I'm Touring The United States! Starting in June, I'm conducting private events in 23 American cities. Click here for full details.

Post Reply 
Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
Author Message
Oberrheiner Offline
Chubby Chaser
**

Posts: 401
Joined: Dec 2018
Reputation: 5
Post: #76
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
(05-01-2019 04:35 PM)Rocha Wrote:  
(05-01-2019 02:03 PM)Oberrheiner Wrote:  
(04-29-2019 08:20 PM)Rocha Wrote:  
(04-29-2019 07:11 PM)911 Wrote:  You have to understand the nature of the current Russian/Ukrainian societies, nearly half the people were purged by the vengeful, tribal Bolsheviks over the last 102 years. This included nearly all their aristocrats, most of the upper and upper middle classes and most pious Christians.

Not only did they cull the best of them, but they also further degraded the social fiber of those left over through full-blown communism and moral degeneracy. What you have today is a shadow of that former society, that is one of the main reasons that cultures like the Ukraine's are still highly vulnerable to the ongoing neoliberal rape that has prevailed in the last 3 decades.

I see this repeated over and over again in this forum, and I still have yet to know from where comes this idea of "moral degeneracy" in the Soviet Union, when for most of it's history the nuclear family was valued and enforced, even in the hard core bolshevik days after the October revolution.

The degeneracy came after the Perestroika, and mainly after the fall of the USSR.

Go talk to people who were sent to the gulag if you can still find some, ask them for what reason and how the society was back in those days.
You might understand then.

I was expecting that you could explain how was society back in those days.

I wish I could explain it to you, but I did not live there in those days, so I would not want to usurp these people's memories.
I could tell you anecdotes from family members but that wouldn't do them justice either.

And in fact sometimes the actual stories are not even that important, the look in their eyes as they remember says all you need to know - if you know broken people you'll recognize it immediately.
Often they don't even want to talk about it and just leave because they think it would get them problems if they did - as if the system was still "there" after all that time.
Or they are just too ashamed of what they had to do to survive, seen that too - they don't believe anyone including their god could ever forgive them for that ..

If you really want to know go talk to the old ones, it's the best advice I can give you.
1984 was nothing ..
05-04-2019 06:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Reinhard von Lohengramm Offline
Banned

Posts: 7
Joined: Dec 2017
Post: #77
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
(05-04-2019 06:38 AM)Oberrheiner Wrote:  
(05-01-2019 04:35 PM)Rocha Wrote:  
(05-01-2019 02:03 PM)Oberrheiner Wrote:  
(04-29-2019 08:20 PM)Rocha Wrote:  
(04-29-2019 07:11 PM)911 Wrote:  You have to understand the nature of the current Russian/Ukrainian societies, nearly half the people were purged by the vengeful, tribal Bolsheviks over the last 102 years. This included nearly all their aristocrats, most of the upper and upper middle classes and most pious Christians.

Not only did they cull the best of them, but they also further degraded the social fiber of those left over through full-blown communism and moral degeneracy. What you have today is a shadow of that former society, that is one of the main reasons that cultures like the Ukraine's are still highly vulnerable to the ongoing neoliberal rape that has prevailed in the last 3 decades.

I see this repeated over and over again in this forum, and I still have yet to know from where comes this idea of "moral degeneracy" in the Soviet Union, when for most of it's history the nuclear family was valued and enforced, even in the hard core bolshevik days after the October revolution.

The degeneracy came after the Perestroika, and mainly after the fall of the USSR.

Go talk to people who were sent to the gulag if you can still find some, ask them for what reason and how the society was back in those days.
You might understand then.

I was expecting that you could explain how was society back in those days.

I wish I could explain it to you, but I did not live there in those days, so I would not want to usurp these people's memories.
I could tell you anecdotes from family members but that wouldn't do them justice either.

And in fact sometimes the actual stories are not even that important, the look in their eyes as they remember says all you need to know - if you know broken people you'll recognize it immediately.
Often they don't even want to talk about it and just leave because they think it would get them problems if they did - as if the system was still "there" after all that time.
Or they are just too ashamed of what they had to do to survive, seen that too - they don't believe anyone including their god could ever forgive them for that ..

If you really want to know go talk to the old ones, it's the best advice I can give you.
1984 was nothing ..

I am from Russia, my parents lived in the USSR. I have only heard positive things about those times from them. Comparing current times or the 1990s to the final decade of the Soviet Union in the 1980s, the difference is like night and day. The 1960s-1980s were a golden age compared to anything that has happened since then in the former USSR. My family weren't part of the elite or even the communist party at all, but were pretty well off nonetheless. The dissolution of the Soviet Union was a catastrophe.

Also the Soviet Union was very socially conservative. I think Westerners mistake the SJW types that may occasionally LARP as "communists" as being the same thing as the people in the USSR and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union/Russia. If that were true than it would not have lasted or had been as much of a threat to the West as it did. Homosexuality was illegal, military service was mandatory, men were expected to be men, women were expected to be women, etc. Abortion has always been a problem, although it was illegal for a brief period, but overall society in the USSR was very socially conservative.

Russian Communists, even more so since the end of the USSR, were/are effectively national socialists. They would be considered far right nationalists by the American Left's current standards.
05-04-2019 03:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 3 users Like Reinhard von Lohengramm's post:
Going strong, Rocha, Count Pyotr
911 Offline
International Playboy
******

Posts: 4,268
Joined: Mar 2016
Reputation: 54
Post: #78
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
Lohengramm, most of the 65 millions purged in the Soviet Union were before WW2, so even before your parents' experience. Stalin resorted to more nationalism because Russians weren't going to sacrifice themselves on the front for the glory of the party.

Jura Lina described the early Soviet experience well, the second hour of his documentary really delves into the extent of the horror and the guiding evil philosophy:





Basically the USSR was a classic kakistocracy, thugs and psychopaths were taken out of jail and elevated to rule over the masses through NKVD terror and administrative oppression. Solzhenitsyn described this well.

Under that regime, people had to lie and cheat to get by. The upper and middle classes were purged, as well as anybody religious, breaking the moral fiber of society.

There was a very aggressive social engineering, women and children were targeted. Those "reforms" enacted and the society and rules they've spawned are actually pretty similar to our own legal divorce rape and hypergamous current society with broken families. he article below, from 1926, really describes the kind of degeneracy that was practiced there.

