claims.
Thank you for your time.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27616
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Statistical Mechanic » Sun Aug 18, 2019 10:04 am

It would seem that you can't make an accurate statement about Jewish deaths during WWII or defend your inaccurate statement. Good for you.
. . . all right we are two nations . . .

Sergey_Romanov
Regular Poster
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:15 am

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by Sergey_Romanov » Sun Aug 18, 2019 10:06 am

sandhurst wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:10 am
During an international conference, "Holodomor 1932-1933 loss of the Ukrainian nation", which took place on 4 October 2016 at the National University of Kiev Taras Shevchenko, it was claimed that during the Holodomor 7 million Ukrainians were killed, and in total, 10 million people died of starvation in the entire USSR.
These figures are obviously exaggerated, but the thing is, if you deny the Holocaust, you can forget about affirming the Holodomor.

Holocaust deniers cannot appeal to the historicity of the Holodomor since all their pseudo-arguments apply to it at least as strongly as to the Holocaust - much more strongly in fact, since the evidence for the Holocaust is many times more voluminous than that for the Holodomor.

User avatar
sandhurst
New Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:15 am

Re: Who is the worse person?

Post by sandhurst » Sun Aug 18, 2019 10:09 am

Sergey_Romanov wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 10:06 am
These figures are obviously exaggerated, but the thing is, if you deny the Holocaust, you can forget about affirming the Holodomor.
why?
Holocaust deniers cannot appeal to the historicity of the Holodomor since all their pseudo-arguments apply to it at least as strongly as to the Holocaust - much more strongly in fact, since the evidence for the Holocaust is many times more voluminous than that for the Holodomor.
All this evidence when asked at other places has never been produced. All talk, no substance. Why is this?