Check out the above revisionist anti-Russian drivel. Clearly cultural Trotskyism has taken over the precious west.
While 1917 saw a cultural flowering in Russia, the post-Soviet intelligentsia has failed to articulate a liberal vision and produced only shallow art.
The only thing that flowered after 1917 was the civil war that claimed the lives of over 10 million people and the appearance
of all sorts of degeneracy posing as art, architecture and philosophical "thought". Trotsky and his merry band of Russia haters
invested fully breaking up Russia. That included giving away vast tracts of Russia including millions of Russians to faked up
"republics" such as Ukraine. Nobody asked the Russians living on their ancestral land if they wanted to be Ukrainians or Estonians, etc.
The 1954 gift of Crimea to Ukraine was part of this criminal social engineering.
The whole postwar period in Russian history is viewed through the prism of the cold war “initiated by the United States of America.” The textbook does not deny Stalin’s repressions; it justifies them. The concentration of power in Stalin’s hands suited the country; indeed, conditions of the time “demanded” it. “The domestic politics of the Soviet Union after the war fulfilled the tasks of mobilisation which the government set. In the circumstances of the cold war… democratisation was not an option for Stalin.”
Hilarious nonsense. The power was concentrated at the top by the Bolshies. Stalin functioned within the system they created.
You just don't like the fact that your favourite Bolshies got displaced from the social engineering anti-Russian power. Thanks
to Stalin, the USSR was able to defeat the Nazis. With Trotsky in charge and his spend every last gram of Soviet resources on
world revolution BS, the USSR would not have been able to even defend Moscow. I guess Trotsky would have surrendered Soviet
(Russian, Ukrainian, Belorussian) land to the Nazis to appease them. But they would have taken the lot.
Now we have seen this ambition realised in the recent war against Georgia. For the first time since the end of the Soviet Union, Russia has asserted itself militarily in the post-Soviet space and played out its imperial ambitions with tanks and grenade launchers. Russia’s invasion was intended to send an unequivocal message to other former Soviet republics: “we can and will stop Nato’s eastward advance.” In the first few days of the war, Russia bombed Gori, Stalin’s home town. The cluster bombs it dropped on the city killed between five and 30 people, but the statue of Stalin on the main Stalin Square remained standing. As Russian tanks rolled past the statue on Putin’s orders, one can even imagine the Soviet dictator winking and waving.
1) The cluster bombs used in Georgia were identified as Israeli made so they were 100% used by Suck-ass-shvili's forces and not those of
2) How about the 2000 civilians murdered by the pro-NATzO Georgian regime in the middle of the night by the sneak attack on Tskhinvali
which was not a military target but part of the regime's attempt to grab South Ossetia.
3) And supposedly NATzO is not engaged in imperialism. Welcome to 1984 newthink and newspeak. Not surprising for a Trotskyist bootlick.
It is easy enough to condemn Russia’s manipulation of history for ideological ends, or Putin’s restoration of the Soviet anthem in 2000. But the truth is that a large majority of Russians—77 per cent according to one poll—welcomed the restoration of the anthem, and at least half the country view Stalin’s role in history as positive. This connects to another uncomfortable truth: the version of history portrayed in the new textbook is as much a defeat for Russian liberalism and liberal intellectuals—the journalists, historians and artists who were supposed to counter the Soviet ideology—as it is a triumph for Putin. There was more opposition from Russian liberals to the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, than there is now to the war in Georgia.
1) You are a lying cunt who distorts modern day facts to serve the agenda of your screed. So what is exactly your legitimacy to pass
judgement on Russians for their view of WWII.
2) Clearly the Russian view of WWII sticks in the craw of Trotskyist maggots. Stalin really did help Russia survive. That is a cold, hard fact
and no amount of your "cluster bombs in Gori" crap will change it.
3) If Russian liberalism is all about sycophancy to NATzO and guilt tripping Russians who were, bar none, the greatest victims of WWII aside from
the singular Holocaust, then they deserve to be sidelined and ignored. Their BS is designed to lubricate the imperialism of NATzO.
4) The 1968 Czechoslovakia incident is small potatoes. Nothing like yanqui meddling in Panama, Grenada, and pretty much around the world.
The US helped Sukharto butcher a million people in Indonesia. Those victims were civilians who wanted what the writer of this screed purports
to believe in, leftist ideals.
I skimmed the rest of this screed and some fixation on the Russian national anthem and Soviet jingles. Really? This is the "weighty"
evidence against modern Russia?
Here is another shitball from the same toilet:
Today the majority of Russians—including younger Russians who we might have expected to demand answers to the thorniest historical questions—assess Stalin in a positive light. As we witness toppled statues in Europe and the US, in Russia the state has sanctioned the erection of busts of Stalin in various cities including the country’s third largest, Novosibirsk.