There has been tremendous damage from that period, in the social mores and family structures. I think that things like the endemic corruption, mafia culture and overly materialistic mindset derive directly from the cultural purge and socially engineered degeneracy from the early and mid 20th century there.

The pendulum swung back to more conservative mores in the 1960s. Same thing happened in China, were the craziness of the Cultural Revolution gave way to a more sane socialist structure in the 1960s-70s. But the cultural foundation is not very strong, you can't really fully recapture the solid moral mores, fundamentally Christian goodness and refinement of pre-Soviet Russia. Modern Russia is driven by nouveaux riches and oligarchs, though there is a popular conservative Orthodox current as well.



https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc...ge/306295/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...When the Bolsheviki came into power in 1917 they regarded the family, like every other 'bourgeois' institution, with fierce hatred, and set out with a will to destroy it. 'To clear the family out of the accumulated dust of the ages we had to give it a good shakeup, and we did,' declared Madame Smidovich, a leading Communist and active participant in the recent discussion. So one of the first decrees of the Soviet Government abolished the term 'illegitimate children.' This was done simply by equalizing the legal status of all children, whether born in wedlock or out of it, and now the Soviet Government boasts that Russia is the only country where there are no illegitimate children. The father of a child is forced to contribute to its support, usually paying the mother a third of his salary in the event of a separation, provided she has no other means of livelihood.

At the same time a law was passed which made divorce a matter of a few minutes, to be obtained at the request of either partner in a marriage. Chaos was the result. Men took to changing wives with the same zest which they displayed in the consumption of the recently restored forty-per-cent vodka.

'Some men have twenty wives, living a week with one, a month with another,' asserted an indignant woman delegate during the sessions of the Tzik. 'They have children with all of them, and these children are thrown on the street for lack of support! (There are three hundred thousand bezprizorni or shelterless children in Russia to-day, who are literally turned out on the streets. They are one of the greatest social dangers of the present time, because they are developing into professional criminals. More than half of them are drug addicts and sex perverts. It is claimed by many Communists that the break-up of the family is responsible for a large percentage of these children.)

The peasant villages have perhaps suffered most from this revolution in sex relations. An epidemic of marriages and divorces broke out in the country districts. Peasants with a respectable married life of forty years and more behind them suddenly decided to leave their wives and remarry. Peasant boys looked upon marriage as an exciting game and changed wives with the change of seasons. It was not an unusual occurrence for a boy of twenty to have had three or four wives, or for a girl of the same age to have had three or four abortions. As the peasants of Borisovo-Pokrovskoie bitterly complained: 'Abortions cover our villages with shame. Formerly we did not even hear of them.' But the women, in self-defense, replied: 'It's easy for you to talk. But if you just tried to bear children yourselves you would sing a different song.'

I was once discussing the subject of frequent divorces with the president of a village soviet. 'What makes women get divorces?' I asked him. Just then a girl about eighteen years old entered the room. 'Here is our latest divorcee,' said the president laughingly. 'Ask her.' I turned around, but the girl was no longer there, and from the window I saw her running away as fast as she could. I ran after her and finally caught up with her in the fields outside the village. We sat down on a haystack and I asked the girl to talk to me frankly, as woman to woman.

Tears filled her eyes as she told me that she still loved her nineteen-year-old husband, but that he had forced her to ask for a divorce only two months after they had been married. He now thought he loved another girl in the village and threatened to kill his wife if she did not leave him voluntarily.

I recall another victim of the breakdown of family ties in the villages, a tall, pale, silent Cossack woman. She was divorced by her husband after their first child was born. He then married another woman, had a child by her, deserted both, and returned to his first wife, by whom he had a second child. The woman was deeply religious, and was tormented by the thought that her second child was illegitimate, although her priest assured her that this was not the case, because the Church did not recognize the divorce.

Several peculiar abuses sprang up in the country districts in connection with the shifting marriage regulations. Many women of light behavior found marriage and childbearing a profitable occupation. They formed connections with the sons of well-to-do peasants and then blackmailed the father for the support of the children. In some cases peasants have been obliged to sell their last cow or horse in order to settle such alimony claims. The law has created still more confusion because it is retrospective in its operation, so that women can claim support for children born many years ago.

Other peasants took advantage of the loose divorce regulations to acquire 'summer brides.' As the hiring of labor in Russia is hedged about with difficulties and restrictions for the private employer, the richer peasants in some districts took to the practice of marrying a strong girl for the harvest season and divorcing her as soon as the work in the fields was over.

The new sex relations have also raised certain problems in the cities. During the winter of 1924-1925 some of the older Communists accused the younger generation, especially the students, of indulging in too much dissipation, of squandering health and vitality in loose connections; they blame the girl students for practising frequent abortions. 'You must be either a student or a mother; under present-day conditions you can't be both,' declared one mentor to the modern Russian women students. The latter indignantly replied that love was almost the only cheap amusement left to them and demanded that they be given at least the same opportunity for free abortions that factory women enjoy. Moreover, they retorted that not all the older Communists could serve as a model of pure living.

Some members of the League of Communist Youth, an organization which now numbers between a million and a half and two million young men and women, regard the refusal to enter into temporary sex relations as mere bourgeois prejudice, the deadliest sin in the eyes of a Communist. Some of the provincial branches of the League went so far as to organize 'Down with Shame' and 'Down with Innocence' circles; but these were sharply condemned as rowdy aberrations in the official report on the activities of the League at the last Congress of the Communist Party.

Both in the villages and in the cities the problem of the unmarried mother has become very acute and provides a severe and annoying test of Communist theories. In the early stages of the Revolution the Communists held the theory that children should be reared and cared for by the State. But it soon became evident that the State, especially in war-torn and impoverished Russia, was financially quite incapable of assuming such a heavy burden of responsibility. The figure of ten thousand foundlings, reported for thirty-two provinces of the Soviet Union over a period of six months, illustrates the danger that the present large number of vagrant homeless children may be swelled because of the inability or unwillingness of parents to provide for the offspring of temporary connections.

The session of the Tzik which discussed the abolition of marriage as an institution last autumn took place in the famous throneroom of the Tsars in one of the Kremlin palaces. The gilded walls and ceilings are unchanged, but the throne has been replaced by a simple wooden structure serving as a platform. Here round-faced peasant women with red kerchiefs over their heads, workers in plain dark blouse without tie or collar, commissars in high boots, mingled democratically and argued with equal ardor.

