Stalin analysis

[rever]

[Darth_aurelius]

The length of that video is going to seriously test the limitations of many of the comrades attention spans here including my own as someone who is ADHD. I did notice that the lecturer looks and sounds to be a proper truecel which is encouraging to see. I assume his thesis is going to arrive at some conclusion about the imperative to defeat fascism and the lesser of two evils sort of analysis that most conventional historians who are partial to Soviet revisionist historiography tend to arrive at (e.g., had the Nazi conquest of Russia been consummated, all the slavs living there would have been enslaved or exterminated).

[rever]

No
He says Stalin is ubermansch . You can check comments to find the part which you want to see

[Darth_aurelius]

No
He says Stalin is ubermansch . You can check comments to find the part which you want to see

Well I am not sure if I could ever be convinced of that proposition and I highly doubt that this guy would ever be able to write a dissertation on that subject as I don't believe there is any credible factual and historical basis for it. The historiography of Stalin is dominated by two schools of thought; the Russian/Slavic interpretive paradigm which extols his virtues as a stoical and necessary man of uncompromising nature at the right time, the right place and with the right qualities to be able to defeat fascism and then everyone else who regards him as morally equivalent to Der Fuhrer. I personally think he was a great man for exterminating as many Ukrainians and jews as he did as well as for instituting a totalitarian system of rule in Russia whereby old white men lorded over all the NPC's and where foids were relegated to subservient positions of low status.