In 2019 the most respected pollster in Russia, the Levada Center, found that these efforts are working, with 70 per cent of Russians believing that Stalin’s rule had been good for the Soviet Union. In fact, the number who admired Stalin was greater than at any point since Levada started polling on the question in 2001. Lev Gudkov, the head of the Levada Centre, stated that “there’s been a quiet rehabilitation of Stalin on the part of the government.”
What a crime! How despicable of this "ebil Roshians".
This "article" is using the routine propaganda tricks of setting up a false inference. Since Germans of the 1950s did not accept their guilt,
that is the same as Russians after 1990 not accepting their "guilt". WTF do Germans after 1945 have to do with Russians? Assume
a false premise and proceed to "conclude" that Russians are in the wrong. The revisionist cunts who write this agit-prop pretend that
Hitler was equal to Stalin and that the Nazis were equal to the Soviets? How?
1) Did the USSR start WWII? Obviously not since the war started in 1939 and only in 1941 on the eastern front. That is not a gap one
can fob off. But NATzO revisionists also invoke "partition of Poland" between the USSR and the Nazis as part of some sort of natural alliance.
The much touted Molotov-Ribbentrop pact is used to support this revisionism. Unlike the USA, the USSR did not help the Nazis set up
military production lines during the 1930s. The so called partition was the legal return of Soviet lands annexed by Poland in 1920 which
had little to do with Poland since any Polish population on those lands was nowhere close to a majority. Those were Ukrainian and
Belorussian lands. The much yapped about non-aggression pact was not unique to the USSR, Poland had signed the same earlier.
And this pact resulted in the shipment of food grain to Germany in exchange for a period when the USSR increased its war potential
by 40%. This was a brilliant move by Stalin. Naturally the revisionists pretend that Stalin was "surprised" by the German attack in
1941. Really? After preparing to fight them, right?
2) The authors want Russians to feel guilt for some sort of wrongdoing associated with WWII just like the Germans. Did the Soviets
(Russians) set up death camps for Jews? I know about the Chechens, but that is a problem between Chechnya and Russia and not
some sort of stick in NATzO's hand to beat Russia on the head with. The UK, USA, Belgium, etc., have committed vastly greater crimes
against ethnic groups around the planet compared to the wartime treatment of Chechens. Chechens were not peacfully minding their
own business but decided to ally themselves with the genocidal Nazis.
3) The USSR had no platform of genocide in the name of racial purity. The Nazis did and planned to exterminate Russians and
other Soviet untermenschen. So why should Russians feel guilt for WWII? Because they were the victims of attempted genocide.
Actually, 18 million Soviet civilians died so there was a de facto genocide.
Germany’s post-war economic achievements eventually allowed its citizens to face their collective guilt in a more confident, rather than a defensive spirit, with contemporary success encouraging hope that society could continue to recover and prosper into the future after drawing a line under past crimes.
The rocky and, for a time, ruinous road of the Russian economy after the Soviet collapse stands in stark contrast. Yet there is something more fundamental in Russia’s failed replication of the German model in the post-Cold War world. The historian Carlo Ginzburg was on to something when he suggested that “the country one belongs to is not, as the usual rhetoric goes, the one you love but the one you are ashamed of.” We rarely experience our national belonging as powerfully as in those moments when we feel “ashamed for somebody different from us for something we are not involved in,” but for someone whom we nonetheless feel a sense of responsibility.
Inane name-dropping drivel. Germany did not change economic systems and was subsidized by the Marshall Plan. By contrast
1990-91 Russia transitioned to capitalism. That is like rebuilding a house at the brick level. It is a miracle that the country did not
completely dissolve. Nobody was subsidizing Russia's transition. But instead, NATzO sent its Harvard Boyz of economic witchdoctors
who prescribed shock-therapy voodoo. This resulted in the collapse of Russian industry (and jobs) and a flood of imports (lucrative
for NATzO) that keep Russia's economy down until after 1998. Yeltsin's compardor regime, which is basically being extolled by the
writers of this article, maintained an artificially high ruble forex rate (enabling the import flood) through the GKO ponzi. This racket
collapsed in 1998. Thanks to this collapse the forex dropped almost four times and Russia's manufacturing capacity started to be
used again. Yeltsin failed to physically destroy Russian factories and thus his whole scam fell apart. But Russians are to be credited
for rescuing their economy. Like workers in Argentina in 2000, they secured their places of work and even kept working without pay
particularly in the military sector.
I won't bother to dissect the rest of this crap. It appeals to non-arguments and things that do not matter to push blood libel.