The bill was introduced by the Commissar for Justice, Mr. Kursky, a large man with tremendous blonde moustaches. He pointed out that whereas, according to the old law, the wife had no rights in the case of an unregistered marriage, the proposed law would give her the rights of a legal wife in holding property and in other matters. Another new point was that wife and husband would have an equal right to claim support from the other, if unemployed or incapacitated for work. The woman would have the right to demand support for her child even if she lived with several men during the period of conception; but, in contrast to previous practice, she or the court would choose one man who would be held responsible for the support. Commissar Kursky seemed especially proud of this point because it differed so much from the 'burgeois customs' of Europe and America. In those countries, he said, the husband can bring a friend who declares that he also lived with the woman, and the latter is then left defenseless. In the villages, where some continue to live with their parents long after they are married, the whole family is held responsible if a woman claims alimony, according to the original draft of the proposed law.

When Kursky had finished his report and the floor was open for discussion, so much heated opposition developed that representatives from villages and factories spoke for days at a time, and the list of speakers who wished to be heard seemed to be continually growing larger. The question which chiefly occupied the attention of the debaters was whether giving the unregistered wife all legal rights would prevent men from making many rash and temporary connections, or whether it would simply lead to polygamy and polyandry.

The Commissar for Internal Affairs, Byelobrodov, argued that the State cannot regard marriage as a purely private affair. It was his view that stable marriages would better ensure the education of the children. He asserted that the break-up of the family was responsible for many of the criminal and beggar children now on the streets.

Another speaker objected to the proposed law on the ground that some women would take advantage of its liberal provisions to form connections with wealthy men and then blackmail them for alimony. Krasikov, a high official in the Commissariat for Justice, contended that it would be most difficult to establish whether people had actually lived in marriage, and drew the conclusion that the law against polygamy would become a dead letter. One debater put the question in more picturesque fashion: 'You want to turn Russia into one huge marriage, where everyone will have married everyone else.'

A working woman from Kostroma, with a shawl over her head, added her voice of general chorus of opposition. 'In our factories,' she said, 'you notice something very unpleasant. As long as a young man doesn't participate in public activities he respects his wife. But as soon as he moves up a little, gets a little more education, something comes between them. He leaves his wife with a child, lives with another woman, and brings poverty and misery to both. I ask the working women to pass a law that will stop the practice of having many husbands and many wives.'

Mrs. Gypova, a peasant woman from Kursk Province, insisted that men and women must not be permitted to live like gypsies, continually changing their mates. The children suffered too much. 'Many husbands who lived peacefully with their wives for twenty years suddenly begin to cry: "We have freedom now. Give me a divorce." Unless some firm limit is placed on frequent marriages and divorces we shall be discussing this question at every session and never get good results.'

The opposition to the proposed law seemed to centre around four points: (1) that it would abolish marriage; (2) that it would destroy the family; (3) that it would legalize polygamy and polyandry; (4) that it would ruin the peasants.

It soon became clear that the bill could not be passed at the autumn session, and a resolution to postpone further action on it until the next session was adopted. About two weeks later a mass meeting was held in Moscow to discuss the proposal. Krilenko, the Soviet public prosecutor, who had a very large share in the framing of the bill and is one of its most passionate advocates, argued that there is neither necessity, importance, nor even utility in the registration of a marriage. 'Why should the State know who marries whom?' he exclaimed. 'Of course, if living together and not registration is taken as the test of a married state, polygamy and polyandry may exist; but the State can't put up any barriers against this. Free love is the ultimate aim of a socialist State; in that State marriage will be free from any kind of obligation, including economic, and will turn into an absolutely free union of two beings. Meanwhile, though our aim is the free union, we must recognize that marriage involves certain economic responsibilities, and that's why the law takes upon itself the defense of the weaker partner, from the economic standpoint.'

Leon Trotski also pronounced himself in favor of the proposed new law at a conference of medical workers engaged in maternity welfare work. Trotski stressed the point that such a law, by giving more protection to women, would make for the benefit of the country's children.

On the other hand, Mr. Soltz, a prominent Communist authority on legal matters and one of the bitterest opponents of the proposed law, took a very different view of its probable consequences. His argument ran somewhat as follows:—

'We now impose the responsibility for the consequences of loose living on men who are guilty of it, while at the same time we know that they can't undertake the burden of these responsibilities. Women don't get a hundredth part of the alimony to which they are entitled by court decisions because the husbands simply cannot pay. The proposed law seems to favor women, but it will really work out to their disadvantage, because even now husbands run away from their wives and wives run vainly after their husbands and their alimony. Women enter into temporary connections because they think the law will protect them. We must tell them that only registered marriage can involve economic obligations; then they will be more careful. You say we can put alimony defaulters in prison, but if we tried to do this we shouldn't have enough prisons to hold the guilty. Women will defend themselves better if they know that they can't rely on our laws for defense.'

Madame Smidovich expressed the opinion that the family is still needed to fulfill the function of bringing up children and carrying out other obligations which the State is not yet able to assume. She favored the law because she thought a woman would be best defended if her rights as a wife were legally upheld, regardless of whether the marriage were registered. 'Many applauded Soltz,' she added, 'because they already rejoice in the idea that if they are only obliged to assume responsibility for a registered marriage, they can at the same time maintain several other connections without any responsibility at all.'

Madama Kollontai, Russia's foremost feminist leader and first woman ambassador (to Norway), offered an interesting contribution to this discussion. She opposed the bill because she did not think women could collect alimony, especially if their husbands had two families. She was against registration and altogether in favor of free love. As a solution for the vexing problem of children she suggested a scheme of 'marriage insurance,' to be financed by an annual levy of one dollar on every adult citizen of the Soviet Union. This would provide a fund of about sixty million dollars a year, enough to provide for all the babies who might be born as a result of free-love unions. She also remarked that, although the present-day Russian youth is accused of dissipation and loose living, it is often forgotten that prostitution has largely disappeared. (In this connection there is a widespread saying that amateurs spoil the profession.)

If opinion on the proposed law is divided in the cities, the feeling in the villages, where eighty per cent of the Russians live, is overwhelmingly against it. Recently the official Soviet newspaper, Izvestia, printed a résumé of peasant opinion in regard to it. Perhaps the most characteristic spokesman was A. Platov, a peasant from Vologda Province, who declared:—

'Marriage among the peasants has not yet become a toy which can be fashioned to-day and broken to-morrow or next week. The new proposal to have many wives and husbands is considered illegal in the villages. Responsibility for the sins of one member should not fall upon the the entire family. Every divorce in the villages brings with it family discords, feuds, trials, revenge, murder, and ruin. One must take into consideration the backwardness of the village population, which feels that the new law will bring polygamy, grief, demoralization, and the dying out of the race.'

In Tetushi, a Tatar village, the meeting of the peasants was described as 'noisy, even stormy.' It began at two in the afternoon and lasted until the following morning. The meeting registered a unanimous vote for the registration of marriage. Although disussion is still going on all over Russia, there seems to be little doubt that the bill, with certain modifications, will be passed at the next session of the Tzik, which will be held in the summer. The more important changes in the draft law, to which the Commissariat for Justice has agreed in deference to the widespread popular protests and opposition, are as follows:—

Unregistered marriage will entail legal rights only in cases where the parties concerned mutually acknowledge each other as husband and wife, where it is established before a court that they lived together and had joint property, either by the testimony of a third party of by the evidence of their personal correspondence or other documents, where there was mutual material support or joint bringing up of children.

A husband or wife may claim support from the other partner only for one year if incapacitated for work, and only for six months if unemployed. (This change was made as a result of numerous suggestions to the effect that some Russian men are so lazy that they would be glad to marry working women and remain permanently unemployed if they were thereby entitled to claim support from their wives.)

Preference will be given to registered marriages in so far as registration will be considered an absolute proof of marriage.

The whole peasant family will be responsible for the support of the child of one of its members, but the amount given must in no case be so great as to lead to the ruin of the family.

The mere technical details of the proposed new marriage law would scarcely have excited such a flood of ardent popular discussion if the whole problem of sex relations had not been in the forefront of public attention. The discussion simply provided an outlet for the expression of long-repressed feelings on this subject.

The course of the discussion indicated pretty clearly two outstanding developments in modern Russia's attitude toward the problems of marriage, sex, and the family. In the first place, there is an unmistakable reaction, both among the Communists and among the general public, against excessive loose living. Some of the Communists especially stress the point that a comrade who spends too much time in love affairs cannot fulfill his duties to the Party and the proletariat. There is a tendency among Communist writers now to decry excessive preoccupation with sex as a symptom of bourgeois decadence. Among the general population and especially among the peasants there is a keen realization of the difficulties, material and otherwise, which have come up as a result of a too literal adoption of the 'free love' slogan, and there is a desire for more stable domestic relations.

In the second place, it is now pretty evident that the widespread circulation of revolutionary ideas on the desirability of abolishing the family has not by any means eliminated old-fashioned passions of love and jealousy. The police records are full of cases, some of them very terrible, of murders and assaults and suicides committed by women under the influence of jealousy. One such case may serve as an example. A peasant left his village wife and began to live with a working woman in the town. The village wife kept coming and making scenes before the second wife, until the latter, irritated beyond endurance, poured benzine over her rival, set her on fire, and burned her to death. Such elemental outbursts of jealousy are condemned by the Communists as 'relics of bourgeois prejudice'; but they continue to occur nevertheless, and even Communist women have been known to commit suicide because their husbands'attentions were diverted elsewhere.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“Nothing is more useful than to look upon the world as it really is.”
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2019 06:43 PM by 911.)
05-04-2019 06:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 3 users Like 911's post:
Jungle, VincentVinturi, Alpone
Reinhard von Lohengramm Offline
Banned

Posts: 7
Joined: Dec 2017
Post: #79
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
@911, I was not talking about the early USSR. The fact is that by the later decades the USSR was basically nationalist and conservative in opposition to the globalist neoliberal West under Reagan.

Also not sure where you got the 65 million number, which sounds pretty ridiculous. Not to defend the Bolsheviks, but that does not make sense. The population of the Russian empire in 1897 was about 125.6 million, in 1926 the Soviet population was around 147 million, and in 1959 about 208 million. Given that population growth the 65 million purged figure sounds totally absurd, especially when combined with the 30 million WW2 casualties.
05-04-2019 10:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like Reinhard von Lohengramm's post:
Rocha, Count Pyotr
Count Pyotr Offline
Banned

Posts: 4
Joined: Nov 2017
Post: #80
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
(05-04-2019 06:38 AM)Oberrheiner Wrote:  I wish I could explain it to you, but I did not live there in those days, so I would not want to usurp these people's memories.
I could tell you anecdotes from family members but that wouldn't do them justice either.

And in fact sometimes the actual stories are not even that important, the look in their eyes as they remember says all you need to know - if you know broken people you'll recognize it immediately.
Often they don't even want to talk about it and just leave because they think it would get them problems if they did - as if the system was still "there" after all that time.
Or they are just too ashamed of what they had to do to survive, seen that too - they don't believe anyone including their god could ever forgive them for that ..

If you really want to know go talk to the old ones, it's the best advice I can give you.
1984 was nothing ..

Nonsense. Most of soviet born russians say that the Soviet Union was the “good old days” of Russia.

And actually many positive things came out of the Soviet regime.

- Transformed an illiterate country into a country where 99% of people could read, and placed Russia the number one nation of college graduates in sciences, history and arts (and to this day some 60% of russian have university diplomas, and most are very well read and by-and-large, far more learned in classical arts - literature, painting, music - than western or american people).

- Transformed a country where people died like in the middle ages of curable diseases to a healthy state with universal health care.

- Developed the first true model of welfare state (education, eradication of unemployment, same rights for all citizens, secured pension, annual leave with free mandatory four weeks vacations, sick leave, maternity leave, etc)

- Invested heavily in applied sciences and transformed into one of the top world’s scientific power.

- Achieved a highly effective industrialization process (1928 to 1938) - the Soviet Union industrialized at a faster rate than any other country previously had, which improved the lifestyles of its citizens.

- Aided to industrialize, create education and health systems to middle eastern, asian and african countries.

- Started the space race, and won it.

Plus many other things .....

Also people had security and never had to worry about crime, debt, jobs, homelessness or lack of food (after WWII), and had a spartan but dignifying life.
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2019 04:37 AM by Count Pyotr.)
05-05-2019 03:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Oberrheiner Offline
Chubby Chaser
**

Posts: 401
Joined: Dec 2018
Reputation: 5
Post: #81
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
Believe what you will, I won't bother discussing this any further.
Like I said, if you want to know, some people are still here.
Not my problem, this way or the other.
05-05-2019 05:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Mage Offline
True Player
*****

Posts: 2,688
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 70
Post: #82
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
Fuck you commie. I have nothing but disgust and hatred against your evil kind.

(05-05-2019 03:38 AM)Count Pyotr Wrote:  Nonsense. Most of soviet born russians say that the Soviet Union was the “good old days” of Russia.

You lie when you say it's the most. Those who do say stuff like that were corrupt co-participants to the regime or/and people who are too old and senile to accept any change, even one for the better.

(05-05-2019 03:38 AM)Count Pyotr Wrote:  And actually many positive things came out of the Soviet regime.
Positive for state and "progress" is not the same as positive for individuals and freedom.

(05-05-2019 03:38 AM)Count Pyotr Wrote:  - Transformed an illiterate country into a country where 99% of people could read, and placed Russia the number one nation of college graduates in sciences, history and arts (and to this day some 60% of russian have university diplomas, and most are very well read and by-and-large, far more learned in classical arts - literature, painting, music - than western or american people).

This is true but it has to do with faults of capitalism rather then (non-existing) bonuses of communism. I consider this to be a fake duality and consider neither perfect, but capitalism much better then communism.

(05-05-2019 03:38 AM)Count Pyotr Wrote:  - Transformed a country where people died like in the middle ages of curable diseases to a healthy state with universal health care.

This has to do with global development of medicine in 20th century and happened worldwide aside from Africa, no special credit is due to Soviet Union here.

(05-05-2019 03:38 AM)Count Pyotr Wrote:  - Developed the first true model of welfare state (education, eradication of unemployment, same rights for all citizens, secured pension, annual leave with free mandatory four weeks vacations, sick leave, maternity leave, etc)

- Party members had more rights, women having the same rights is bad.
- Pensions are evil curse the still plague the former soviet nations. People need to make their old years prosperous trough children not trough taxation and slaving for the state.
- If you have enough money you can leave for vacation and sickness and maternity whenever you want, but the welfare would give you these limited bonuses and tax you out of ever earning enough money to decide for yourself the limits of your leaves.

(05-05-2019 03:38 AM)Count Pyotr Wrote:  - Invested heavily in applied sciences and transformed into one of the top world’s scientific power.

Many scientists worked in "sharaskas" - concentration camps for scientists and were forced to deliver. This falls under category "good for state and progress, but bad for individuals and freedom".

(05-05-2019 03:38 AM)Count Pyotr Wrote:  - Achieved a highly effective industrialization process (1928 to 1938) - the Soviet Union industrialized at a faster rate than any other country previously had, which improved the lifestyles of its citizens.

All it did was enable half of the nation to be effective enough to feed the other half of the nation that was in military or in prison and have a limited set of goods left for themselves.

(05-05-2019 03:38 AM)Count Pyotr Wrote:  - Aided to industrialize, create education and health systems to middle eastern, asian and african countries.

What?


(05-05-2019 03:38 AM)Count Pyotr Wrote:  - Started the space race, and won it.

Soviets managed to do some things first like send first animal and first man and first woman in space by ignoring safety procedures and subjecting them to greater risk then USA, who caught them on just a few months later anyway. First man in space Yuri Gagarin died in relative poverty, the state cared little about him later, but he was forced to participate in all sorts of tiring propaganda events.

Space race was won by USA, by landing on Moon. Something Soviets never could repeat.



(05-05-2019 03:38 AM)Count Pyotr Wrote:  Also people had security and never had to worry about crime, debt, jobs, homelessness or lack of food (after WWII), and had a spartan but dignifying life.

People had no security from a paranoid state that could take any person to gulags for tiniest of offenses or even tiniest of unproven suspicions. Crime was rampant in USSR, with government being the biggest criminal.
Food shortages were a common thing, shops were empty constantly, not quite to starvation level, but still nutrition was poor.
Lifestyle was not dignifying as you had to undergo various humiliation compliance tests from the state, like participate in parades you don''t believe in, be forced to lie , be denied of freedom of speech and be asked to snitch on your family members and friends constantly.
[/quote]
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2019 08:09 AM by Mage.)
05-05-2019 08:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like Mage's post:
partyfowl, VincentVinturi
Reinhard von Lohengramm Offline
Banned

Posts: 7
Joined: Dec 2017
Post: #83
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
Like I said, I'm not a communist, but this is getting absurd.

Mage Wrote:Fuck you commie. I have nothing but disgust and hatred against your evil kind.

You lie when you say it's the most. Those who do say stuff like that were corrupt co-participants to the regime or/and people who are too old and senile to accept any change, even one for the better.

No, not really. Most average people do believe that. Also no idea what "change for the better" you are referring to, because certainly nothing of that sort occurred in former USSR during the 1990s. Relatively good standard of living pre-1989 to ... total societal and economic disintegration, oligarch-run mafia state, formed with the participation of Western capitalists trying to make money at the expense of the population? Not the kind of change I would support or want to see. Compare the capitalist era to the effectively national socialist system before that. Gee, I wonder which is more beneficial on the practical level to most people.

After the end of the USSR, 80% of the population was living in squalor and poverty, millions of people were dying as a result with virtually nothing they can do about it, but hey at least they have the abstract idea of "freedom" available to them now.

Also this kind of individualistic indifference to the concerns of the older generations of people, fellow countrymen, sounds like something some atomized lolbertarian would say.

Mage Wrote:Positive for state and "progress" is not the same as positive for individuals and freedom.

There are more important things than individuals and freedom. Most people simply cannot exist as completely abstract sovereign individuals in a void. Look at the West now. The current situation there just shows that order and hierarchy are far more important in a society than some abstract notion of "muh individualism" and "muh freedom". America today has arguably the culturally and religiously freest society in history, and it is currently in the process of self-destruction.

Mage Wrote:Space race was won by USA, by landing on Moon. Something Soviets never could repeat.

By relying on knowledge originally developed by National Socialist Germany, and on the same scientists. The US didn't really have its own space program, but rather the German space program. Russia actually had its own space program.

Also, Yuri Gagarin died in a plane crash at a very young age.

Mage Wrote:Crime was rampant in USSR

Nowhere near on the level of post-Soviet Russia. Not even comparable.
05-05-2019 12:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Reinhard von Lohengramm's post:
Rocha
911 Offline
International Playboy
******

Posts: 4,268
Joined: Mar 2016
Reputation: 54
Post: #84
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
(05-04-2019 10:09 PM)Reinhard von Lohengramm Wrote:  @911, I was not talking about the early USSR. The fact is that by the later decades the USSR was basically nationalist and conservative in opposition to the globalist neoliberal West under Reagan.

Also not sure where you got the 65 million number, which sounds pretty ridiculous. Not to defend the Bolsheviks, but that does not make sense. The population of the Russian empire in 1897 was about 125.6 million, in 1926 the Soviet population was around 147 million, and in 1959 about 208 million. Given that population growth the 65 million purged figure sounds totally absurd, especially when combined with the 30 million WW2 casualties.


You're looking at official Soviet population figures at face value here.

If you annually cull 1%-2% of the total population in a country the size of the USSR over several decades, you will easily be able to reach the tens of millions in cumulative deaths. Early on in 1917-30 that cull rate was probably a lot higher than 2%, in rural areas or the Ukraine it was a lot higher than that.

You have no idea of the extent of the early/mid 20th century gulag camp network. Solzhenitsyn, who has been through it and dedicated a lifetime of research on this, estimated that the total Soviet body count was 66 million, based also on the research of statistics professor Kurganov.

R.J. Rummel, an American PoliSci prof who has focused on this subject, came to an estimate of 61 million, showing his detailed research in this book, available here with appendices and charts:

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE4.HTM

[Image: USSR.TAB1.1.GIF]

Some interesting reads on the subject,

https://beam-truth.livejournal.com/5582191.html

this page linked above references research done by an Israeli academic who, in a rare display of tribal introspection, attributed the main role in this genocide to Jewish soviets:

https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340...99,00.html

Quote:Whole population strata were eliminated: Independent farmers, ethnic minorities, members of the bourgeoisie, senior officers, intellectuals, artists, labor movement activists, "opposition members" who were defined completely randomly, and countless members of the Communist party itself. {note: he doesn't mention Christian clegy and their parishes, who were massively targeted and culled}

...Lenin, Stalin, and their successors could not have carried out their deeds without wide-scale cooperation of disciplined "terror officials," cruel interrogators, snitches, executioners, guards, judges, perverts, and many bleeding hearts who were members of the progressive Western Left and were deceived by the Soviet regime of horror and even provided it with a kosher certificate.

"Genrikh Yagoda," the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century, the GPU's deputy commander and the founder and commander of the NKVD. Yagoda diligently implemented Stalin's collectivization orders and is responsible for the deaths of at least 10 million people. His Jewish deputies established and managed the Gulag system.

Stalin's close associates and loyalists included member of the Central Committee and Politburo Lazar Kaganovich. Montefiore characterizes him as the "first Stalinist" and adds that those starving to death in Ukraine, an unparalleled tragedy in the history of human kind aside from the Nazi horrors and Mao's terror in China, did not move Kaganovich.

Many Jews sold their soul to the devil of the Communist revolution and have blood on their hands for eternity. We'll mention just one more: Leonid Reichman, head of the NKVD's special department and the organization's chief interrogator, who was a particularly cruel sadist.

...The Jews active in official communist terror apparatuses (In the Soviet Union and abroad) and who at times led them, did not do this, obviously, as Jews, but rather, as Stalinists, communists, and "Soviet people." Therefore, we find it easy to ignore their origin and "play dumb": What do we have to do with them? But let's not forget them. My own view is different. I find it unacceptable that a person will be considered a member of the Jewish people when he does great things, but not considered part of our people when he does amazingly despicable things.

“Nothing is more useful than to look upon the world as it really is.”
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2019 01:19 PM by 911.)
05-05-2019 01:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes 911's post:
Jungle
Reinhard von Lohengramm Offline
Banned

Posts: 7
Joined: Dec 2017
Post: #85
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
The Soviet census figures largely align with Western intelligence estimates of the Soviet population. Also, modern Russia today would not have 143 million people if that was true.

Solzhenitsyn is a joke. Nobody in Russia takes him seriously. A lot of his claims were made up.
05-05-2019 01:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
911 Offline
International Playboy
******

Posts: 4,268
Joined: Mar 2016
Reputation: 54
Post: #86
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
Count Pyotr, the dumbest aspect of your posts here is that you're posting praises of the Soviets with that handle... Do you realize that all the Russian aristocracy, their entire families and social circles, were systematically exterminated?

The Bolsheviks/Soviets did kill 60 million plus people, but wow, they brought universal healthcare to those that they didn't exterminate, how wonderful that was!


Of course the Soviets never taught the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of those they didn't kill about the real history of the USSR. For many of these, their baseline is the neoliberal globo-ashkenazi rape and pillaging of the 1990s, which totally devastated what was by the 1970s-80s a stable 2nd world country, still a lot more liveable than the more bloody and repressive eras of Lennin-trotsky-Stalin. Hence the rose glasses view towards the USSR days.


My original point stands, the fact that the social ills in FSU countries (esp. Ukraine) stem from the decades of extermination of their best people and the undermining of their societies in the early and mid-20th century.

“Nothing is more useful than to look upon the world as it really is.”
05-05-2019 01:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like 911's post:
partyfowl, Jungle
911 Offline
International Playboy
******

Posts: 4,268
Joined: Mar 2016
Reputation: 54
Post: #87
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
(05-05-2019 01:37 PM)Reinhard von Lohengramm Wrote:  The Soviet census figures largely align with Western intelligence estimates of the Soviet population. Also, modern Russia today would not have 143 million people if that was true.

Solzhenitsyn is a joke. Nobody in Russia takes him seriously. A lot of his claims were made up.

The West and the people running it were propping up the Soviets, right from the start, with the financing of the Bolsheviks in the 1910s/20s, on to the massive land-lease transfers of funds, technology and raw materials in later decades through the 1950s. That might be a bit outside of your Overton window though.

Yeah, people in Russia care more about rap and Louis Vuitton bags than Solzhenitsyn, that's the product of 100 years of a successful communist then neoliberal indoctrination. It's not like he was a fixture in your educational system and media, or the oligarchs who now own the entire system are particularly fond of his historical testimony and philosophical views...

Modern Russia is severely underpopulated, it would have had a population closer to 180-200 million without the culls. Today, it has the lowest population density of any country in Europe except Iceland, much lower than Scandinavian countries with similar weather distribution.

“Nothing is more useful than to look upon the world as it really is.”
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2019 02:17 PM by 911.)
05-05-2019 01:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Mage Offline
True Player
*****

Posts: 2,688
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 70
Post: #88
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
(05-05-2019 12:27 PM)Reinhard von Lohengramm Wrote:  Like I said, I'm not a communist, but this is getting absurd.

If you speak like a communist I will assume you are one. If you object that you are merely a socialist or whatever - I don''t care, all leftists are commies in the end.


(05-05-2019 12:27 PM)Reinhard von Lohengramm Wrote:  No, not really. Most average people do believe that. Also no idea what "change for the better" you are referring to, because certainly nothing of that sort occurred in former USSR during the 1990s. Relatively good standard of living pre-1989 to ... total societal and economic disintegration, oligarch-run mafia state, formed with the participation of Western capitalists trying to make money at the expense of the population? Not the kind of change I would support or want to see. Compare the capitalist era to the effectively national socialist system before that. Gee, I wonder which is more beneficial on the practical level to most people.

Wait, so you are using the transitional period of 1990 as comparison? You dishonest piece of shit. Of course there will be troubles in transitional period. Basically you are saying that communism is better then capitalism because the transitional period is rough. You are disgusting piece of liar shit using false comparisons.

Most people detest communist regime. Those who are for it are deluded and have forgotten that it was bad. Some people recognize that it was a mix of much bad with some good, but most people would not want to return to that time.

(05-05-2019 12:27 PM)Reinhard von Lohengramm Wrote:  After the end of the USSR, 80% of the population was living in squalor and poverty, millions of people were dying as a result with virtually nothing they can do about it, but hey at least they have the abstract idea of "freedom" available to them now.

That is because the state crushed and there were no law. It was neither Communism, nor Capitalism it was chaos. It was a transitional period.

Every occupied former soviet state that broke free went trough that period knowing it is transitional and everyone feels much better now when that transition is over.

Only some of those that remained in Russia have warm feelings about the Soviet past because of the perceived might of the state at that time. They are losers and slaves in their soul.

(05-05-2019 12:27 PM)Reinhard von Lohengramm Wrote:  Also this kind of individualistic indifference to the concerns of the older generations of people, fellow countrymen, sounds like something some atomized lolbertarian would say.

You only select to be sympathetic with those wish for old times to return, but you ignore those who fear the old times like fire because their faith was oppressed or their themselves were sent to gulag or oppressed.

(05-05-2019 12:27 PM)Reinhard von Lohengramm Wrote:  There are more important things than individuals and freedom. Most people simply cannot exist as completely abstract sovereign individuals in a void. Look at the West now. The current situation there just shows that order and hierarchy are far more important in a society than some abstract notion of "muh individualism" and "muh freedom". America today has arguably the culturally and religiously freest society in history, and it is currently in the process of self-destruction.

If you believe there are things more important then freedom then you are a commie. You are a corrupt individual who wants to sell freedom for some comforts you cannot live without.

For an individual to be able to function in freedom that individual and that society must have morality. Something atheist commies like you understand nothing about.

The problem of America today is lack of morality. America was great and people were free while morality was high. Once morality is gone, ability to perform under freedom goes away too.


(05-05-2019 12:27 PM)Reinhard von Lohengramm Wrote:  By relying on knowledge originally developed by National Socialist Germany, and on the same scientists. The US didn't really have its own space program, but rather the German space program. Russia actually had its own space program.

Also, Yuri Gagarin died in a plane crash at a very young age.

Germans were not commies. So if you say it all is due to Germans then it still is no argument for Soviet system. Also it is stupid to think that American success in 60ties is only due to German inventions in 40ties. Also Russians also benefited from German discoveries trough the medium of spying.

Germans+Americans came up with Nuclear weapons first. Commies were only able to copy that success due to spying and stealing a lot of scientific info. Sure Russians had brilliant scientists too. Russians are white people with high IQ, just like Germans. But the soviet system does not get credit for that.


(05-05-2019 12:27 PM)Reinhard von Lohengramm Wrote:  
Mage Wrote:Crime was rampant in USSR

Nowhere near on the level of post-Soviet Russia. Not even comparable.

Again you are comparing communism to a chaotic transitional period, not to an established free-market system. This is just a dishonest comparison. It's like saying that you should not drink medicine, because it is bitter.
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2019 05:07 PM by Mage.)
05-05-2019 05:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like Mage's post:
Jungle, VincentVinturi
Hang the bankers Offline
Banned

Posts: 7
Joined: Jan 2018
Post: #89
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
(I got on to another account to reply to these posts).

Mage Wrote:Wait, so you are using the transitional period of 1990 as comparison? You dishonest piece of shit. Of course there will be troubles in transitional period. Basically you are saying that communism is better then capitalism because the transitional period is rough. You are disgusting piece of liar shit using false comparisons.

Most people detest communist regime. Those who are for it are deluded and have forgotten that it was bad. Some people recognize that it was a mix of much bad with some good, but most people would not want to return to that time.

"Troubles in the transitional period" is a mild way to put total societal and economic disintegration that led to millions of deaths. Obviously such a system that leads to that outcome is not desirable, regardless of whether or not that is the intention. I also like how you say it's "dishonest" to point out the result of the capitalist system in the 1990s. It's in no way a false comparison. That's like saying that the period before WW2 was a transition from the Russian empire to communism so all of the destruction caused by the Soviets during that time is OK because it's just transitional.

And it's not as if the modern state of Russia is much better. Sure the situation has improved considerably since 2000, but it is still pretty far behind Western Europe. The USSR was still much better by comparison to the current condition, thirty years after the end of communism.

Again, not sure who you are referring to because most people do acknowledge that the USSR was far better than anything Russia has had since then.

Mage Wrote:That is because the state crushed and there were no law. It was neither Communism, nor Capitalism it was chaos. It was a transitional period.

Every occupied former soviet state that broke free went trough that period knowing it is transitional and everyone feels much better now when that transition is over.

Only some of those that remained in Russia have warm feelings about the Soviet past because of the perceived might of the state at that time. They are losers and slaves in their soul.

No. Most people in the five Central Asian countries, in Moldova, and even Ukraine recognise that the USSR was far better. All of the former Soviet republics are all still far behind Western Europe, being some of the poorest countries in Europe. If the transition is over, then this is the end result?

Mage Wrote:You only select to be sympathetic with those wish for old times to return, but you ignore those who fear the old times like fire because their faith was oppressed or their themselves were sent to gulag or oppressed.

If you believe there are things more important then freedom then you are a commie. You are a corrupt individual who wants to sell freedom for some comforts you cannot live without.

For an individual to be able to function in freedom that individual and that society must have morality. Something atheist commies like you understand nothing about.

The problem of America today is lack of morality. America was great and people were free while morality was high. Once morality is gone, ability to perform under freedom goes away too.

Why do you think there is a lack of morality? It's imposed by society. A society of totally free atomised individuals loses its morality, as we can see today. Also calling people who think there are more important things than freedom just makes you sound like a Boomer. Order, hierarchy, and stability are far more important the abstract and meaningless sense of "freedom," the logical conclusion of which is nihilism, lack of morality, and the death of religion. Ironic that you also make accusation of "atheism," when a free individual society will naturally stop being religious.


Mage Wrote:Germans were not commies. So if you say it all is due to Germans then it still is no argument for Soviet system. Also it is stupid to think that American success in 60ties is only due to German inventions in 40ties. Also Russians also benefited from German discoveries trough the medium of spying.

Germans+Americans came up with Nuclear weapons first. Commies were only able to copy that success due to spying and stealing a lot of scientific info. Sure Russians had brilliant scientists too. Russians are white people with high IQ, just like Germans. But the soviet system does not get credit for that.

No, the Germans had a better system, national socialism. They certainly weren't capitalists. They developed their space program, which was then taken by the Americans and used as the foundation of the "American space program," while the USSR developed its program mostly indigenously.

Mage Wrote:Again you are comparing communism to a chaotic transitional period, not to an established free-market system. This is just a dishonest comparison. It's like saying that you should not drink medicine, because it is bitter.

"It's not real capitalism!" lol.
No, the transition period is still a product of capitalism. The chaos of the 1990s was a free market system. Again, saying that capitalism is not responsible for any destruction it causes is dumb. Just like saying communism was not responsible for the millions of deaths it did cause in the 1920s and 1930s.

911 Wrote:The West and the people running it were propping up the Soviets, right from the start, with the financing of the Bolsheviks in the 1910s/20s, on to the massive land-lease transfers of funds, technology and raw materials in later decades through the 1950s. That might be a bit outside of your Overton window though.

No, I am fully aware that the early Bolsheviks were funded by the Anglo-American Establishment. Then they were assisted during WWI by German intelligence to overthrow the imperial regime in Russia. As Carroll Quigley wrote in Tragedy and Hope, Russia has long been a problem for the western establishment, which is why they funded not only the Bolsheviks but the liberal revolutionaries as well. As a monarchist I have never been a supporter of the early Soviet Union and would have preferred the emperor and the Russian Empire to remain.

All of that is irrelevant if we are talking about the later period of history, 1960-1990, at which point the USSR was essentially a nationalistic, socially conservative force opposing the neoliberal globalism of Reagan.

911 Wrote:Yeah, people in Russia care more about rap and Louis Vuitton bags than Solzhenitsyn, that's the product of 100 years of a successful communist then neoliberal indoctrination. It's not like he was a fixture in your educational system and media, or the oligarchs who now own the entire system are particularly fond of his historical testimony and philosophical views...

Modern Russia is severely underpopulated, it would have had a population closer to 180-200 million without the culls. Today, it has the lowest population density of any country in Europe except Iceland, much lower than Scandinavian countries with similar weather distribution.

Neoliberalism and globalism took hold because the Soviet Union ended the sense of purpose and great power fulfilment that the country's status had given people. As Zbigniew Brzezinski also wrote in Grand Chessboard, the end of the Soviet Union also represented the loss of much of the Great Russian Empire. This is one of the biggest cultural problems, as the end of the USSR caused an identity crisis and emptiness that is still a problem today. The Soviet system by the 1980s was basically Russian nationalism and represented a continuation of the power of Great Russia from the tsarist predecessors. So the dissolution of the Soviet Union was a blow to the national psyche.

Russia's population growth has been pretty consistent, and it has always been under-populated, especially during the much bigger Russian Empire. If 95 million people died as a result of WW2 and purges, then the population today would be far lower than it is. If the population of the bigger empire was 125 million around the turn of the last century, and around 286 million in the USSR in 1989, that does not seem likely if there was a period in between with 95 million deaths.
05-05-2019 07:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
911 Offline
International Playboy
******

Posts: 4,268
Joined: Mar 2016
Reputation: 54
Post: #90
RE: Ukraine about to elect jewish comedian as president
Thanks for the detailed responses, I see where you come from. Some quick answers to your points:

- The USSR was not a socially conservative country in the 1960s-80s. for example, women were working at higher rates than in the West, when they only started joining the wokforce "en masse" in the 1980s. Women were more masculine than in the West, working in blue collar jobs, and with their female athletes dominating. Abortion was always legal throughout the eastern block, and Christianity was still harshly suppressed.

Soviet women seemed a lot more like the modern American or Australian women, and western women were still quite feminine through the 1980s. It seems like the situation flipped today with third wave feminism sweeping the west today while the FSU went back to a more classic ideal, also corresponding with a revival of the Church in many parts of this region...

North Korea is the one example of a socially conservative socialist country, they ban women from wearing pants, encourage feminine behavior, and families. I don't think the Soviet bloc was quite like this. One of my older cousins, who was a classical pianist, attended a conservatory in the GDR in the late 70s and ended up living there, she said it was a less conservative society than in France or even the Federal Republic.

-On the population: I think a large part of the purges was misattributed to WW2 losses, up to half of the 30M labeled as war losses, as a way to hide their crimes. The same way for example the Soviet propaganda blamed their large massacres of Poles on the Nazis.

“Nothing is more useful than to look upon the world as it really is.”
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2019 09:30 PM by 911.)
05-05-2019 09:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like 911's post:
nomadbrah, Jungle
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  'El Chapo' paid ex-Mexican president $100 million bribe: trial witness CaptainChardonnay 0 728 01-16-2019 07:29 AM
Last Post: CaptainChardonnay
  Leftist Conservative López Obrador Elected President of Mexico Luvianka 81 10,286 12-15-2018 11:52 PM
Last Post: HornyRamone
  Oprah running for President? gringoed 180 29,500 04-25-2018 04:51 PM
Last Post: CynicalContrarian

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | RooshV.com | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication