The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Putin Sends Russians on One Week Holiday. But What Next?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In today’s federal address, Putin announced that the referendum on the Constitutional referendum – which nullifies his Presidential terms, and implicitly defines Russians as the “state-forming” people of the Russian Federation – is to be indefinitely postponed from its original date of April 22 because the “absolute priority” is to be the “health, safety and security of our people.”

Like most of the world outside the US, Russia is to become more of a “socialist” country in the next six months, though the list of measures are mild relative to the policies getting adopted in much of Europe (e.g. UK to pay 80% of salaries up to a limit of 2,500 GBP for people who lose their jobs).

Here are some policies mentioned by Putin:

  • The next week (March 28-April 5) is to be declared a holiday.
  • All current social welfare and subsidies to be automatically prolonged for the next six months without having to re-submit documents.
  • Extra 5,000 rubles per month for families with children under the age of 3.
  • Minimal sick leave pay and maximal unemployment benefits to be fixed at the level of the minimum wage.
  • Credit holiday for people whose incomes fall by more than 30%.
  • Support for S&M businesses: Tax holiday on everything except VAT for the next six months, credit holidays in specific circumstances, postponement of debt collection on the part of creditors. Their social security tax of 30% is lowered to 15% permanently.
  • Tax on income transferred offshore to be increased from 2% to 15%. This would necessitate revising some double taxation agreements. This is probably the most significant measure.
  • Tax on the interest on bank deposits and government securities to be set at 13% for people holding 1 million rubles or more (will affect one percent of depositors).

This is perfectly adequate for a situation in which Corona doesn’t advance deeply enough to significantly shut down the Russian economy. However, there’d need to be stronger economic support if there are stronger and longer containment measures.

Cases are still low, though they are now rising alarmingly fast.

What Russia really needs to do ASAP is to accelerate mask production – it is currently almost impossible to find them in Moscow pharmacies, and they cost almost $1 per mask online (a twentyfold markup). Russia will produce 5 million masks per day by the first half of April, while China will donate 25.5 million (which is rather fair, as the Chinese bought up most of Russia’s stock in February, before export restrictions were in place). But really, production should be at least fivefold that amount. Taiwan, with less than a sixth of Russia’s population – which managed to keep coronavirus restrictions at just 47 cases throughout February, despite the intensity of air traffic with China – produces 13 million masks per day. It should then legally mandate the wearing of masks in crowded areas and fine people without them. This is by far the most cost-effective way to save both money and lives.

 
• Category: Economics • Tags: Corona, Russia 
Hide 128 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.

    If you are new to my work, start here.

  2. Dmitry says:

    Another lesson I will add, from watching the epidemic in Europe: there needs to be regular and mass testing of medical staff (aside from adequate production of PPE for them). A lot of infections seem to happen inside the hospitals itself, which is often fatal to people recovering from other problems there.

    What Russia really needs to do ASAP is to accelerate mask production – it is currently almost impossible to find them in Moscow pharmacies, and they cost almost $1 per mask online (a twentyfold markup). Russia will produce 5 million masks per day by the first half of April, while China will donate 25.5 million (which is rather fair, as the Chinese bought up most of Russia’s stock in February, before export restrictions were in place). But really, production should be at least fivefold that amount. Taiwan, with less than a sixth of Russia’s population – which managed to keep coronavirus restrictions at just 47 cases throughout February, despite the intensity of air traffic with China – produces

    Yes it’s great to see bloggers supporting this.

    Although some caveats:

    1. Medical masks are useful to reduce airborne infectivity of people with coronavirus. But this design, is probably not sufficient to kill the epidemic. The fact it protects others, rather than the person wearing it, might also reduce motivation to wear it away from more altruistic East Asian culture.

    2. China has some 3M factories. But they also produce a lot of very bad and counterfeit respirators.

    3. Eyes need to be sealed with goggles (or using full face respirator), as viral infections are believed to be possible through exposed eyes.

    4. Opening military stocks of respirators was another idea, but apparently in Russia many gas masks until 1990s used asbestos in filters. (In America, this might be more suitable).

    So there needs to be mass production of a design like Putin was wearing (I bought one of these similar designs among others). These protect eyes and fit P100 filters – are light and easy to make airtight seal, while provide good visibility.

    This is the same standard design used by many companies. For example, Moldex 9000, and is very cheap (around $100 -$150). Producing millions of these would be possible for most countries.

    The problem is you can’t speak very easily with that mask, so it wouldn’t be great for returning everyone to the office.

    However, more expensive masks like Dräger FPS 7000 or Scott Promask, have voice diaphragms, which make it easy to speak with them on (the latter also has a drinking tube, you can drink beer through). So also it would be recommened to have mass production of such more expensive designs to provide to office workers, and allow them to continue almost as normal in the office.

  3. I’m impressed. I like the increasingly competent technocratic angle of Russian governance. The measures seem to be just enough to ensure safety and confidence in the populace but not too much as to irritate people or cause major disruption.

    • Replies: @neutral
  4. Dmitry says:
    @Dmitry

    For example, Moldex 9000, and is very cheap (around $100 -$150). Producing millions of these would be possible for most countries.

    It would be a simple solution and so cheap, if it was organized in time. E.g. From around $4,6 billion, you could have such a full face respirator for each of the e.g. 46 million people in Spain, and the population could continue to work in many jobs.

    Then mass production of gendine-coated gloves, and providing them to the population, would greatly reduce transmission of virus by hands and surfaces.

  5. @Dmitry

    Erm, let’s be real. Nobody’s going to walk around in those things in a ~1% mortality rate epidemic apart from the really dedicated, or post-apocalyptic larpers.

    1. East Asians are not more altruistic than Europeans, it’s sooner the opposite (see e.g. charitable giving statistics). However, East Asians are more shame-based, and since wearing masks is public, this may make it easier make them wear masks culturally. That, or they banally have had the SARS experience. I would bet it’s mostly or entirely the latter. In any case propaganda can say that ordinary medical masks offer personal protection and, importantly, it would not be incorrect.

    2. Ordinary medical masks are still extremely effective relative to nothing. Main goal of masks after all – with the exception of very dangerous environments, like hospitals, and/or to protect especially important individuals, such as Presidents – is not so much individual protection as forcing the r0 below 1 at the social level. Ordinary masks accomplish this as easily as n95s (let alone those full face masks). The (un-gouged) price of the former is 5c, of the latter – around $3.

    • Agree: utu
  6. @Anatoly Karlin

    The virus being in aerosol is only happening in extreme situations such as when doctors and nurses open up the windpipe(?) on a patient. In normal situations, as long as you keep the distance, it is not to be worried. That seems to be the consensus in China.

    Basically, keeping distance is about the only real thing I do. 🙂

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  7. Andy says:

    A holiday – not a quarantine – during a pandemic? Spreading a virus around Russia might not be a very good idea

  8. melanf says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    East Asians are not more altruistic than Europeans, it’s sooner the opposite (see e.g. charitable giving statistics). However, East Asians are more shame-based, and since wearing masks is public, this may make it easier make them wear masks culturally.

    The scene in the St. Petersburg Metro, I saw a few days ago – a full subway car of people without masks (only one girl in a mask), and a group of Japanese all in breathers. A familiar teacher went to the store in a mask – from him everyone was scarred as from the leper. The wife went to the doctor in a polyclinnik – in front of her the doctor removed the mask with the words that in the mask is uncomfortable.

    That is, masks in Russia can be introduced only by rigid forced methods

  9. @melanf

    Русские по-хорошему не понимают. Такова национальная черта – в этом была сила Советской системы, она заставляла слушаться во благо всех.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
  10. melanf says:
    @melanf

    One necessary condition for combating the epidemic is cruel measures against insane believers. Any icons or relics that believers kiss – immediately confiscate to the end of the epidemic, any churches where this is allowed – close. Zilots who will interfere with the fight against echepidemia – to prison

  11. How deaths from SARS 2.0 are counted in RF? The so called “German method” was adopted? If I’m not mistaken, there have been already 3 or 4 dead people with confirmed infection but Yandex still shows zero deaths at the moment:

    https://yandex.ru/maps/covid19?ll=41.775580%2C54.894027&z=3

    • Replies: @melanf
  12. g2k says:

    As someone who’s been renovating a house, thus doing a lot of dusty work, I used to buy these quite often. ffp2/3 (euro standard for n95) makes would cost about £1.50 each before this thing hit. Or is AK referring to the cheap surgical ones?

  13. melanf says:
    @sudden death

    Yes “German method”. According to official data, three patients with coronavirus died. In one case, an old woman (with a coronovirus) died of a broken thrombus and is not taken into account. The causes of death of two other old people have not yet been accurately identified.

  14. neutral says:
    @AltSerrice

    I am guessing that in Russia the politicians have less pressure to follow the “if it saves one life, its worth it” ideology, but they have to seen to be doing something else stand accused by foreign propagandists that they don’t care for the people.

  15. @melanf

    “Any icons or relics that believers kiss”

    No kissing of icons or the cross has already been the rule now for at least a week in all churches, by order of the Patriarch. I don’t know how it is enforced.

  16. LondonBob says:

    So the Kremlin is worried they will be more like a Spain or Italy, than a Britain or Germany. The Kremlin has bought Russia some time to prepare, and also to see how things further progress in Europe.

    • Replies: @melanf
  17. melanf says:
    @LondonBob

    So the Kremlin is worried they will be more like a Spain or Italy, than a Britain or Germany

    It is officially announced by Russian doctors that there is a pessimistic option for Russia (Italy) and an optimistic option (Japan and South Korea). Doctors will be hoping for an optimistic option, and preparing for a pessimistic one

  18. Putin’s longtime associate, Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko, has the answer … he says the virus panic is ‘psychosis’, no lockdown necessary; he advises outdoor physical work & a glass of vodka at lunch
    https://www.baltictimes.com/lukashenko__coronavirus_is_psychosis/
    Work on farm tractor, avoid coronavirus, says the Belarussian leader
    https://www.euractiv.com/section/coronavirus/news/belarusian-leader-proposes-tractor-therapy-for-virus/

    • Agree: Yevardian
    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Yevardian
  19. @Nazbolfren

    Translation:

    Russians don’t understand in good faith. This is the national character – that was the strength of the Soviet system, that it forced everyone to obey for the good for all.

    I would say that masks being sold out has rather more to do with it.

    But thanks for the daily reminder that Bolshevik = Russophobe.

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  20. I propose this.

    1) Europeans don’t have a culture of wearing masks like east asians, medical masks are a novel thing and mostly associated with late stage patients of terminal diseases than common colds and flus.
    2) On the other hand, there’s a tradition of wearing masks in almost any white country with a tradition of folk festivals and the like. So other than being more acceptable, it’s also trad.
    3) Almost no need for social distancing, meaning normalfags can still hang out as long as they wear their expensive dress, which can also be used as a form of signaling social status.
    4) The newborn mass carnival dresses industry would revitalize the economy, the main issue with the pandemic is the lack of spending, and a new government mandated fashion industry would force expenditures.
    5) Logistics wise, you could insert respirators and other omnious tools into more extravagant masks and still be socially acceptable
    6) It would have a side effect of protecting privacy from facial recognition software
    7) Doctors could wear a special mask with a beak and dark clothing to signal themselves as belonging to that profession, to keep a proper respirator (see point 5), and because it’s trad (see point 2)

    • Thanks: Daniel Chieh
    • LOL: Yevardian
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  21. songbird says:
    @melanf

    I wonder if it is possible that there is something additive in the psychology of Europeans that makes them less willing to wear masks. Like, maybe it is somehow more evolutionarily important for them to see each others faces.

    Some believe that NE Asians experienced more group selection, so they are more adapted to working as a group. Maybe, working together requires more facial communication among Europeans. Facial expressions being important as honest signals.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  22. @melanf

    One necessary condition for combating the epidemic is cruel measures against insane believers.

    “Insane believers,” huh?

    I happen to agree that such kissing of relics should probably be stopped for now. More importantly, the Russian churches have already beaten you to the punch.

    On the other hand, your joy in being “cruel” is no good sign for your soul. Judging by your arrogant attitude, believe me, you’ll understand the meaning of “cruel measures” after you die.

    • Replies: @melanf
    , @Jatt Arya
  23. Dmitry says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Nobody’s going to walk around in those things in a ~1%

    Why not?

    If the rule is simply stated that it is a requirement to go to work, or use public transport, – to wear such full face mask – then everyone will wear them. (It’s far easier than asking people to not go out).

    In addition, high quality models are extremely comfortable, light, easy to wear, with beautiful clear vision. Air you breath is extremely clean and refreshing, so it’s actually a pleasant experience, that the population would rapidly become addicted to.

    They are more easier and more convenient and comfortable to wear than disposal N95 masks.

    There is a century R&D involved in this technology. It’s not like an old Soviet respirator (which were also produced for every citizen).

    With more high quality models, you can include things like communication systems inside them. I.e. it would easier to talk to each other in the office, than a normal day without anything on.

    Ordinary medical masks are still extremely effective relative to nothing. Main goal of masks after all – with the exception of very dangerous environments, like hospitals, and/or to protect

    Surgical masks may be somewhat effective in reducing airborne infectivity of already infected people, if sufficient number of altruistic people wear them. Moreover, they might reduce face touching. So if a large part of the population is altruistic to wear them, they might lower rate of infection. So I agree they would be “better than nothing”.

    But there doesn’t seem so much evidence to support that overall. And we know it is not a sufficient condition to kill such epidemics e.g. everyone in Wuhan was wearing medical masks, and they were still easily infecting each other before a brutal quarantine.

    Medical masks do not protect you from being infected. And the convenience of them is almost less than e.g. Moldex 9000, Dräger FPS 7000, which does protect you from being infected. Latter you need about 30 seconds more to check seal to your face and tighten straps. In the 19th or early 20th century, it would understandable to rely on primitive medical masks, like a plague doctor.

    But now we have a century of development in creating comfortable, lightweight, modern respirators, which are designed not to inconvenience workers in industries which use them.

    They are designed for workers doing physical activities.

    In any case propaganda can say that ordinary medical masks offer personal protection and, importantly, it would not be incorrect.

    On the positive side, the convenience now – they are easy to mass produce in a few days, during the epidemic. On the negative side, it would not necessarily be at all effective to reduce the epidemic. And people are not so stupid that they would believe they give them personal protection.

    In the USSR, 600 million GP-5 gas masks were produced – so it is easy to equip the population if you prepared in advance. Unfortunately, those having asbestos https://zen.yandex.ru/media/protostar/strashnaia-taina-sovetskogo-protivogaza-gp5-ili-pochemu-ih-ispolzovanie-v-nashe-vremia-chrevato-rakom-legkih-5cda82bd9885ae00b3457918

    Rapid emergency building of a model like a Moldex 9000 series mask on mass scale would stll be easy if a country was actually dedicated to it. (It’s not like producing a tank or a medical ventilator).

  24. Dmitry says:
    @melanf

    A month ago, in Italy, people did not wear surgical masks.

    Now, the whole population of Italy does not exit the home, without wearing a surgical mask. If you don’t wear a surgical mask, Italians “visibly panic”.

    That is, masks in Russia can be introduced only by rigid forced methods

    Attitude to anything which changes appearance, is dependent on fashions.*

    Do you one strap or two strap your rucksack? (I’m old enough that I feel weird if I am not doing one-strapping)

    If celebrities and “cool people” had masks, then in a short time everyone wants one. Then e.g. there would be instant demand for production of Moldex 9000 series in pink decoration, for girls.

    I remember a few years ago, when it was still eccentric to wear expensive bluetooth headphones in the street. And now all hipsters have them.


    * Although at least in the 20th century, it was easier to make fashionable things which are “dangerous” than safe – e.g. not wearing safety belts in cars, or smoking.

  25. melanf says:
    @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    “Insane believers,” huh?

    These people understand only harsh measures. Today news:
    The authorities of St. Petersburg closed the churches, but the Alexander Nevsky Lavra refused to obey

    And Yes: religious zealots who openly declare that diseases come from God, and for this they do not care how many people they infect, cause only disgust . Not all Orthodox people are like this, of course, but there are a lot of them.

  26. Dmitry says:
    @yakushimaru

    There’s not such a clear distinction between aerosol and droplet transmission, as droplet transmission can travel many metres (there is a good advantage of wearing surgical masks to stop coughs and sneezes spraying too many droplets), and the smaller droplets can remain in the air for hours.

    Although droplet transmission requires certain air temperature conditions to remain in the air – for example, above 25°C, the droplet transmission infectivity of similar viruses falls by orders of magnitude, from what I can read.

  27. @Anatoly Karlin

    On the contrary = anti-Soviet = russophobe…look at what the likes of “Russophiles” like Gorbachev did to Russia.

    Moreover, under the soviet system masks would not be sold out – as more production of masks would have been forced.

  28. @NazBolFren

    Antisoviet = homophobe.
    You’re not a “nationalist” if you think your people are so inferior only violent repressions work in making them do what other ethnic groups accomplished on their own. You’re lower than a cuck because at least cucks are honest about hating their own.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  29. @Autists Anonymous Rehab Camp Fugitive

    Rarely has a chosen screen name been more perfectly matched to the post than yours. Bravo, AARCF!

    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
  30. @Autists Anonymous Rehab Camp Fugitive

    No. On the contrary, I am saying that Russians are too freedom loving that unless you force them to do shit for the common good, they won’t do it.

    And whats bad about being a homophobe? If you are not a “homophobe” you’re a degenerate that hates their own country.

  31. @NazBolFren

    Why are you blaming Gorbachev for the USSR splitting along the lines that Lenin drew

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  32. @Korenchkin

    Lenin drew lines for administrative efficiency – it’s like blaming the Founding Fathers for breaking up America by creating a State system.

    In fact the USSR was administered in a similar way to the United States. In fact, Lenin drew from the experience of the United States when creating this system of administration.

    So yes, I do blame Gorbachev for splitting the USSR along lines Lenin drew.

    Finally, instead of working to preserve what already existed – Gorbachev acted like a traitor and sought to destroy it in the name of ‘feelz’.

    • Replies: @Korenchkin
  33. @NazBolFren

    «…И не только семья. Все запреты, касающиеся сексуальности, должны быть сняты… Нам есть чему поучиться у суфражисток: даже запрет на однополую любовь должен быть снят».

    t. Lenin.
    Follow your leader and choke on a dick.

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  34. @Autists Anonymous Rehab Camp Fugitive

    Lenin is not my leader. I follow Stalin more. Or even better, Italian Fascism.

    Lenin did not love Russia, but he was the Founding Father of the greatest period of its history.

  35. @NazBolFren

    Lenin drew lines for administrative efficiency

    Creating internal borders which didn’t match the ethnic map at all and also creating more bureaucracy with the internal passport system is efficiency? You’re either a liar or a moron
    Lenin never claimed that he was drawing them for “administrative efficiency”, he wanted to break apart the Russian Empire and create a system to absorb more and more states into the Union, culminating in the Communist world conquest
    Ofcourse Stalin switched it to the Communism in a single state model later on

    it’s like blaming the Founding Fathers for breaking up America by creating a State system.

    The US states were not based on ethnicities, nor did the US pursue a policy of korenizatsiya which sowed more division across the state in order to spite the “racist chauvinist” Russians
    The US also didn’t promote arbitrary fake ethnicities or boost black legend like narratives of it’s conquest of the West
    As for the founding fathers, well they didn’t need to kill millions of it’s own citizens in organized mass slaughter and idiotic agricultural mismanagement nor did they require mass repression of those same citizens (which in turn would create more ethnic strife then ever existed before in the Russian Empire)

    And last but not least the Centrally planned system of the USSR was nothing like the USA, in fact it was seriously lackluster in comparison (so much so that it fell apart after just 70 years while the US is still here)

    You are seriously uninformed on this topic and should pick up some books on the various topics mentioned before posting such nonsense here
    Anti-Soviet is anti-Russian? Gorbachev is the only Soviet General Secretary who was a full Russian (Lenin was mixed, Stalin was Georgian, Khrushchev, Brezhnev and Chernenko were Ukrainians and Andropov was a Jew )
    The Soviet Unions economic system which it imposed on half of Europe and it’s brutal character forever tarnished the reputation of Russia and Russians, indeed despite it being gone for almost 30 years now the enemies of Russia still pluck propaganda material from it to attack Russian interests

    I am not a Russophobe, read my posts if you have doubts, and as funny as the Nazbol memes we cannot ignore the facts on the ground, and the fact is that the USSR was a failure that couldn’t even outlast the “backwards” Empire it replaced
    Since you’re on this blog, read:
    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/lenin/

  36. @Korenchkin

    Creating internal borders which didn’t match the ethnic map at all and also creating more bureaucracy with the internal passport system is efficiency? You’re either a liar or a moron
    Lenin never claimed that he was drawing them for “administrative efficiency”, he wanted to break apart the Russian Empire and create a system to absorb more and more states into the Union, culminating in the Communist world conquest

    Ofcourse Stalin switched it to the Communism in a single state model later on

    He wanted to break up the Russian Empire – true. However, since he wanted world revolution and to incorporate more States into USSR, his method was rather effective way of doing it. Moreover, as we saw with the breakup of the USSR into republics after its fall, it was not an intelligent decision to not follow ethnic borders when drawing the map of the USSR. In fact, had I been drawing the maps, I would have done the same thing – the best way to incorporate a conquered peoples is to make sure they get seperated and diluted so that they do not revolt or cause instability.

    The US states were not based on ethnicities, nor did the US pursue a policy of korenizatsiya which sowed more division across the state in order to spite the “racist chauvinist” Russians

    You just went full autist. I never claimed that the creation of the US states was based on ethnicity. My point was that decentralized rule through semi-independent States was what informed Lenin’s decision on creating the system of the SSRs.

    As for the founding fathers, well they didn’t need to kill millions of it’s own citizens in organized mass slaughter and idiotic agricultural mismanagement nor did they require mass repression of those same citizens (which in turn would create more ethnic strife then ever existed before in the Russian Empire)

    LOL. “Kill millions of its own citizens in organized mass slaughter?” You sure? What about the systemic massacre of millions of Indians in America? Or are you going to brush that off? What Soviet citizens where murdered in organized slaughter? Ukrainian’s? There was no systemic mass slaughter – the Holodomor is an invention by former UPA members that fled to Canada.

    Mismanagement of agriculture? Sure, but it was also compounded by widespread famine throughout the world and the USSR (Kuban, Kazakhstan, etc) that required forced rapid collectivization to deliver relief to starving regions and the Ukrainian peasants refusing to play ball.

    And last but not least the Centrally planned system of the USSR was nothing like the USA, in fact it was seriously lackluster in comparison

    You sure about that? I’d say it has an amazing track record given that under a centrally planned economy (in 3-4 5 year plans), the USSR went from a backwards agrarian nation to the second economy of the world (surpassing UK, Germany, France, etc). Furthermore, you are comparing the US economy that had 150 years of uninterrupted development to the economy of the USSR that underwent three wars in a period of around 30 years. What the centrally planned economy was able to accomplish was incredible.

    Anti-Soviet is anti-Russian? Gorbachev is the only Soviet General Secretary who was a full Russian (Lenin was mixed, Stalin was Georgian, Khrushchev, Brezhnev and Chernenko were Ukrainians and Andropov was a Jew )

    Just because Gorbachev was ethnically Russian doesn’t make him a patriot or Russo-phile. In fact, Stalin was a greater Russo-phile than Gorbachev, especially given that Stalin recognized Russians as the nation forming ethnicity.

    The Soviet Unions economic system which it imposed on half of Europe

    How is that a bad thing? This is what European nations were trying to do to one another since the Thirty Years War. One European nation always tried to conquer the rest, starting with Louis the XVI, through Fredrick the Great, through Peter the Great, through Napoleon Bonaparte. The USSR policy was a continuation of that.

    it’s brutal character forever tarnished the reputation of Russia and Russians, indeed despite it being gone for almost 30 years now the enemies of Russia still pluck propaganda material from it to attack Russian interests

    They pluck propaganda material because the USSR “lost”. Had it won, these same ‘enemies’ would be plucking at the corpse of the United States for propaganda material. Its a story as old as history – any student of history knows this.

    I am not a Russophobe

    I have my doubts on that account

    the USSR was a failure that couldn’t even outlast the “backwards” Empire it replaced

    LOL comparing a backwards agrarian power that could barely defeat the collapsing Ottoman Turks and could not prevent a few British ships from taking Sevastopol, or while being poised to take Constantinople and forever control the Bosporus cowering in fear because of a few British ships

    VS

    a nuclear power that forced the World to count with it, won basically every event in the Olympics (had some of the greatest athletes in existence), was the first nation to not only dream about space but make it reality, had some of the greatest scientific minds in existence, and whose corpse still inspires fear from lesser nations.

    You tell me which Empire was the failure.

  37. Why are you blaming Gorbachev for the USSR splitting along the lines that Lenin drew

    Lenin never claimed that he was drawing them for “administrative efficiency”, he wanted to break apart the Russian Empire and create a system to absorb more and more states into the Union, culminating in the Communist world conquest

    To put things in perspective, Soviet Union at the time of its dissolution, according to its official statistics, had a population of around 300 million, out of which roughly 140 million were ethnic Russians.
    Even if we lump together all Slavs, there were some 200 – 210 million of Slavs and 90 million non-Slavs (I will disregard the fact that the Slavs themselves were far from being homogeneous, with Ukrainian nationalism and so on).
    Next, the long term demographic trends were clear: the percentage of Slavs was decreasing percentage of others, especially Central Asian and South Caucasian Muslims was increasing.
    The question is: how do you keep a country, having such ethnic composition, together and functional in 21st century settings?

    The Russian nationalists of the time determined that this is impossible, unless one applies force to keep the country together i.e. Stalinist methods, which in 1990 was hard to imagine, to put it mildly.

    So, I will argue that Russian nationalism, and Boris Yeltsin was primarily a Russian nationalist, was the main force behind the Soviet Union demise.

    Now, the really smart thing Russian nationalists did was not to contest the internal borders within the Soviet Union and recognize them as international. That saved the new Russian Federation from being involved in numerous ethnic civil conflicts with just about everybody else in the former Soviet Union.
    This provided much needed peace and time for the new Russian Federation to recuperate and have a chance of survival and to, possibly, re-gain its superpower status.

    We can see an example of exactly opposite course with its devastating consequences in the break-up of former Yugoslavia.

    To cut a long story short, one can equally blame Russian Emperors for the break up of the Russian Empire and its successor the Soviet Union due to Empire’s over-reaching.

    It seems that the current Russian leadership, as shown in the last 20 years, have learnt the most important lessons provided by the history of their country.

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
    , @RadicalCenter
  38. @Simpleguest

    To put things in perspective, Soviet Union at the time of its dissolution, according to its official statistics, had a population of around 300 million, out of which roughly 140 million were ethnic Russians.
    Even if we lump together all Slavs, there were some 200 – 210 million of Slavs and 90 million non-Slavs (I will disregard the fact that the Slavs themselves were far from being homogeneous, with Ukrainian nationalism and so on).
    Next, the long term demographic trends were clear: the percentage of Slavs was decreasing percentage of others, especially Central Asian and South Caucasian Muslims was increasing.
    The question is: how do you keep a country, having such ethnic composition, together and functional in 21st century settings?

    That is a good question. One way to do it is use the method of the current Russian administration – as you mentioned. Another is to use the American method and the method of the Nazi Propaganda Ministry. Aggressive use of soft power through every media outlet available, influencing young people (particularly women, as men will follow suit) that they are a part of the Russian nation and not individual nations.

    • Replies: @Simpleguest
  39. @NazBolFren

    Aggressive use of soft power through every media outlet available, influencing young people (particularly women, as men will follow suit) that they are a part of the Russian nation and not individual nations.

    After the Russian revolution of 1917 and constitution of the Soviet Union, Marxism-Leninism or communism was supposed to be the ideology that was supposed to keep the country (empire) together.
    Communist ideology and the ideal of building a new, just, society, was the glue, or the soft power, that was supposed to keep the country and all the peoples in it together.

    So, one can argue that the communists (bolsheviks) really tried to re-gather the former empire, that previously crumbled on its own, together, only on radically new basis.

    But, by 1990s the soft power of the Soviet Union and its communist ideology was exactly zero. Ancient old ethnic conflicts re-surfaced. Add to that non-functional economy and unfavorable demographic trends and the result seem all but inevitable.

    In all honesty, people need to be fair(er) and kind(er) to Mikhail Gorbachev.

  40. @NazBolFren

    A generic list of 4chan/twitter meme arguments, didn’t even read the link
    Typical cargo cult retard who knows nothing about Russian history except from what he heard on YouTube videos
    I wonder of what value was the space race to the average Russian who was living worse then the average Englishman or Frenchman despite living in a bigger economy, to say nothing of things like the child mortality coverup under Brezhnev

    The only advice I can give you is to lurkmore

    I have my doubts on that account

    The people you worship killed more Russians then any enemy of Russia (with the exception of Germany) and set her back 300 years territorially, their descendants today all live in the US or Western Europe spending their unearned wealth
    At this rate a Russophobe would be preferable to a “Russophile” such as you

    My point was that decentralized rule through semi-independent States was what informed Lenin’s decision

    This statement is some Orwellian absurdity

    • Agree: AP
  41. A generic list of 4chan/twitter meme arguments, didn’t even read the link
    Typical cargo cult retard who knows nothing about Russian history except from what he heard on YouTube videos

    Says the guy repeating every talking point of US propaganda repeating everything from “hurr durr muh planned economy, muhhh capitalism”, to “hurr durr holodomor”, to “hurr durr stalin killed 100 million people!!1!”. LOL

    I wonder of what value was the space race to the average Russian who was living worse then the average Englishman or Frenchman

    In what specific way was the average Soviet citizen living worse than English or Frenchman? Did they not have sufficient food? After 1945 they did. Did they not get a world class education? They did. Did they get everything they needed to live (from clothing to housing)? They did. Did old people get a pension? They did (unlike now). Where people able to have safety and stability for their kids? They were. Did they have to worry about making enough money to pay the electric bill? They did not. What specifically where they lacking in?

    Hmm. Sounds like you’re a degenerate Bourgeois who needs the newest iPhone every year to be happy. Jokes on you because now you spend all your time at work, working to pay the bills and to buy basic necessities. What an upgrade!

    The people you worship killed more Russians then any enemy of Russia

    Did they? 1-2 million purged at the hands of Stalin (most of whom weren’t even Russian but Jews and other ethnicities) is hardly alot. Moreover, I’d rather have traitors purged than have them around.

    and set her back 300 years territorially, their descendants today all live in the US or Western Europe spending their unearned wealth

    Because they were traitors and degenerates that preferred material comforts instead of Revolting Against the Modern World, or pursuing Aristocracy of the Soul as the Soviet government propagandized through its foucs on reading and education.

    We should be focusing on how Russians live now.

    The demographic situation is one of the worst its ever been because it has become 1) too expensive to have kids (not so in the USSR) 2) women have begun to follow American soft power and betraying their roots (this is something that the USSR protected the average person against).

    Russian Science is dead – because it is not in the benefit of the education system of a capitalist country to develop a renaissance human – someone too smart would not consume. Further, Russia is not America – it does not betray its culture to get the smartest scientists from all over the world to do everything for them (like America).

    “Russo-philes” such as you were the cause of the demographic collapse, the economic collapse, the brain drain and the cultural collapse. “Russo-philes” such as you are responsible for opening the Russian people (particularly young women) to the negative influences of American culture and turning them into whores that have no loyalty to their husband or family.

    • Replies: @Korenchkin
    , @AP
  42. @NazBolFren

    Excellent strawman, I did not use word “holodomor” once but the brainless Soviet apologist thinks that was the only famine in the USSR, ofcourse

    It is good that you are on this blog, I recommend you read every article here
    https://www.unz.com/author/anatoly-karlin/topic/soviet-union/
    Using the USSRs own data is the best way to shatter delusions
    You should know that I used to hold the same opinions as you, but one cannot believe in Santa Claus forever

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  43. It should then legally mandate the wearing of masks in crowded areas and fine people without them. This is by far the most cost-effective way to save both money and lives.

    Strongly agree that everybody should wear masks, this reduces the risk and the spread so much and is so easy.

    Anybody who can’t buy a mask in the pharmacies (here they went out very quickly too) should ask his grandma to sew him one, I did that and now I have several double layer cotton masks.

    Even if you have a single mask, you can simply steam iron it for fast disinfection if you go out multiple times per day (one should not wear such a mask for more than an hour without changing or steaming it), and throw it in the washing machine at the end of the day.
    Without any scientific trials I’ll just go ahead and say that the temperature at the Cotton setting on the iron will kill any viruses on the mask quickly.

    • LOL: LondonBob
    • Replies: @LondonBob
  44. @Korenchkin

    Excellent strawman, I did not use word “holodomor”

    And yet you imply it with your statement of killing “hur dur millions”. That’s the same argument that American propaganda uses. Furthermore, if you follow Karlin and Karlin believes in the Holodomor then ergo so do you.

    I’ve read through most of the articles on the thread and other than a few, I could break most apart using various sources or even basic logic.

    The fact of the matter is, you have not been able to disprove any of my statements – the USSR did have a better welfare system for its poorer citizens, it did have a superior education system (judging by the fact that the top 10 places of most international math and physics competition were held by Soviet (mostly Russian) school children, it did have a superior scientific system (compare the amount of papers published and the number of patents filed in 1989 vs now – at its peak almost HALF of the scientific literature of the world was written in Russian). Russian military technology was superior to the US up until the Regean Era (judging by Jimmy Carter’s own statements).

    Which of my statements is wrong, hmm? Exactly.

    • Replies: @Korenchkin
  45. @NazBolFren

    You sure? What about the systemic massacre of millions of Indians in America?

    Good to know you consider the two comparable. Minor exception that (white) Americans did it to peoples they considered hostile foreigners.

    I’d say it has an amazing track record given that under a centrally planned economy (in 3-4 5 year plans)…

    The USSR only reattained the industrial output levels of the Russian Empire c.1913 in the late 1920s. The Bolsheviks lost it a decade of industrial development.

    Not to mention shorning it of its Tsarist era human capital stock. One example: https://www.unz.com/akarlin/sikorskys-engineers/

    Did they not have sufficient food? After 1945 they did.

    LOL. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1946%E2%80%9347

    Did old people get a pension? They did (unlike now).

    LOL. You might want to learn a bit more about your own idols. Universal pensions only came to the USSR in 1964, when they were extended to collective farm workers.

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
    , @AP
  46. Max Payne says:

    What happened to laws preventing people from covering their face due to terrorism. Are we gonna let the burka ninjas win because of a bitch cold? How unAmerican.

  47. @Anatoly Karlin

    The USSR only reattained the industrial output levels of the Russian Empire c.1913 in the late 1920s. The Bolsheviks lost it a decade of industrial development.

    Not to mention shorning it of its Tsarist era human capital stock. One example: https://www.unz.com/akarlin/sikorskys-engineers/

    That makes sense, given that the Russian people (first the Empire then the Union) went through two wars and much destruction.

    Furthermore, much of the human capital that was lost was replaced by even better men. Plus, it is doubtful that even if the people on the Philosophers Ship remained, they would have been productive. I think they would have rocked the boat like Solzhenitsyn did – so perhaps it was a good thing they were exiled.

    LOL. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1946%E2%80%9347

    I should have been more clear, post war there were no more famines as the Soviet Union entered its Golden Age – the 1946 famine not withstanding (what do you expect after a devastating war – hardly the fault of the soviet regieme).

    LOL. You might want to learn a bit more about your own idols. Universal pensions only came to the USSR in 1964, when they were extended to collective farm workers.

    Sure. However, most of the population lived in the cities, so the fact that some Kolhoz workers didn’t have pensions doesn’t undermine my point that MOST people had a better pension situation than they do now.

    Karlin, I understand your dislike of the Soviet regieme, given that you are essentially a White emigre. If you were an aristocrat, the Soviet regieme and the Bolshevik revolution was the worst thing ever. For the average person though, it was great contingent on them being able to keep their mouth shut (much like now in the West – loud political opinions can make you unhirable or worse).

  48. AP says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    He is either:

    1. Teenage Russian product of failed school 21st century school who is the Russian equivalent of clueless and earnest young American pro-Bernie or pro-AOC socialists

    2. Teenage clueless American child of Russian off-the-boaters who is the Russian equivalent of clueless and earnest young American pro-Bernie or pro-AOC socialists.

    I’d guess (2) because I don’t think Russian schools have gotten that bad. Hopefully he will grow up and learn.

    He could also be a troll but he seems sincere.

    • Replies: @Korenchkin
    , @Dmitry
  49. @NazBolFren

    That’s the same argument that American propaganda uses

    Because it is true and is undeniable, as is the Ukrainian famine, the fact that some Galician subhumans use it for their nefarious purposes doesn’t erase the fact that there was a famine there
    The Soviet famines in the Don and Kazakhstan were orders of magnitude worse then even the most terrible Tsarist ones, so the “backwards” Empire was better then the USSR in that sense

    The current RF outproduces the entire USSR in terms of wheat (and that’s without Ukraine!)
    Imagine the scientific achievements that a capitalist Russia with free citizens and without the massive brain drain of the Revolution and purges could’ve achieved
    Sikorsky and his engineers alone would’ve been massive aerospace pioneers

    What’s worse is that in praising the USSR you also turn to shitting on modern Russia like that 4chan meme rant about Russian women being whores
    Russia has made a drastic 180 and fixed many of it’s 90s hangovers, there’s a long road to go to full recovery
    Thankfully Russia’s enemies have opted for suicide by demographics so Russians will have more breathing room

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  50. @AP

    He could just be a non-Russian with YouTube history video education

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  51. @Korenchkin

    Because it is true and is undeniable, as is the Ukrainian famine, the fact that some Galician subhumans use it for their nefarious purposes doesn’t erase the fact that there was a famine there

    Really?

    The notion of genocide that Stalin tried to starve out Ukraine is heavily debated and according to newely accessible data, is far from targeted starvation. According to ‘Years of Hunger/ Soviet Agriculture 1931-1933’, a large collection of historical archives:

    During the famine, grain exports out of Ukraine were reduced from 5,182,835 tonnes in 1931 to 1,819,114 tonnes in 1932, the year of the famine. With the opening of the Soviet archives, thousands of pages have been thoroughly sifted through and they are all accessible to the public.

    Nowhere, not even a single page is there any mention of orders given for a man-made famine in Ukraine. Furthermore, there were 750,000 tonnes of grain imported into Ukraine in the first half of 1932 and 157,000 more tonnes at the end of April later that year.

    If you want to starve out a country, you don’t decrease grain exports by nearly 400% and then import nearly a million tonnes of grain into the country.

    People starved nonetheless, however Ukraine was not the only part of the USSR hit by the famine, drought and movement of resources. Kazakhstan and the Kuban region starved as well. Kazakhstan was hit the hardest in terms of proportion of population. Even Kazakhstan does not recongnize the holodomor as genocide. Ukraine got more aid than any other republic and was the first to receive aid, there was still no targeted starvation.

    The formation of the belief that it was genocide can be further examined in the book ‘Fraud, Famine and Fascism’ written by a Canadian. He mentions the misinformation campaign by Ukrainian community groups within Canada and the United States.

    This process for collectivization and industrialization was crucial for survival in the war that was just a few years away. Without this rapid modernization, the Nazis may have won and carried out GeneralPlan Ost to a greater extent, then without a doubt there would have been a genocide on a scale previously unseen by humanity.

    Imagine the scientific achievements that a capitalist Russia with free citizens

    LOL at thinking capitalism = free. Nice meme there.

    without the massive brain drain of the Revolution

    We saw what was achieved without the ‘brain drain’ of the revolution. Russia was one of the last major European nations to industralize and was only starting to industralize under Tsar Nicholas. In fact, I doubt that Sikorsky or any of the other emigre’s would have been very productive in Russia. Finally, the world class education system implemented under Stalin developed some of the greatest minds the world has ever seen – so the fact that Russia lost some people with the “Philosopher’s Ship” or the emigration of the aristocrats hardly matters.

    and purges

    You keep telling me to read Karlin’s exposition on the Soviet Union. Clearly you need to read this:

    https://www.unz.com/tsaker/reading-the-traitors-a-good-or-a-bad-idea/

    What’s worse is that in praising the USSR you also turn to shitting on modern Russia like that 4chan meme rant about Russian women being whores

    They are though. What I saw during the World Cup in Russia, with young Russian women throwing themselves at foreigners en masse only confirms it. If you think the younger generation is any different, you just need to open instagram to see my point is true.

    • Replies: @AP
    , @Korenchkin
  52. @Korenchkin

    You sound like a Soviet Jew emigre in your arguments, or like a teenager.

  53. LondonBob says:
    @Spisarevski

    Only fags wear masks. Steam ironing a mask every day is even faggier.

    • Disagree: Blinky Bill
    • Troll: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Korenchkin
  54. Arnald says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Mask wearing was originally a Japanese thing. The Japanese were wearing them in the 80s and 90s when other Asian countries generally weren’t.

  55. @Simpleguest

    Seems like Russia should have kept Latvia and completed its ethnic Russification. Same with the northernmost part of Kazakhstan.

    I always wondered why they abandoned the proportionally quite large Russian populations in those places and surrendered the useful location and Baltic Sea access of Latvia (yes, I know they kept the koenigsberg / Kaliningrad enclave, just saying I wish they had kept more of the Baltics — after all, the people in those countries don’t seem to have much national pride or interest in surviving as a people, as they don’t bother to have children, don’t bother to maintain a defense capability, and are eagerly succumbing to Western-style faggotry).

  56. Russia is going for mitigation, not supression like the original British policy until the teaching unions pushed their man in Imperial College into climate scientist mode. (he literally works with the modelling group at the University of East Anglia).

    If the Oxford model is wrong the 2nd wave will be viscous and large. Mitigation is the way to defend against it.

  57. AP says:
    @NazBolFren

    According to ‘Years of Hunger/ Soviet Agriculture 1931-1933’,

    Authors Wheatcroft and Davies. They deny that the Famine’s purpose was to kill people. Rather they state it that it was man-made due to Soviet incompetence and that later decisions were made not to stop the deaths in order not to lose face and show that collectivization was a failure. It’s like setting a house on fire by accident but then preventing the people inside from being saved, letting them burn to death, in order to conceal one’s blunder.

    They write:

    https://www.uio.no/studier/emner/hf/iakh/HIS2319/h16/pensumliste/stalin-and-the-soviet-famine-of-1932-33_-a-reply-to-ellman.pdf

    ‘Stalin’s policy towards the peasants was ruthless and brutal’

    “Our view of Stalin and the famine is close to that of Robert Conquest, who would earlier have been considered the champion of the argument that Stalin had intentionally caused the famine and had acted in a genocidal manner. In 2003, Dr Conquest wrote to us explaining that he does not hold the view that ‘Stalin purposely inflicted the 1933 famine. No. What I argue is that with resulting famine imminent, he could have prevented it, but put “Soviet interest” other than feeding the starving first thus consciously abetting it’.”

    however Ukraine was not the only part of the USSR hit by the famine, drought and movement of resources. Kazakhstan and the Kuban region starved as well.

    Kuban – populated by about 50% ethnic Ukrainians.

    Ukrainians were about 30% of the USSR’s population but about 50% of the USSR’s starvation victims. So Stalin killed plenty of Russians too.

    ‘Fraud, Famine and Fascism’ written by a Canadian

    Author Douglas Tottle.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Tottle

    “Tottle was born in Quebec, but later lived mainly in Western Canada. He had various jobs throughout his working life, including photo-lab technician, fine artist, miner, and steelworker. As a trade union activist, he edited The Challenger, a journal of the United Steelworkers, from 1975 to 1985. Tottle also researched labour history and worked as a union organiser, for example among Chicano farm workers in California, and Native Indian farm workers in Manitoba. ”

    LOL.

    Soviet archives revealed a death toll in Ukraine of about 3 million people (nearly 10% of Ukraine’s population). There was never such a scale of famine in Ukraine under the tsars.

    This process for collectivization and industrialization was crucial for survival in the war that was just a few years away.

    A war that the Soviets nearly botched…against an enemy with a little more than half their population that was busy fighting on another front and occupying much of Europe at the same time. Russia should have won that war in a year, without tens of millions killed.

    Russia was one of the last major European nations to industralize and was only starting to industralize under Tsar Nicholas.

    It had roughly caught up to France by the start of the war, so very rapid expansion. Accomplished without starving to death millions of peasants. There is no reason to assume expansion would not have continued.

    So let’s review. You love a government of mostly non-Russians that: seized Russia by force; killed millions of ethnic Russians; persecuted the Russians’ Church, their patriots, and their writers; conducted a war against a smaller country so badly that millions more Russians were needlessly slaughtered (they won eventually, congratulations lol); and when it was, done left Russia as a decrepit rusting hulk, its people much poorer than the ones they died by the millions to defeat.

    LOL at Sovok-“nationalism.”

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  58. AP says:
    @NazBolFren

    In what specific way was the average Soviet citizen living worse than English or Frenchman? Did they not have sufficient food? After 1945 they did. Did they not get a world class education? They did. Did they get everything they needed to live (from clothing to housing)? They did. Did old people get a pension? They did (unlike now). Where people able to have safety and stability for their kids? They were. Did they have to worry about making enough money to pay the electric bill? They did not. What specifically where they lacking in?

    Other than education and safety, everything you wrote above applies to people of color living in American housing projects.

    So the Soviet Union was a place where educated white people lived materially like unemployed ghetto Americans. Actually even worse – the American ghetto people probably had nicer televisions and radios. You should point out to them how happy and satisfied they should be with their lives.

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
    , @Philip Owen
  59. @AP

    Authors Wheatcroft and Davies. They deny that the Famine’s purpose was to kill people.

    That exactly the point I’m trying to make. Glad you caught on! There was no Holodomor. There was famine caused by a combination of factors, incompetence being one of them. But then again, can we really blame them considering that this was the first time collectivization was done and there was no functional models for it to work? Further, the Soviet Union was not the only nation suffering from drought – it was present in the US, parts of Asia too.

    Kuban – populated by about 50% ethnic Ukrainians.

    What are you going to say next – Kazakhstan was 70% Ukranians. LOL. Ukranian’s weren’t intentionally targeted. Calm your shilling.

    “Tottle was born in Quebec, but later lived mainly in Western Canada. He had various jobs throughout his working life, including photo-lab technician, fine artist, miner, and steelworker. As a trade union activist, he edited The Challenger, a journal of the United Steelworkers, from 1975 to 1985. Tottle also researched labour history and worked as a union organiser, for example among Chicano farm workers in California, and Native Indian farm workers in Manitoba. ”

    What’s your point? I can read as well as you can. I don’t think you have a point.

    “Furthermore, there were 750,000 tonnes of grain imported into Ukraine in the first half of 1932 and 157,000 more tonnes at the end of April later that year.

    If you want to starve out a country, you don’t decrease grain exports by nearly 400% and then import nearly a million tonnes of grain into the country.

    …Ukraine got more aid than any other republic and was the first to receive aid, there was still no targeted starvation.”

    Of course you ignore this part of my writing because it is inconvenient for your narrative.

    A war that the Soviets nearly botched…against an enemy with a little more than half their population that was busy fighting on another front and occupying much of Europe at the same time.

    LOL. And Ukraine can’t win a war against a few Spetsnaz boys in LDNR…again whats your point?

    If you’re trying to say that the USSR could barely win a war against Nazi Germany – that’s blantly false and infact reeks of wehrabooism as after 1941 the USSR outproduced Nazi Germany in every metric and began counteroffensives that drove them back. Try again.

    It had roughly caught up to France by the start of the war

    LOL by start of World War 1, only 15% of the Russian population was literate, and was so incompetent it couldn’t produce enough Mosin’s for every soldier thus having to rely on the US to produce the rest.

    You love a government of mostly non-Russians that: seized Russia by force; killed millions of ethnic Russians; persecuted the Russians’ Church, their patriots, and their writers; conducted a war against a smaller country so badly that millions more Russians were needlessly slaughtered (they won eventually, congratulations lol); and when it was, done left Russia as a decrepit rusting hulk, its people much poorer than the ones they died by the millions to defeat.

    Let me understand what you’re saying correctly – a bunch of intelligent and motivated people seized power from an incompetent Tsar – who BTW couldn’t win a war against a Germany fighting simultaneously on three fronts, an old decrepit Austro-Hungary and a bunch of incompetent Turks – destroyed the Church which kept Russia in the Middle Ages, killed a bunch of aristocratic traitors that kept the Russian people in a state of serfdom (despite it being illegal), made Finland lose like 80% of its land LOL, and transformed Russia into a space-faring nation?

    • Replies: @AP
    , @Korenchkin
  60. @AP

    Other than education and safety, everything you wrote above applies to people of color living in American housing projects.

    So the Soviet Union was a place where educated white people lived materially like unemployed ghetto Americans. Actually even worse – the American ghetto people probably had nicer televisions and radios. You should point out to them how happy and satisfied they should be with their lives.

    So let me get this straight – to you the measure of a nations success is how many useless trinckets they have..?..makes sense why Ukranians sell out their nation to the highest bidder (like the son of Biden).

    Also, for the record – up until the late 70’s Soviet radio tech and computer tech was on par with the US. The Soviet leadership was considering developing the internet back in the 60’s (OGAS) and one of the founding fathers of cybernetics who contributed much to current understanding of cybernetics was Soviet.

    Try again Kiddo.

    • Replies: @AP
  61. Jatt Arya says:
    @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    Too bad you’re dealing with that cruelty in the here and now||
    The natives had to watch their people fade to the smallpox virus, you have to now watch them fade to the virus of:

  62. Jatt Arya says:

    Nazbol Im reminded of this quote but instead about the USSR state:

    I still support Tsarist Russia more though||

    • Replies: @AP
  63. 128 says:

    Why do you need lockdown measures for places like rural Yakutia, Primorsky, and the Kamchatka?

    • Replies: @anonymous coward
  64. AP says:
    @NazBolFren

    That exactly the point I’m trying to make. Glad you caught on! There was no Holodomor.

    That is only according to your source.

    So according to Ukrainians and others, it was a deliberate killing. According to your source, it was caused by epic incompetence followed by deliberate refusal to fix the situation.

    You may think that there is a big difference between setting a fire on purpose to kill people, vs. accidentally setting the fire but then locking the people inside. But it’s not really.

    Of course you ignore this part of my writing because it is inconvenient for your narrative.

    It didn’t contradict what I wrote, nor the above.

    Further, the Soviet Union was not the only nation suffering from drought – it was present in the US, parts of Asia too.

    10% of the US population didn’t starve do death. Nor did this happen in Tsarist-era droughts.

    According to your source, it was extreme incompetence and brutality, combined with deliberate refusal to fix the problem sufficiently to prevent millions of deaths.

    Our view of Stalin and the famine is close to that of Robert Conquest, who would earlier have been considered the champion of the argument that Stalin had intentionally caused the famine and had acted in a genocidal manner. In 2003, Dr Conquest wrote to us explaining that he does not hold the view that ‘Stalin purposely inflicted the 1933 famine. No. What I argue is that with resulting famine imminent, he could have prevented it, but put “Soviet interest” other than feeding the starving first thus consciously abetting it’.”

    Kuban – populated by about 50% ethnic Ukrainians.

    What are you going to say next – Kazakhstan was 70% Ukranians. LOL.

    According to Soviet census Kuban was 50% Ukrainian.

    What’s your point? I can read as well as you can. I don’t think you have a point.

    Tottle is a stupid source.

    A war that the Soviets nearly botched…against an enemy with a little more than half their population that was busy fighting on another front and occupying much of Europe at the same time.

    LOL. And Ukraine can’t win a war against a few Spetsnaz boys in LDNR…again whats your point?

    A good comparison of military competence. Ukraine 2014 to Soviets under Stalin, who failed to take little Finland.

    If you’re trying to say that the USSR could barely win a war against Nazi Germany

    Remind me how many Soviets were sacrificed against a country with about 60% of the Soviets’ population which was also fighting an another front and which was also busy occupying much of Europe. And even then, the Soviets required massive Lend Lease help.

    Let me understand what you’re saying correctly – a bunch of intelligent and motivated people seized power from an incompetent Tsar

    So you don’t know basic Russian history.

    who BTW couldn’t win a war against a Germany fighting simultaneously on three fronts, an old decrepit Austro-Hungary and a bunch of incompetent Turks

    Turks crushed Brits at Gallipoli, yet Russia defeated them easily. Austria-Hungary was stronger than Italy, Russia crushed it. Germany failed to advance much beyond Poland and was held in check. Not bad performance for a country that only 15 years earlier had been defeated by Japan. Russia was a rapidly rising power prior to the Bolshevik takeover. Bolsheviks botched that rise. Russia’s enemies (at least, those lucky enough not having had to actually live under Sovok rule) should be grateful.

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  65. @NazBolFren

    What do the Saker, Nina Byzantina and Martyanov have in common?
    Oh right, none of them live in Russia, unlike Karlin

    And Karlin doesn’t shill for Russia to become an Islamophilic Turkic state with Slavic characteristics unlike the Faker and Nina, a neat bonus

    with young Russian women throwing themselves at foreigners en masse only confirms it

    This is such a juvenile talking point, you must be a teenager, or at least a manchild

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  66. @LondonBob

    I agree friend, tell all of your Anglo friends to not wear masks

    • Replies: @LondonBob
  67. @NazBolFren

    Russia lost the war BECAUSE of the Bolsheviks
    Had they literally done nothing and maintained the frontline (they were never under risk of collapse until Communist sabotage started to take hold)
    Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria on the verge of breaking (they would later be knocked out of the war by Franco-Serbian troops in the Salonica Front)
    Thanks to Lenin, Russians were defeated by the defeated side
    Talk about stealing defeat from the jaws of victory

    Without it’s strong ally to back it up, Serbia was pressured into the Yugoslav project by Western nations, essentially dooming millions of my people aswell

    The threat of the Communist nation spreading revolution across the world would be used as propaganda fuel and help the Fascists and NSDAP to rise to power, leading to a more painful World War 2
    Instead of 1 bad war, Russia got 3, each more deadly then the last

    Slavs who idolize Lenin are retarded

    • Agree: AP, Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  68. AP says:
    @NazBolFren

    So let me get this straight – to you the measure of a nations success is how many useless trinckets they have..

    You are the one who brought up material living standards as an example of Soviet greatness. I simply pointed out that in terms of material living standards the Soviets offered their “middle class” a standard that was comparable to that of American blacks living in housing projects. Except with worse radios and televisions.

    Also, for the record – up until the late 70’s Soviet radio tech and computer tech was on par with the US

    So back when no one had computers Soviet computers were a little better according to you. Doubtful, but so what?

  69. AP says:
    @Jatt Arya

    In Afghanistan a single Muslin terrorist got into a Sikh temple and killed 25 people before the authorities killed him. The Sikhs were helpless. How do you explain that?

    • Replies: @Jatt Arya
  70. @AP

    They lacked living space, private transport and the freedom to work for themselves. Not everyone has the talent to manouvre for position in a bureaucracy. Other societies over more diversity of career.

  71. LondonBob says:
    @Korenchkin

    I don’t need to, they are smart enough to know the limited risks to not to.

  72. @NazBolFren

    Moreover, under the soviet system masks would not be sold out – as more production of masks would have been forced.

    The Soviet system never ever sold out of anything… OH SH–

  73. LondonBob says:

    If Putin shuts down the Russian economy I will adjust my buying target on the RTS index from 750 to 600.

  74. Jatt Arya says:
    @AP

    Explain what?

  75. @AP

    So according to Ukrainians and others, it was a deliberate killing. According to your source, it was caused by epic incompetence followed by deliberate refusal to fix the situation.

    Right and Ukranian sources are truth speakers, not that they have a vested interest in a Holodomor narrative. /s

    Fact of the matter is, even Kazakhstan (who suffered more from the famine in terms of percentage of the population) does not recognize the Holodomor should tell you something. And since you have troubles with comprehension and misunderstand the simplest points – I’ll point it out for you. It means that there was no Holodomor – or should I say it exists only in the deluded mindds of Ukranian nationalists to try to get legitamacy for themselves.

    10% of the US population didn’t starve do death.
    According to your source, it was extreme incompetence and brutality, combined with deliberate refusal to fix the problem sufficiently to prevent millions of deaths.

    Our view of Stalin and the famine is close to that of Robert Conquest, who would earlier have been considered the champion of the argument that Stalin had intentionally caused the famine and had acted in a genocidal manner. In 2003, Dr Conquest wrote to us explaining that he does not hold the view that ‘Stalin purposely inflicted the 1933 famine. No. What I argue is that with resulting famine imminent, he could have prevented it, but put “Soviet interest” other than feeding the starving first thus consciously abetting it’.”

    Nor did this happen in Tsarist-era droughts.

    Really?

    Lets examine your claim that “hurr durr there were no droughts during Tsarist times”.

    “In the 17th century, Russia experienced the famine of 1601–1603, as a proportion of the population, believed to be its worst as it may have killed 2 million people (1/3 of the population). Major famines include the Great Famine of 1315–17, which affected much of Europe including part of Russia[2][3] as well as the Baltic states.[4] The Nikonian chronicle, written between 1127 and 1303, recorded no less than eleven famine years during that period.[5] One of the most serious crises before 1900 was the famine of 1891–92, which killed between 375,000 and 500,000 people, mainly due to famine-related diseases. Causes included a large Autumn drought resulting in crop failures. Attempts by the government to alleviate the situation generally failed which may have contributed to a lack of faith in the Czarist regime and later political instability.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droughts_and_famines_in_Russia_and_the_Soviet_Union#Pre-1900_droughts_and_famines

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_famine_of_1891%E2%80%9392

    The famines of 1601 were so bad 1/3 of the population died. And the Tsar was so incopetent and mishandled the famines on the Volga (1891) that it was a direct contributor to the rise of the Soviet regieme.

    I can’t tell whether you are a liar and intentionally obfuscate or whether you are simply not knowledgable and need to do some reading.

    According to Soviet census Kuban was 50% Ukrainian.

    What’s your point? Kazakhstan lost more people as a proportion of the population. That means it wasn’t targeted to punish Ukranians, as Ukranian nationalists like to claim.

    Tottle is a stupid source.

    And Ukranian nationalists are an even better source right? /s

    Its very convenient to say “x is a stupid source” when it goes against your narrative. You don’t get to do that.

    A good comparison of military competence. Ukraine 2014 to Soviets under Stalin, who failed to take little Finland.

    Ukraine 2014? Its been 6 years and Ukraine still can’t beat a bunch of Spetsnaz boys. I think its a rather apt comparison.

    Also, regarding Finland.

    A lot of people have this false belief that Finland won the Winter War, however that is quite far from the truth, and is quite the opposite.

    Prior to the war, Finland was offered more territory in exchange for the lands that it was soon to lose. However more than that, Finland lost more land than what was originally bargained for after the war.

    In terms of military performance, the Finns did very well, and the Soviets learned from this war, a lesson that was absolutely necessary in the near future.

    Furthermore:

    Before the war, Finland had been a leading producer of high quality pulp, which was an important raw material for explosives. The Soviet Union captured 80% of Finland’s production capacity.

    Finland had to cede 1/3 of built hydroelectric power, mainly in the form of hydroelectric power plants.

    Finland’s second largest city, Käkisalmi, Sortavala, and Suojärvi and the whole of Viipuri bay with its islands; in total, nearly 10% of the territory were lost.

    Finland had to hand over 75 locomotives, 2,000 railroad cars, a number of cars, trucks and ships.

    The southern part of the lost area was Finland’s industrial heart.

    The location of the new border was consistent with the Soviet defense doctrine, which envisioned taking the fight onto enemy soil through counterattacks and pre-emptive strikes. Under this doctrine, the ideal border should not allow the enemy to have natural defensible barriers; so instead of running through natural border locations like the Bay of Viipuri or the swamp region at the isthmus between Lake Saimaa and Lake Ladoga, the new border ran on the western side of those.

    Although this meme more or less shows the result, I felt I should provide some details on what Finland lost, because people aren’t the only thing you lose during a war.

    So you don’t know basic Russian history.

    Says the guy who repeats memes, tired tropes and sound bites from Western propaganda. Right.

    Turks crushed Brits at Gallipoli, yet Russia defeated them easily. Austria-Hungary was stronger than Italy, Russia crushed it. Germany failed to advance much beyond Poland and was held in check. Not bad performance for a country that only 15 years earlier had been defeated by Japan. Russia was a rapidly rising power prior to the Bolshevik takeover. Bolsheviks botched that rise. Russia’s enemies (at least, those lucky enough not having had to actually live under Sovok rule) should be grateful.

    Are you serious? And you blame me for not knowing Russian history. LOL

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_entry_into_World_War_I#Poorly_prepared_for_combat

    “The outbreak of war on 1 August 1914 found Russia grossly unprepared.”

    “In every other respect, however, Russia was unprepared for war. Germany had ten times as much railway track per square kilometre, and whereas Russian soldiers travelled an average of 1,290 kilometres (800 mi) to reach the front, German soldiers travelled less than a quarter of that distance. Russian heavy industry was still too small to equip the massive armies the Tsar could raise, and her reserves of munitions were pitifully small; while the German army in 1914 was better equipped than any other, man-for-man, the Russians were severely short on artillery pieces, shells, motorised transports, and even boots.[22]”

    ” With the Baltic Sea barred by German U-boats and surface ships”

    “The Russian High Command was greatly weakened by the mutual contempt between Vladimir Sukhomlinov, the Minister of War, and the experienced warrior Grand Duke Nicholas who commanded the armies in the field. ”

    “The Germans mobilised there with great efficiency and completely defeated the two Russian armies which had invaded”

    LOL the Tsar was so incompetent that Germany defeated TWO Russian armies at the same time.

    “The Battle of Tannenberg, where the entire Russian Second Army was annihilated, cast an ominous shadow over the empire’s future.”

    The Battle of Tannenberg was essentially the turning point of the War which was perhaps the last straw in the chronic mismanagement of the Tsars and caused the rise of the Bolshevik’s.

    “Ottoman entry into the war opened up new opportunities, but Russia was much too hard pressed to take advantage of them…They failed very badly.”

    “Gradually a war of attrition set in on the vast Eastern Front, where the Russians were facing the combined forces of the German and Austro-Hungarian Empires, and they suffered staggering losses.”

    “The combination of poor preparation and poor planning destroyed the morale of Russian troops, and set the stage for the collapse of the entire tsarist regime in early 1917.[25]”

    In other words the Tsar was so incompetent they couldn’t produce enough boots, let alone weapons and had to order armament to be produced in the USA.

    LOL keep mememing about how well Russia was doing in WW1 before the big bad Bolsheviks came and ruined their chances. What a fucking joke.

    Clearly you don’t know Russian history and have a vested interest in hating the Soviet regieme (let me guess you are either a White Emigre like Karlin or the child of former UPA supporter).

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    , @AP
  76. @Korenchkin

    What do the Saker, Nina Byzantina and Martyanov have in common?
    Oh right, none of them live in Russia, unlike Karlin

    How does Karlin having his place of residence in Russia suddenly make him an expert on Stalin or Lenin? That makes no sense. By that logic, we should look at what my grandpa said who actually DID live through Stalin’s time and remembers it quite well. He said it was great.

    And Karlin doesn’t shill for Russia to become an Islamophilic Turkic state with Slavic characteristics unlike the Faker and Nina, a neat bonus

    Karlin shills for Russia to become an American globohomo colony. I don’t know what’s worse.

  77. @Korenchkin

    Russia lost the war BECAUSE of the Bolsheviks
    Had they literally done nothing and maintained the frontline (they were never under risk of collapse until Communist sabotage started to take hold)
    Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria on the verge of breaking (they would later be knocked out of the war by Franco-Serbian troops in the Salonica Front)
    Thanks to Lenin, Russians were defeated by the defeated side
    Talk about stealing defeat from the jaws of victory

    LOLOLOL. Shall we examine that?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_entry_into_World_War_I#Poorly_prepared_for_combat

    “The outbreak of war on 1 August 1914 found Russia grossly unprepared.”

    “In every other respect, however, Russia was unprepared for war. Germany had ten times as much railway track per square kilometre, and whereas Russian soldiers travelled an average of 1,290 kilometres (800 mi) to reach the front, German soldiers travelled less than a quarter of that distance. Russian heavy industry was still too small to equip the massive armies the Tsar could raise, and her reserves of munitions were pitifully small; while the German army in 1914 was better equipped than any other, man-for-man, the Russians were severely short on artillery pieces, shells, motorised transports, and even boots.[22]”

    ” With the Baltic Sea barred by German U-boats and surface ships”

    “The Russian High Command was greatly weakened by the mutual contempt between Vladimir Sukhomlinov, the Minister of War, and the experienced warrior Grand Duke Nicholas who commanded the armies in the field. ”

    “The Germans mobilised there with great efficiency and completely defeated the two Russian armies which had invaded”

    LOL the Tsar was so incompetent that Germany defeated TWO Russian armies at the same time. Like how shitty of a commander do you need to be for such humiliation to happen.

    “The Battle of Tannenberg, where the entire Russian Second Army was annihilated, cast an ominous shadow over the empire’s future.”

    The Battle of Tannenberg was essentially the turning point of the War which was perhaps the last straw in the chronic mismanagement of the Tsars and caused the rise of the Bolshevik’s.

    “Ottoman entry into the war opened up new opportunities, but Russia was much too hard pressed to take advantage of them…They failed very badly.”

    “Gradually a war of attrition set in on the vast Eastern Front, where the Russians were facing the combined forces of the German and Austro-Hungarian Empires, and they suffered staggering losses.”

    “The combination of poor preparation and poor planning destroyed the morale of Russian troops, and set the stage for the collapse of the entire tsarist regime in early 1917.[25]”

    In other words the Tsar was so incompetent they couldn’t produce enough boots, let alone weapons and had to order armament to be produced in the USA.

    LOL keep mememing about how well Russia was doing in WW1 before the big bad Bolsheviks came and ruined their chances. What a fucking joke.

    The war was so exhausting in terms of material supplies and morale that people were willing to follow anyone who promised to end it – which was part of the reason Lenin and co had such popular support. Successful revolutions don’t arise or succeed out of thin air.

    Nice try though, nice try.

    Without it’s strong ally to back it up, Serbia was pressured into the Yugoslav project by Western nations, essentially dooming millions of my people aswell

    The Tsar can be blamed for WW1. If the Tsar never supported Serbia, Germany would never have been involved and France/England would not have gotten involved either. It would have been a limited conflict between Austro-Hungary and Serbia. So essentially, the loss in WW1, the rise of the Soviet regieme, etc can be laid at the feet of the Tsar.

    The threat of the Communist nation spreading revolution across the world would be used as propaganda fuel and help the Fascists and NSDAP to rise to power, leading to a more painful World War 2
    Instead of 1 bad war, Russia got 3, each more deadly then the last

    LOLOLOL. NSDAP would have risen without the USSR. NSDAP rose due to the Treaty of Versailles and Germany’s terms. Not due to Communism (early Soviet government provided airfields for NSDAP pilots to train whereas NSDAP trained Soviet soldiers) – there would have been no collaboration if that were the case.

    Jesus, I can’t believe how stupid you guys are. You guys literally repeat memes and American propaganda bites and think of yourselves as ‘enlightened’, when these are the same old tired tropes you hear every redditor say. LOL

    • Replies: @Simpleguest
    , @Korenchkin
  78. From what I hear many Russian organisations have ordered their employees to go to work next week. This isn’t a shutdown. Not even a proper holiday week. I wouldn’t be surprised if Putin’s order gets universally ignored in Russia – the impact on the economy and the spread of the disease will be minimal.

    I’m afraid my fellow Russians are not taking pandemic seriously, will allow it to develop into a full-blown crisis.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    , @Anatoly Karlin
  79. @NazBolFren

    The war was so exhausting in terms of material supplies and morale that people were willing to follow anyone who promised to end it – which was part of the reason Lenin and co had such popular support. Successful revolutions don’t arise or succeed out of thin air.

    I think we need to ask ourselves where did the nascent Red Army get its manpower from and, more importantly, how did it obtain its officer’s corps? Warfare, like any other, requires a fair degree of professional knowledge that only formally trained officers could provide.

    So where did the Red Army officer’s come from? I have encountered an interesting information that the majority of the Imperial army officer’s corps, perhaps some 70% of them, especially lower rank and file, switched sides and joined the bolsheviks.
    Even some members of the Imperial army headquarter staff joined the Red Army.
    I will leave to others to look for explanations as I don’t have a dog in this fight.
    I will only say that I find it hard to imagine all those good people being coerced in doing that.

    This must have been one of the main contributing factors to the ultimate bolshevik’s victory.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
  80. Dmitry says:
    @AP

    It varies by context of the people. Usually older people who lived in “golden ages” of their nation, can justifiably idealize them after their country falls to relative decline.

    In America, there are people who idealize the golden age of American history and power, even though today America has only lost relative, rather than absolute, power. In the 20th century American history, this is probably a few epochs can be viewed as golden ages: 1945-1971 is the main golden age of 20th century American histoy. But also 1920-1929 (“Roaring 20s”), and 1989-2001 (“The End of History”).

    I assume though that it is mainly people with conservative temperament who idealize (although with justification) these “golden ages” of the nation.

    For Russian (and all the multinational) peoples of the Soviet Union, the epoch of maximum power, cultural prestige, rising living standards, and success in scientific and technological development, and even things like sports achievement and educational standards – is something 1957-1979. So it’s not surprising how many people are idealize those years of developed socialism, especially those who are also mourning their lost youth, which they associate with them.

  81. Dmitry says:
    @Felix Keverich

    I haven’t looked at numbers, and not have any special knowledge or expertise in this area.

    But as an intuitive guess, with the current development of the epidemic, the crisis could be already at the end of April, or perhapsby early May?

    (If there is not some Japanese good fortune, as in the latters’ country the development of the epidemic has suddenly paused for one month).

    Here is a reason to regret that it is not Soviet times: anti-epidemic policy is an area where the Soviet Union, from late 1960s onwards, was considered by international experts, to be the country in the world with the highest state capacity.

    In the context of respiratory infections, GP-5 gasmasks could have been distributed to all citizens in a few days, and the requirement mandated that you need to wear the gasmask to leave the home (thereby the only possibly route of infection would be by hands and surfaces). And perhaps total quarantine of Moscow from the rest of the country, like how Odessa in 1970 was surrounded by the army when it had chlorea, so that not a single soul could leave the city.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  82. @NazBolFren

    Russia needed Brtish boots in WW2 and still can’t produce enough. A Russian military supplier asked me for boots “like the British wore in the Falklands” in early 2014.

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  83. Dmitry says:
    @Dmitry

    (thereby the only possibly route of infection would be by hands and surfaces).

    Law that you wear GP-5 gasmasks whenever outside the home, or go to prison, would have mostly eliminated even that route of infection, as you cannot touch your eyes or mouth while wearing it. So even if you have a virus on your hands, you cannot infect your body with it while not breaking the law by removing your gask mask. Citizens would just need to wash their hands on entering their home, before removing the gas masks, remove clothes carefully and decontaminate clothes. It would be almost impossible for the epidemic to expand in such conditions.

    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
  84. @Dmitry

    GP-5 gasmasks

    A simple medical mask would suffice. lol How hard can it be?
    Why do have to do this the hard way?

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    , @Anatoly Karlin
  85. @Philip Owen

    Lend lease is an overblown meme.

    It only came into effect for the USSR near the end of 1942 after the front had stabilized. At it’s peak lend lease accounted for less than 20% of all soviet production and mostly consisted of food and trucks. In other words it was a drop in the bucket. Within 2 months all of the factories moving behind Soviet lines to the Urals they were working at peak production and within 6 months began to outproduce Germany.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    , @Korenchkin
  86. @NazBolFren

    Wikipedia source, terrific

    I am not talking about how they entered the war, I am talking about how their situation in 1917
    Their fighting capability was on parity with the Ottomans and Austrians and as it showed by the Civil War that followed there was still lot’s of fighting spirit left
    Things like the Brusilov offensive prove they were capable of organizing proper attacks

    And, again, had they done nothing but maintain their position in 1917 they would’ve eventually won as the Central Powers were already beyond drained at that point (Germany got a giant boost in morale and resources when Russia abandoned the war)

    NSDAP rose due to the Treaty of Versailles and Germany’s terms

    90% of Hilters rhetoric and propaganda was about a crusade against Judeo-Bolshevism, the main job of the Freikorps initially was to beat up Communist agitators who were backed by the USSR
    This created a state of almost anarchy within the already shaken Weimar Germany which allowed Hitler to seize total control

    Had Russia instead been a victorious nation, allied with France and both of them with soldiers on the borders of Germany (and without the massive purge of competent military staff) the Germans wouldn’t have been so eager to start another war

    The Tsar can be blamed for WW1. If the Tsar never supported Serbia

    Right, the Tsar is to blame, not the nation which initiated the conflict over Serbia agreeing only to 9 out of the 10 points of their ultimatum, all while knowing Germany, Russia and France would go at eachother
    And don’t pretend this was some sudden decision either, Conrad Von Hotzendorf was demanding war even back in 1912, he requested over 20 times for A-H to initiate hostilities against Serbia

    So essentially, the loss in WW1, the rise of the Soviet regieme, etc can be laid at the feet of the Tsar.

    Kerensky and the limpwristed liberals who sabotaged the Tsarist Government and then stood back and did nothing as the Bolsheviks started a violent coup are arguably far more guilty, not that you know anything about them Mr. Wikipedia

    You guys literally repeat memes and American propaganda

    Yes we are here debunking retarded myths about modern Russia and discussing how to best promote Russian interests because we’re consumers of American propaganda
    Don’t you ever get cognitive dissonance for regurgitating Soviet propaganda which even it’s own people ended up rejecting and widely supported replacing the Communist system (and before you try to pilpul I am talking about replacing the system, not dismantling the state into 15 pieces)

    Your sheer disregard for Russian lives, their Church and faith, their Centuries old royal family and their brave and noble efforts in the first World War to help out a tiny helpless ally is utterly disgusting, but it’s in tune with Bolshevik thinking (they were, after all, in large part not Russians)
    When you grow out of this retarded phase I hope you seriously reflect and understand how shameful and sociopathic the opinions you held were

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  87. I think they intended it to be a paid vacation, then realized it will be government it will have to pay for it, and they refused to pay for it.

    • Replies: @sudden death
  88. @Felix Keverich

    It all gives the impression that they were caught pants downs by the speed of shitstorm (mostly everybody in the world too) and now are just flailing rather aimlesly atm.

    Even hardcore putinist Markov is quite pesimistic now, predicts tenfold increase of infected in the next ten days:

    Эпидемия. Впереди катастрофа. В эти выходные, 28 и 29 марта произойдет резкий скачок заражения короновирусом в России….

    Posted by Sergey Markov on Friday, March 27, 2020

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
  89. @sudden death

    It’s the same complacency we have seen in every other country. Now Russian military is holding drills, preparing to lock down cities…Except Russia doesn’t print the world’s reserve currency, cannot be in lockdown for weeks/months.

    These people are not imbeciles – so how come the idea of universal mask usage does not occur to them? How long is it gonna take and how much our country is going to suffer before they stumble onto it?..Such a simple idea.

  90. Dmitry says:
    @Felix Keverich

    The problem is medical mask have little protection from the virus – a lot of the demand for them, is a psychological need (to feel some control), and to show altruism in public.

    The benefit of medical masks is that infected people wearing the mask, will have their sneezes and coughs blocked, so won’t project droplets as far in the air. It’s the same effect as covering your mouth with hands, when coughing/sneezing – although a bit better as it keeps hands from being covered with the virus from that. It reduces airborne infectivity of people wearing the mask in public, like someone covering their mouth with a scarf or hands when they cough.

    Another problem is many viruses – probably including this coronavirus – are transmitted via mucuous membrane surrounding the eyes. So eyes need to be sealed for particles smaller than 5 microns (around the size of smallest water droplets containing the virus in the air).

    On the other hand, GP-5 gasmasks was designed to protect the Soviet population in nuclear/chemical/biological war. Wearing it would eliminate any possibily of infection, while it is on, as it seals the face completely.

    (Unfortunately, although 600 million GP-5 gasmasks were produced in the USSR, filters expired many decades in the past and if used now could – due to disintegration in old age – release abestos).

  91. AP says:
    @NazBolFren

    Right and Ukranian sources are truth speakers, not that they have a vested interest in a Holodomor narrative

    No more than do Communists or Russian nationalists. Among non-Ukrainian, non-communist sources there is consensus that the famine killed millions and that it was articifical and man-made, but there are disagreemnts over whether it was targetted killings or not.

    Fact of the matter is, even Kazakhstan (who suffered more from the famine in terms of percentage of the population) does not recognize the Holodomor

    What Kazakhs do is irrelevant here. They are motivated to maintian friendly relations with Russia.

    “Nor did this happen in Tsarist-era droughts.”

    Really?

    Lets examine your claim that “hurr durr there were no droughts during Tsarist times”.

    Is “hurr durr” a term teenagers use?

    Better to learn how to read. Have an adult read to you, if it is difficult.

    Here your historical illiteracy combined with your inability to read.

    I wrote: “Nor did this happen in Tsarist-era droughts.” In clear reference to millions dying during a drought.

    “In the 17th century, Russia experienced the famine of 1601–1603, as a proportion of the population, believed to be its worst as it may have killed 2 million people (1/3 of the population). Major famines include the Great Famine of 1315–17, which affected much of Europe including part of Russia[2][3] as well as the Baltic states.[4] The Nikonian chronicle, written between 1127 and 1303, recorded no less than eleven famine years during that period.[5]

    In 1601 Russia was politically unstable and was ruled not by the Riurikid or Romanov Tsars but by elected tsar Boris Godunov.

    In 1932-1933 the Soviet Union was firmly under Communist rule.

    And there, of course, were no Tsars in the 1300s.

    It is very funny that you have to compare 20th century Communists to medieval times to get similar results. I guess in terms of feeding its own people, the Communists managed to set Russia back 700 years.

    One of the most serious crises before 1900 was the famine of 1891–92, which killed between 375,000 and 500,000 people, mainly due to famine-related diseases. Causes included a large Autumn drought resulting in crop failures.

    Good that you brought this up.

    In the 19th century the Russian Empire was much larger, yet its worst famine resulted in 375,000 to 500,000 deaths. In the 20th century, the Soviet Famine in a smaller territory resulted in 6 million to 12 million deaths.

    I guess that’s what happens when feeding capability reverts to 14th century level of competence in the 20th century.

    Mass deaths from famine is something commies just do. China and Ethiopia also had these problems.

    Ukraine 2014? Its been 6 years and Ukraine still can’t beat a bunch of Spetsnaz boys.

    After about 50 years the Soviets never captured all of Finland.

    A lot of people have this false belief that Finland won the Winter War, however that is quite far from the truth, and is quite the opposite.

    This same game can be played with Donbas also.

    These are the territories Finland lost, while avoiding occupation by Moscow:

    These are the territories Donbas lost, while avoiding occupation by Kiev:

    And Finns did it on their own, without massive assistance from the nearby great power.

    So Ukraine right after a revolution did better than did the Soviet Union under Stalin, in terms of territory gained or lost.

    Now of course, if we consider the entire “Novorossiya Project” from Odessa to Kharkiv, the magnitude of Ukriane’s success in comparson to that of Sovoks vs. little Finland becomes much larger.

    guy who repeats memes

    Again with the vocabulary of the teenage basement-dweller.

    LOL the Tsar was so incompetent that Germany defeated TWO Russian armies at the same time.

    Compare how far the Germans got inside Russia when Russia was ruled by the Tsar, with how far the Germans got inside Russia when it was ruled by Communists. And the death toll of Russians in the two wars.

    Your historical illiteracy is showing again.

    “Ottoman entry into the war opened up new opportunities, but Russia was much too hard pressed to take advantage of them…They failed very badly.”

    “Failed very badly:”

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
  92. @Korenchkin

    Wikipedia source, terrific

    Yup. Despite popular belief wikipedia is a great source and is in fact more accurate than the Encyclopedia Britannica. Moreover, everything stated in the article is cited, you can check for yourself.

    Oh wait, let me guess, you want to discredit wikipedia unless it supports your narrative. LOL

    I am not talking about how they entered the war, I am talking about how their situation in 1917

    It was just as shitty, except for the Brusilov Offensive, Russia still couldn’t defeat neither Austria nor Germany to win the war.

    Their fighting capability was on parity with the Ottomans and Austrians and as it showed by the Civil War that followed there was still lot’s of fighting spirit left
    Things like the Brusilov offensive prove they were capable of organizing proper attacks

    Shall we examine that statement?

    “The Brusilov offensive commanded by Brusilov himself went very well, but the overall campaign…became tremendously costly for the Imperial army, and after the offensive, it was no longer able to launch another on the same scale”

    “Many historians contend that the casualties that the Russian army suffered in this campaign contributed significantly to its collapse the following year”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brusilov_Offensive

    Sure the Brusilov offensive was well done, by one competent general. However, this is hardly an indication of improvement in the fighting capability of Russia as a whole. Despite success in the Brusilov Offensive, it was ultimately a pyrrhic victory because Russian forces lost so many men that they war-fatigue set in and the population on the home front clamored for the war to end.

    Wanna know something even funnier (and that supports my point) – Alexei Brusilov (who made the Brusilov Offensive) joined the Bolsheviks himself! It has to tell you something when Russia’s best general at the time hated the Tsar and his government! I guess he hates the Russian people too, eh. LOL. You’re a joke.

    “Despite his prominent role in the Imperial Russian Army, he ultimately joined with the Bolsheviks in the Russian Civil War and aided in the early organization of the Red Army”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksei_Brusilov

    90% of Hilters rhetoric and propaganda was about a crusade against Judeo-Bolshevism, the main job of the Freikorps initially was to beat up Communist agitators who were backed by the USSR
    This created a state of almost anarchy within the already shaken Weimar Germany which allowed Hitler to seize total control

    Had Russia instead been a victorious nation, allied with France and both of them with soldiers on the borders of Germany (and without the massive purge of competent military staff) the Germans wouldn’t have been so eager to start another war

    And yet Hitler closely associated with the USSR, going as far as to use the USSR to train his pilots.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipetsk_fighter-pilot_school

    Had Russia stayed in the war, WW2 would still have occured because just like France, Russian administration was incompetent and would have been tricked by brilliant Nazi tactics on the Rhine. Furthermore, had Russia stayed in the war revolution would still have occured as even Brusilov (as I demonstrated above) had revolutionary sympathies. Many people at that time hated the Tsar and wanted to give the little guys, the workers and the peasants an ability to express their voices. This is what the Bolshevik’s gave and part of the reason they succeeded.

    Right, the Tsar is to blame, not the nation which initiated the conflict over Serbia agreeing only to 9 out of the 10 points of their ultimatum, all while knowing Germany, Russia and France would go at eachother

    And don’t pretend this was some sudden decision either, Conrad Von Hotzendorf was demanding war even back in 1912, he requested over 20 times for A-H to initiate hostilities against Serbia

    Of course the Tsar is to blame. If the Tsar never supported Serbia, Austria-Hungary and Serbia would have had a limited war, Serbia would have lost and Europe would have gone on its merry way. It would have been a small scale conflict just like the many other conflicts that happened in Europe. But no, the Tsar had to drag Russia into the war (against the advice of his advisors) this activated the Entente alliance and brought the rest of Europe into the war.

    Yes we are here debunking retarded myths about modern Russia and discussing how to best promote Russian interests because we’re consumers of American propaganda

    Just because you debunk a few myths about modern Russia doesn’t mean you don’t subscribe to the globohomo view and support what is best for Russia.

    it’s own people ended up rejecting

    Did they? I think the 1991 referendum on preserving the Union begs to differ.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Soviet_Union_referendum

    If its own people hated the Union so much, why did >70% of the population vote to preserve the Union?

    Most people loved it. It’s only liars and revisionists like yourself, Karlin and AP that now that try to say otherwise.

    Your sheer disregard for Russian lives, their Church and faith, their Centuries old royal family and their brave and noble efforts in the first World War to help out a tiny helpless ally is utterly disgusting, but it’s in tune with Bolshevik thinking (they were, after all, in large part not Russians)

    LOL. Lets unpack this ridiculous statement shall we.

    Russian lives

    Whose lives? The lives of rich aristocrats and pomeshik’s who exploited the peasantry, took their wives and enslaved them? Of course I don’t support them.

    I support those who stood up for the weak, the disenfranchised, who allowed the Russian men and women to express themselves and developed their talent to make them (briefly) one of the greatest nations on earth.

    What’s funny is you pretend to be a patriot of Russia all while indirectly supporting slavery of the people through the figure of the Tsar and his people. Personally, I’d take death over slavery.

    Before you say that never happened, go read some Tolstoy – who wrote extensively about this.

    their Church

    LOOOL. Don’t get me started on Christianity. The Church (and Christianity) is one of the worst things that happened to the Russian people. It not only enslaved them (the reason that serfdom even came to be in Russia was thanks to the Church), but it is not even a Russian religion. It is a religion of Jewish desert people. How does the religion of Jewish desert people apply to Russians?

    Want to know the true religion of the Russian people? The religion that its own people developed and weren’t forced to adopt by numerous successions of Tsars? Paganism.

    Even after adopting Christianity, Knyaz Vladimir never bothered to convert the peasantry and so up until the time of Catherine, much of the peasantry practised paganism, believed in Svarog, Tajbog, Perun and others. Numerous Tsars before Catherine tried to convert the peasantry to Christianity but were often met with resistance and rebellion. Catherine came along and with true German efficiency embarked on systematic, forced conversions of the peasantry. It was either conversion or death. Moreover, she ordered many of the idols and any information regarding Russian paganism to be destroyed – this is why we know less about it than we do about Greco-Roman Paganism.

    You’re a fucking joke if you believe in the Church or if you think the Church is Russian or if it was beneficial to the Russian people.

    their Centuries old royal family

    This is getting only funnier LOOOL.

    Who cares about the royal family? It mostly consisted of incompetent administrators who hated their own people and culture (hence why the nobility generally had a fetish for France and French culture and why the Tsar’s residence in SPB is built as a miniature of the Palace of Versailles).

    brave and noble efforts in the first World War

    BAHAHA. They got stomped repeatedly by a nation fighting on three fronts and lost TWO whole armies that were already mobilized. They even lost on a surprise attack.

    Want to know one of the greatest offensives in human history, that was also done by the Russian people, by a Russian general and that did not exhaust lost steam or exhaust the Russian people?

    Operation Bagration.

    Further, the sacrifice and bravery of the Russian people in WW2 was the greatest example of mass bravery in World History. These qualities were brought out of the Russian people but one if its finest and greatest administrators.

    Bolshevik thinking (they were, after all, in large part not Russians)

    So are you claiming now that Brusilov was not Russian? What about the thousands of soldiers who fought for the RKKA? Are they also not Russian?

    LOL. The Bolshevik’s won precisely because the Russian people supported them.

    Notice, I said the people. Not the aristocracy. Not the nobility. The people. The Bolshevik movement may not have been started by Russians, but it certainly became a movement by the Russian people, for the Russian people. It finally enfranchised the people and gave them a stake in their own lives – something the Tsar and his system did not do.

    When you grow out of this retarded phase I hope you seriously reflect and understand how shameful and sociopathic the opinions you held were

    LOL I’m older than you think. But even if I am younger than you – how does it feel to have the shit kicked out of you intellectually by a younger man?

    Perhaps you really need to reassess your beliefs because you’ve swallowed a big dose of American propaganda. If you were transported back to Tsarist times you would quickly change your tune. Why? Because you’d probably be working on a farm for a Pomeschik who would treat you worse than cattle. Or work for a British industrialist in a Russian factory like slave labor. Or would die in one of the Tsars pointless wars.

    You wouldn’t have the life you have now. Because that came under the Soviets.

    • Replies: @Korenchkin
  93. Mr. Hack says:
    @AP

    I think that before you and Korenchkin dismantle Jr., he’ll have to seek refuge somewhere far, far away. 🙂

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  94. @AP

    No more than do Communists or Russian nationalists. Among non-Ukrainian, non-communist sources there is consensus that the famine killed millions and that it was articifical and man-made, but there are disagreemnts over whether it was targetted killings or not.

    Perhaps “non-Ukranians” who have this “consensus” (as I pointed out Kazakhstan does not support this consensus) had a vested interest to say this. Hmm, maybe they are Western and support America?

    What Kazakhs do is irrelevant here. They are motivated to maintian friendly relations with Russia.

    And Ukraine is motivated to say that the famine was man-made/targetted killings to maintain good relations with the US.

    Also, its supports my point that there is no ‘consensus’.

    Is “hurr durr” a term teenagers use?

    Better to learn how to read. Have an adult read to you, if it is difficult.

    Here your historical illiteracy combined with your inability to read.

    I wrote: “Nor did this happen in Tsarist-era droughts.” In clear reference to millions dying during a drought.

    “Hurr durr” is a term Ukranians use. I just make fun of them.

    LOOL cute how you don’t understand logic very well and then ignore the link I sent you regarding famine during Tsarist times.

    Let me repost it again:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_famine_of_1891%E2%80%9392

    Did Tsardom not exist in 1892?

    You said there was no famines during Tsarist times. All I have to do is present one to disprove the point.

    In the 19th century the Russian Empire was much larger, yet its worst famine resulted in 375,000 to 500,000 deaths. In the 20th century, the Soviet Famine in a smaller territory resulted in 6 million to 12 million deaths.

    I guess that’s what happens when feeding capability reverts to 14th century level of competence in the 20th century.

    Mass deaths from famine is something commies just do. China and Ethiopia also had these problems.

    Tsarist Russia never underwent three devestating wars on its own territory or had to rapidly industralize. In fact Tsarist russia just continued in its mediocrity using Agricultural techniques from the 13th century well into the late 1800’s.

    Further, the people were enslaved and forced to work for wealthy Pomeschik’s who treated them worse than Black slaves in cotton plantations in America.

    Go read your Tolstoy kiddo – he wrote much about this.

    After about 50 years the Soviets never captured all of Finland.

    That wasn’t the point of the Russo-Finnish war you idiot. It was to provide a buffer between Leningrad and Finland, from where Soviet high command imagined an attack on Leningrad to come. They also didn’t want to rely on the Baltic sea to reach Leningrad in case of attack (which turned out to be a wise decision) – and in these objectives the Soviets succeeded marvelously.

    And Finns did it on their own, without massive assistance from the nearby great power.

    So Ukraine right after a revolution did better than did the Soviet Union under Stalin, in terms of territory gained or lost.

    Now of course, if we consider the entire “Novorossiya Project” from Odessa to Kharkiv, the magnitude of Ukriane’s success in comparson to that of Sovoks vs. little Finland becomes much larger.

    Finland was under Total War – with almost the entire Finnish population participating against the war with the Soviets.

    The ENTIRE Ukrainian Army can’t defeat a few Spetsnaz boys for 6 years. Not only that, they’re so incompetent they manage to get surrounded and a big portion of their force destroyed by these same few Spetsnaz boys at Debaltsovo. Not to mention most of the territory Ukraine “captures” is the Spetsnaz boys giving up themselves because they can’t hold it due to lack of people.

    Now of course if we consider, what a bumbling failure Ukraine is – its failure is further compounded by the fact that no amount of American training or arms could defeat a few Spetsnaz boys. Also, isn’t it interesting how the American weapons that Ukraine recieves always end up in the hands of the Donbass seperatists?

    I’d say Ukraine was better off under Soviet rule given how comically incompetent it is.

    Again with the vocabulary of the teenage basement-dweller.

    Ok Boomer.

    Compare how far the Germans got inside Russia when Russia was ruled by the Tsar, with how far the Germans got inside Russia when it was ruled by Communists. And the death toll of Russians in the two wars.

    The Germans did pretty shitty against a nation entirely unprepared for war, that had just undergone a purge of its officer corps and was in the middle of a major rearmament and restructuring project.

    If the Communist leadership was so incompetent why did it wage one of the greatest military offensives in human history (that did not run out of steam or exhaust the country like the Brusilov Offensive did)?

    I suggest you do some reading.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Bagration

    Lets comapre how well Napoleon Bonaparte did against a prepared Tsarist army. The Tsarist Army was so incompetent that the one time they faced Napoleon at Borodino they got crushed.

    Try again kiddo.

    • Replies: @AP
  95. @Mr. Hack

    So far i’m dismantling them. Especially Korenchkin.

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
  96. Mr. Hack says:
    @NazBolFren

    So far, you’re making it interesting, I’ll grant you that much. But your two adversaries have stubbed their toes already on similar “hot shots” before and come out on top. We’ll see how you’re doing in rounds 11 – 12? This could be a long one…

  97. @NazBolFren

    Nothing to do with LEnd LEase that was a US scheme. The Matildas and Valentines were defending Moscow in December 1941. 1/3 of all the tanks available. Churchill diverted shiploads of Valentines to the USSR in June 1941 no questions asked. 3000 Hurricaines were sent too during the whole war. Who cares about 1943. We saved your arses in 1941. Mostly by destroying teh Luftawaffe in 1940 while the Nazis were still fellow socialists who wanted their own share of Poland.

    Britain started to outproduce Germany in tanks, planes and ships in 1940. German submarine production stayed ahead. The ussr never matched Germany in ships or submarines. No heavy bombers either.

    It was agreed that USSR produced weapons and received logistics equipment. Soviet logistics was appalling and remained so throughout the war.

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  98. @AP

    Compare how far the Germans got inside Russia when Russia was ruled by the Tsar, with how far the Germans got inside Russia when it was ruled by Communists.

    This is kind of irrelevant considering how WW2 ended.

  99. @Felix Keverich

    Yes, many companies are openly flouting it, even to the extent of posting on social media about it. There needs to be a well publicized arrest or two.

    • Replies: @anonymous coward
  100. @Felix Keverich

    Why do have to do this the hard way?

    Enforced Stalker/Metro 2033 aesthetics.

  101. AP says:
    @NazBolFren

    “No more than do Communists or Russian nationalists. Among non-Ukrainian, non-communist sources there is consensus that the famine killed millions and that it was articifical and man-made, but there are disagreemnts over whether it was targetted killings or not.”

    Perhaps “non-Ukranians” who have this “consensus” (as I pointed out Kazakhstan does not support this consensus) had a vested interest to say this. Hmm, maybe they are Western and support America?

    You demonstrate your trouble reading again. Didn’t I ask you to have your parents read to you?

    Again:

    The consensus is that the famine that killed 6-12 million people in the USSR in the early 1930s was artificial and the result of disastrous Soviet policies.

    The controversy is whether it was a deliberate policy that targeted Ukrainians (as Ukrainian nationalists and others claim), or gross incompetence combined with deliberate refusal to apply measures that would end it. The latter is that conclusion of the source that you yourself posted.

    So either way, it was artificial.

    Also, its supports my point that there is no ‘consensus’.

    No, and if you could read you wouldn’t write that.

    Let me repost it again:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_famine_of_1891%E2%80%9392

    Did Tsardom not exist in 1892?

    You said there was no famines during Tsarist times. All I have to do is present one to disprove the point.

    I certainly did not. But you can’t read.

    I wrote there was no famine on the Soviet scale, that killed millions of people, under Tsarist times.

    The famine under the Tsar in 1892 killed 375,00-500,00 people.

    The famine under the Soviets, in 1932-1933, killed 6-12 million people.

    Tsarist Russia never underwent three devestating wars on its own territory or had to rapidly industralize.

    1932-1933, when 6-12 million Soviets died, was ten years after a war ended.

    Non-Soviet countries managed to industrialize without killing 6-12 million people.

    But thanks for acknowledging that the deaths of 6-12 million people were caused by deliberate, unnatural policy (industrialization).

    Further, the people were enslaved and forced to work for wealthy Pomeschik’s who treated them worse than Black slaves in cotton plantations in America.

    Under Soviets free peasants were starved to death and forced to become slaves to collective farms.

    After about 50 years the Soviets never captured all of Finland.

    That wasn’t the point of the Russo-Finnish war

    You can rationalize all you want. The fact is that the Soviets in 1939 took a far smaller percentage of Finland than Ukraine did of Donbas in 2014.

    Finland was under Total War – with almost the entire Finnish population participating against the war with the Soviets.

    The ENTIRE Ukrainian Army can’t defeat a few Spetsnaz boys for 6 years.

    Neither Ukraine nor Donbas have been under total war.

    However, the entire Soviet army never took Finland after 50 years. It just sat on the 10% of whatever it took. As Ukraine sits on Mariupol, Slovyansk, and the 30% of Donbas it took in 2014.

    Not to mention most of the territory Ukraine “captures” is the Spetsnaz boys giving up themselves because they can’t hold it due to lack of people.

    Rather, they went to hide among large numbers of civilians, abandoning areas where they were exposed.

    I’d say Ukraine was better off under Soviet rule given how comically incompetent it is.

    Losing population to work abroad is better than losing population to starvation and execution.

    Again with the vocabulary of the teenage basement-dweller.

    Ok Boomer.

    Whatever. I am not a boomer but you should ask your boomer parents to read to you now that you are home from school and they are home from work.

    Compare how far the Germans got inside Russia when Russia was ruled by the Tsar, with how far the Germans got inside Russia when it was ruled by Communists. And the death toll of Russians in the two wars.

    The Germans did pretty shitty against a nation entirely unprepared for war, that had just undergone a purge of its officer corps and was in the middle of a major rearmament and restructuring project.

    Well, let’s review history.

    In World War I the Germans grabbed Poland and some of the Baltics from the Tsar. About 4.2 million Russians died.

    In World War II the Germans got all the way to Moscow and St. Petersburg and killed about 27 million Soviets.

    In World War I the German Empire + Austria-Hungary + Ottoman Empire which the Russians were fighting had a total of 149 million people, vs. the Russian Empire with about 172 million people.

    In World War II Germany + Hungary + Romania who invaded the USSR had 108 million people vs. the Soviet Union which had 168 million people.

    If the Communist leadership was so incompetent why did it wage one of the greatest military offensives in human history

    Lost more people than did the enemy. So “greatest” in terms of lives lost certainly.

    I suggest you do some reading.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Bagration

    Good one.

    From the wiki article.

    Casualties: Germany 450,000; Soviets 770,000.

    It’s not surprising that a much smaller Germany eventually lost to the Soviets. It is shocking that the incompetent Soviets took so many years to win, at such a huge cost.

    The Tsarist Army was so incompetent that the one time they faced Napoleon at Borodino they got crushed.

    Wikipedia is less enthusiastic. But then, we already know that you can’t read:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Borodino

    “Although the Battle of Borodino can be seen as a victory for Napoleon, some scholars and contemporaries described Borodino as a Pyrrhic victory.”

    Numbers of casualties was close.

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  102. @Philip Owen

    Absolutely and categorically false.

    The Soviets weren’t very concerned with German bombing due to a difference in military doctrine. Like modern Russia, they focused mainly on production of AA guns and systems. Also, 3000 Hurricanes was nothing in the grand scheme of the war effort on the Eastern Front.

    Britain may have outproduced Germany in 1940, but that was largely irrelevant to the war effort given that 75%-80% of the German military machine was on the Eastern Front, and beyond North Africa, Britain never came into contact with Germany’s best troops and commanders.

    Further, the Luftwaffe was destroyed by the Soviet Union, not the RAF.

    https://orientalreview.org/2019/06/10/germany-was-defeated-on-the-eastern-front-not-normandy-2/

    Finally, you may be right about logistics of the Red Army being atrocious during the start of the war. However, one must note that at the start of the war, the Red Army was undergoing a significant restructuring which had not ended after the Winter War.

    Not all of the reforms had been completed by the time Germans initiated Operation Barbarossa 15 months later.[198]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War#Soviet_Union

    However, keep in mind at that time there was also TWO factions within the Red Army – one was headed by Rygachov and Pavlov and the other by Zhukov. Zhukov eventually won out and there was a MASSIVE improvement in quality and logistical standards to the point where some claim that by the end of the War, the Red Army was the best in the World.

  103. @AP

    You demonstrate your trouble reading again. Didn’t I ask you to have your parents read to you?

    Again:

    The consensus is that the famine that killed 6-12 million people in the USSR in the early 1930s was artificial and the result of disastrous Soviet policies.

    The controversy is whether it was a deliberate policy that targeted Ukrainians (as Ukrainian nationalists and others claim), or gross incompetence combined with deliberate refusal to apply measures that would end it. The latter is that conclusion of the source that you yourself posted.

    So either way, it was artificial.

    LOL you must be pulling numbers out of your ass because a quick google search gives everything from 300,000-6 million deaths. No where near the 6 million to 12 million people killed. That’s almost like saying that Stalin personally shot 30 million people. There is no consensus.

    Further, much of these ‘numbers’ claiming deaths of 6-12 million were invented. Even Conquest himself stated he lacked documents to specifically verify the numbers. Moreover, some call the entire premise of the work into question as it was written during the Cold War with Conquest adopting (by his own admission) the Ukranian exiles world view.

    Finally, why are we trying to condemn the Soviet Union (which was a pioneer in many ways) on only one aspect, rather than looking at Tsarism from many aspects.

    For example, if the Tsarist regieme was so great, why were there a minimum of 50 rebellions just in the 19th Century (and hundreds throughout the history of Imperial Russia). A great example of this is Pugachev’s Rebellion.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pugachev%27s_Rebellion

    “There were various pressures on Russian serfs during the 18th century, which induced them to follow Pugachev. The peasantry in Russia were no longer bound to the land, but tied to their owner. The connecting links that had existed between the peasant community and the tsar, which had been diminishing, was broken by the interposition of the serf owners; these private lords or agents of the Church or state who owned the land blocked serfs’ access to the political authority. Many nobles returned to their estates after 1762 and imposed harsher rules on their peasants. The relationship between peasant and ruler was cut off most dramatically in the decree of 1767, which completely prohibited direct petitions to the empress from the peasantry. The peasants were also subject to an increase in indirect taxes due to the increase in the state’s requirements. In addition, a strong inflationary trend resulted in higher prices on all goods.[4] The peasants felt abandoned by the “modern” state.[5] They were living in desperate circumstances and had no way to change their situation, having lost all possibilities for political redress.”

    “There were natural disasters in Russia during the 18th century, which also added strain on the peasants. Frequent recurrence of crop failures, plagues and epidemics created economic and social instability. The most dramatic was the 1771 epidemic in Moscow, which brought to the surface all the unconscious and unfocused fears and panics of the populace.[6]”

    “Each ruler altered the position of the Church, which created more pressure. Peter the Great gave the Church new obligations, while its administration assimilated to a department of the secular state. The Church’s resources, or the means of collection, could not meet the new obligations and as a consequence, they heavily exploited and poorly administered their serfs. The unrest spurred constant revolt among Church serfs.[7]”

    The Serfs hated the Church for exploiting them, they hated the Tsars (that’s why they escaped to Cossack held land when the could), they had no political redress, and were abused worse than blacks on American Plantations.

    Further, not only were Serf (Russian people) treated like poorly, they were further degraded by being sold and mortaged like Cattle by the Nobility

    “Most Russian Nobles… preferred to mortgage serfs for profit. In 1820, 20% of all serfs were mortgaged to state credit institutions by their owners. This was increased to 66% in 1859.[18]”

    “The official estimate is that 10.5 million Russians were privately owned, 9.5 million were in state ownership”

    By some accounts there were between 10 million and 20 million people owned as slaves in Russia.

    When you tell me how great agriculture was under the Tsars, it wasn’t that the agriculture was great it was that you don’t want your possession to break (ie die), similar to how you take care of your car so it doesn’t break and you don’t waste money on buying a new one.

    Given that this is true, its hard to fault the Soviets for collectivization, for at least they didn’t own the people working the farms – they could have gone to the city to work in factories or got an educaiton as many did.

    “One particular source of indignation in Europe was Kolokol published in London, England (1857–65) and Geneva (1865–67). It collected many cases of horrendous physical, emotional and sexual abuse of the serfs by the landowners.””

    Before you go telling me how kind Pomeschik’s were to their peasants and that ‘it was not like that’ or whatever tripe you come up with, there are multiple sources of excesses of Pomeschik’s against peasantry. This stopped with the Soviet regieme.

    “These policies failed to aid famines in the early nineteenth century due to estate owner negligence.[16]”

    Further, we focus on one famine by the Soviet regieme but there were many minor famines throughout the history of the Empire that got so bad even the Empress Catherine had to implement laws to protect against – but they didn’t help.

    I haven’t bothered to research them (writing a post takes enough time as it is, but there were hundreds of mini famines throughout the Time of the Tsars that when added together would surpass the ’38 famine)

    “European philosophers during the Age of Enlightenment criticized serfdom and compared it to medieval labor practices which were almost non-existent in the rest of continent.”

    Finally, serfdom had already been abandoned by most of the European powers by the time Tsar Alexander even considered abolishing it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serfdom_in_Russia

    Generally speaking the practise of serfdom meant that Russia was far behind the Western Powers in terms of development and industrialization. So when Karlin (or others) claim that Russia was growing at 8% per year (doubtful statistic) but even if taken to be true, is not the result of effective Tsarist administration but rather a result of having no starting base whatsoever.

    Neither Ukraine nor Donbas have been under total war.

    However, the entire Soviet army never took Finland after 50 years. It just sat on the 10% of whatever it took. As Ukraine sits on Mariupol, Slovyansk, and the 30% of Donbas it took in 2014.

    So you’re saying that since 2014, Ukraine hasn’t been able to do anything against a few Spetsnaz Boys (TM). What a paragon of competence! LOL

    Ukriane never fought against Donbass in Total War, but nonetheless the full might of the Ukranian Army could not defeat a few Spetsnaz Boys (TM) since 2014.

    You can rationalize however you want – Ukraine still lost both Donetsk and Lugansk (and Crimea) to a few Spetsnaz boys, who not only managed to destroy a large Ukranian Force at Debaltseve but also fought them to a standstill for 6 years.

    And as previous offensives by Spetsnaz Boys (TM) show, they could retake that territory if they wanted – but they are currently content with sitting on Donetsk.

    Rather, they went to hide among large numbers of civilians, abandoning areas where they were exposed.

    Sounds like good tactics for guerilla fighters – when confronted by a force with overwhelming number.

    Also, don’t these tactics sound familiar? I wonder who used them – oh yeah! They were the favorite tactic of UPA and various bandera supporters since WW2. Can’t be angry when they use your own favorite tactic against you!

    Whatever. I am not a boomer but you should ask your boomer parents to read to you now that you are home from school and they are home from work.

    You sure sound like a Boomer. Keep Booming boomer.

    Well, let’s review history.

    In World War I the Germans grabbed Poland and some of the Baltics from the Tsar. About 4.2 million Russians died.

    In World War II Germany + Hungary + Romania who invaded the USSR had 108 million people vs. the Soviet Union which had 168 million people.

    Shall we continue this lesson in history? Also, you happen to be very selective in what battles you pick.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgy_Zhukov#Khalkhin_Gol

    Zhukov perfected the tactics that would prove effective against the Germans and broke the back of Japanese Imperial might in China. The Soviet Army showed great effectiveness in this campaign.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_Manchuria

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland

    In the Invasion of Poland the Soviets lost 3000 men and took 300,000 prisoner. Good odds I’d say.

    In World War II the Germans got all the way to Moscow and St. Petersburg and killed about 27 million Soviets.

    In World War I the German Empire + Austria-Hungary + Ottoman Empire which the Russians were fighting had a total of 149 million people, vs. the Russian Empire with about 172 million people.

    LOL. That is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard.

    Not only are you conflating populations, you are also comparing German military deaths to Soviet military and civilian deaths. All I can say is you’re a fucking egregious liar that only discredits himself.

    Looking at strictly military numbers, Germany lost between 5-10 million soldiers. The Soviet Union lost between 8-10 million. The rest of the deaths were civilians.

    In World War I, Austro-Hungarians/Germans/etc weren’t out to exterminate Russians and do everything they could (from pressing young women into sexual slavery on the Eastern Front https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_camp_brothels_in_World_War_II) to destroy the people, so it was mostly military deaths.

    Just to demonstrate how different conditions were during World War 1 and 2.

    “in the city of Smolensk the German Command opened a brothel for officers in one of the hotels into which hundreds of women and girls were driven; they were mercilessly dragged down the street by their arms and hair.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_military_brothels_in_World_War_II

    Lost more people than did the enemy. So “greatest” in terms of lives lost certainly.

    LOL you’re an idiot.

    There is more to victory than casuality counts. Not only is it easier to defend entrenched positions but as any commander worth his salt knows its not the casualties that count but the consequences of the operation.

    And amongst historian’s there’s a consensus that Operation Bagration was one of the greatest operations in terms of scale, achieving strategic objectives and the amount of territory captured. BTW same with the Winter War.

    But nice try though. Nice try.

    ——————————————————————————————————————-

    So basically, we can state with certainty that you’re a liar that intentionally misrepresents facts. We can safely discredit everything else you wrote too.

    • Replies: @Korenchkin
    , @AP
  104. @NazBolFren

    You are Dunning–Kruger incarnate
    Every Russian should read this sociopathic internet smartass post, it’s like an antidote to Sovok-ism

    • LOL: NazBolFren
    • Replies: @Mikhail
  105. @NazBolFren

    Lend lease is an overblown meme.

    Zhukov didn’t think so

  106. @NazBolFren

    For example, if the Tsarist regieme was so great, why were there a minimum of 50 rebellions just in the 19th Century

    Because the Tsarist regime instead of sending political dissidents to the gallows, like normal states, instead sent them to vacations in Siberia, Stalin escaped from exile like, what, 5 times?
    Trotsky should’ve gotten a pickaxe in the head the first time he got arrested.
    The reason the Soviet Union didn’t have rebellions was because attempting to organize such a thing would likely lead you to an early death from penal labour exhaustion or bullet to the head

    The Tsarists were also lazy in hunting down foreign subversives supplied and funded by hostile states to sabotage Russia, like Lenin

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  107. Yevardian says:
    @Brabantian

    Extremely based and powerful take.

  108. @Korenchkin

    Because the Tsarist regime instead of sending political dissidents to the gallows, like normal states, instead sent them to vacations in Siberia, Stalin escaped from exile like, what, 5 times?

    This is hilarious. You just contradicted yourself.

    First you blame the Soviets for executing dissidents.

    Then you say that the Tsarist regieme should have done the same thing.

    Where is your vaunted ‘muh hoooman lyfe!11!’ meme you were spouting earlier? Why can the Tsarist government execute political dissidents and not the Soviet one?

    Further, these weren’t political dissidents but peasants revolting against terrible conditions. But nice try.

    You have utterly no consistency in your position.

    Which just proves you are a soft mushy turd that stands for nothing, just like the Liberals you claim to oppose.

    You are Dunning–Kruger incarnate
    Every Russian should read this sociopathic internet smartass post, it’s like an antidote to Sovok-ism

    LOL. Is this the best you can do? This is hilarious.

    So Wikipedia is now Sovok? Nice to know that the KGB was able to penetrate so deep into Western Life while at the same time not existing. That’s some psy-ops shit right there.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    , @Korenchkin
  109. @Mikhail

    He thinks like one. He’s a sovok in disguise. Be careful

    Is he KGB?

  110. Mikhail says: • Website
    @NazBolFren

    Plenty of sovok influenced stuff about Russia in Western mainstream institutions.

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  111. @Mikhail

    Is that so?

    Last I checked the news (which was 5 minutes ago), the West shits on Russia for being “Putin’s dictatorship” or some shit.

    Open any Western mainstream article about Russia…

    The fact that I have to explain this to you, boggles my mind

  112. @NazBolFren

    You just contradicted yourself.

    There is a world of difference in arresting, imprisoning and executing terrorists and saboteurs and the mass terror of the USSR, especially since if the Tsarists were a little harsher tens of millions of lives could’ve been saved
    When dealing with these types of figures exceptions have to be made
    You are denying the needless mass executions, famines and various other acts of murder that obviously happened during the first half of the USSRs existence
    The ends did not end up justifying the means as the USSR is now gone and the descendants of it’s leaders all live in the states of it’s sworn enemies

    So Wikipedia is now Sovok

    You are literally inventing claims I never made out of thin air, it is impossible to have a discussion with you
    Wikipedias quality is questionable to anyone who has a brain and looks into who edits the articles and how, and I do not understand how you can treat it as a perfectly honest source when it contradicts your claims about the nature of the USSR and the events that transpired within it

    I am seriously tired of this juvenile leftist nonsense, showing no interest in reading anything linked or conceding on any point no matter how obviously false
    AP can waste his time debating your fantasy straight-space-communist empire that was the best at everything and then fell apart when they allowed people to speak openly, I won’t

    • Replies: @NazBolFren
  113. @Korenchkin

    There is a world of difference in arresting, imprisoning and executing terrorists and saboteurs and the mass terror of the USSR, especially since if the Tsarists were a little harsher tens of millions of lives could’ve been saved

    We’ve established that there is no guarantee that TENS OF MILLIONS of lives could’ve been saved. These are your delusions.

    Further, there is no difference between a peasant rising in revolt against oppression by his Pomeschik and a man starting a revolution (like Lenin). How do you tell the difference between them anyway without having the benefit of hindsight?

    If things were so great under the Tsar’s do you think the Peasants would’ve followed along with a Revolution or supported one? Do you think the likes of Brusilov would’ve supported it and even wrote letters to his fellow officers trying to convince them to join the Bolshevik cause?

    When dealing with these types of figures exceptions have to be made

    So what you’re saying is exceptions should be made for people YOU like and people you don’t like should be hanged?

    So much for moral consistency

    You are denying the needless mass executions, famines and various other acts of murder that obviously happened during the first half of the USSRs existence

    What about the slavery of tens of millions of Russians to rich landowners, their systematic abuse both physical and sexual, their exploitation, having them sent to die in the Tsar’s pointless wars without a choice?

    Do you deny that? Or are you gonna keep claiming that these facts are “sovok inventions”? Maybe Wikipedia is a “sovok” invention too?

    USSR made mistakes. These are inevitable in a new, inexperienced country. But what it also achieved is remarkable as well – yet you choose to ignore that bc you are intellectually dishonest and because you are a beta mushy turd.

    The ends did not end up justifying the means as the USSR is now gone and the descendants of it’s leaders all live in the states of it’s sworn enemies

    The USSR got betrayed by men such as you – meaning that thanks to people such as you the descendents of these leaders live in the states of its sworn enemies.

    Imperial Russia and the slavery of millions of its citizens is also dead. And we should celebrate this.

    You are literally inventing claims I never made out of thin air, it is impossible to have a discussion with you

    No. I’m just taking your position to its logical conclusion.

    Wikipedias quality is questionable to anyone who has a brain and looks into who edits the articles and how, and I do not understand how you can treat it as a perfectly honest source when it contradicts your claims about the nature of the USSR and the events that transpired within it

    Wikipedia is sourced if you scroll to the bottom of the article. And it has a strong moderation team that ensures no stupid edits are made. You are stuck in a late-2000’s mentality where this may have been so. No more.

    “You can even, if you’re so minded, be mischievous or downright malicious with Wikipedia. Want to send comics fans into a tailspin by editing that Justice League of America page to replace all the DC comics characters with superheroes published by rival company Marvel? Go right ahead.

    “It’ll probably last an hour at the most,” says John Lubbock, communications coordinator at Wikimedia UK. “We get this sort of vandalism of pages quite frequently but someone will be along to delete it and put the page back to how it was.””

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/wikipedia-explained-what-is-it-trustworthy-how-work-wikimedia-2030-a8213446.html

    Further, if you don’t like Wikipedia you can always do your own research, but Wikipedia is a good starting place.

    Finally, due to the nature of the war between the West and the USSR, I don’t trust Western (or even Soviet sources about it). Same as I don’t trust Western sources about Nazi Germany. I look for neutral sources or compile my information from multiple diverging sources – as I suggest you do too.

    I am seriously tired of this juvenile leftist nonsense, showing no interest in reading anything linked or conceding on any point no matter how obviously false

    LOL. Are you talking about yourself?

    Cuz you’ve linked me nothing and clearly have not read any of my links – stubbornly insisting on your position

    best at everything and then fell apart when they allowed people to speak openly, I won’t

    Now you’re lying and misrepresenting facts. Where did I say that?

    Also I clearly linked you a referendum that shows your statement to be a lie – you chose to ignore it. That’s on you, not me.

    • Replies: @Jatt Arya
  114. Mr. Hack says:

    Round three:

    Junior- 6
    Korenchkin – 5

    Very close and a lot of interesting jabs being taken, with one solid punch to the head by Junior having pointed out that the peasants were disloyal to the Crown having received little value in return for their lot and ready to jump ship at the drop of a dime (not a fair social contract).

    AP – 7
    Junior -4

    AP holding his own and then some in the jab department by backing his posture with solid number presentations. Also, scores one serious blow to the head demonstrating how the 1932 famine was not close to comparable to the minor famines in medieval Russia.

    All in all two good contests with a lot of time to go, but will the young challenger have the stamina to keep it up against two experienced opponents for the whole 12 rounds? A lot depends on how the two savvy champions of the past come out in round 4. 🙂

  115. Jatt Arya says:
    @NazBolFren

    Turkey is part of the Homosphere just like the Americans are||

    Anything to read on these 2 different factions?

    Also be consistent in anti-christcuckery.

    Communism is also christcuckery without talking about jeebus all the time||

    Tsar liked Sikhs while USSR hated them and asked Indira to attack||
    Tsar thought Afghans were kewl, USSR destroyed itself against the Hindu Kush||

    Stop Cow Slaughter, beyond that Communist, Christian neither have caste or patriarchy, looks same to me|| Spengler agreed. If you’re really Pagang then state it openly. U got discord lot of Russian Nazbol & Rodnovor whod wanna talk to you, make an anon one if u want Idc.

  116. Jatt Arya says:

    IOW, christians will support Tsar and out of closet fags will support USSR.
    Actual Russians sit on side with Vodka and popcorn||
    Russia is pursuing Dharmic discourse instead of any of the above:

    European thinkers in the 17th century proposed that it was God who endowed humans with inviolable rights. Once the idea became sufficiently entrenched in the European mind to be regarded as common-sense, then the discourse of human rights could continue in the liberal-humanist tradition even without the need for a God.

    The matter cannot end there for if the man will not uphold the rights of his son then someone else needs to do it. In a modern society, that is the role played by the state through a social security infrastructure of workers and orphanages. The son will have to be put in their custody so that his rights are guaranteed. This not only imposes a welfare cost but also demands that the state exact violence for the defence of rights. Here the violence occurs in the separation of the son from his family.

    Create separate spaces for different communities and allow each community to practice their weird customs in their own space. This creates the problem of socio-political fragmentation but it eschews violence against the customs of the community. In this example, the discourse of dharma does not cause a break up of the family.

    https://satyanrtam.wordpress.com/2017/02/20/language-and-discourse-why-the-issue-is-not-merely-about-sanskrit-or-english/

    Caste mixing and violence to break up family? Nyet.

  117. Jatt Arya says:

    Many people at that time hated the Tsar and wanted to give the little guys, the workers and the peasants an ability to express their voices. This is what the Bolshevik’s gave and part of the reason they succeeded.
    If the Tsar never supported Serbia, Austria-Hungary and Serbia would have had a limited war, Serbia would have lost and Europe would have gone on its merry way.

    ——
    The individual as anterior to society is the basis of all modernity, ultimately rooted in post Westphalian Christian thought (or even prior). Your rhetoric sounds no different than liberal democracy propoganda.
    https://www.counter-currents.com/2017/06/the-genetic-limits-of-social-mobility/
    https://www.unz.com/jman/no-you-dont-have-free-will-and-this-is-why/

    Give weapons to the poor if you want to liberate them, not “rights” “gulags” “firing squads”

    The Soviet System benefited the same (((Managerial))) class ruling the Homosphere.
    https://evolutionistx.wordpress.com/2020/02/10/fighting-the-bureaucracy/

    If you want to stop thottery then support patriarchy, moralizing has never worked||
    No good king abandons an ally||

    The late 19th C, Victorianism, demonstrated emancipated women = women giving birth in a dark alley to bastards.
    Victorianism was an effort to control this by dialing sexual moralizing to eleven, while denying fathers the power to control their daughters and husbands their wives; this failed spectacularly. No amount of moralizing can replace the stick or the sword, not in the bedroom or the boardroom.

    https://blog.jim.com/culture/emancipation-of-women-was-a-fitness-test-that-we-failed/

    https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/Bavarian_Marriage_Customs,_Laws,_and_Trends_of_Illegitimacy

    About 1750, in every European nation for which we have statistics, rates of illegitimacy began to rise. The increase was initially slow, but by the early decades of the nineteenth century the rise was dramatic. By 1850 in some regions, the number of out-of-wedlock births outnumbered births in wedlock. The number of pre-nuptial conceptions also increased sharply during the period.

  118. @128

    Why do you need lockdown measures for places like rural Yakutia, Primorsky, and the Kamchatka?

    I don’t think putting Yakutia into lockdown would be any different from how it already is.

    Primorsky Krai and Kamchatka have very short trade links to China, however.

  119. @Anatoly Karlin

    Yes, many companies are openly flouting it, even to the extent of posting on social media about it. There needs to be a well publicized arrest or two.

    No, because the President can’t order an official holiday through presidential decree.

    A holiday becomes an official day off only if a federal law is passed, which didn’t happen.

    So the decree is only valid for those people who directly report to the President – government bureaucrats and state-owned corporations, basically.

    And even then, those who work remotely (e.g., schools) are continuing to do that, they don’t get a school holiday so that kids start wandering outside out of boredom.

  120. AP says:
    @NazBolFren

    LOL you must be pulling numbers out of your ass because a quick google search gives everything from 300,000-6 million deaths. No where near the 6 million to 12 million people killed.

    Again you demonstrate that you can’t read. Perhaps you need some Ritalin?

    I wrote: “The consensus is that the famine that killed 6-12 million people in the USSR in the early 1930s was artificial and the result of disastrous Soviet policies..”

    Your favorite source wikipedia:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1932%E2%80%9333

    Has a range of 5.5 million to 8.5 million.

    Russian state duma estimated 7 million starved to death.

    12 million was too high, but an estimated 7 million is probably reasonable.

    So in the 20th century, under peacetime conditions, the Soviets starved to death 7 million people.

    In comparison, under the Tsar, 375,000-500,000 starved to death in the 19th century. So the high estimate for Tsar-era famine was 14 times lower than what occurred under incompetent Soviets.

    Further, much of these ‘numbers’ claiming deaths of 6-12 million were invented.

    No, Soviet archives were opened up. They disproved the really high numbers like 20 million but support the 5.5 million to 8.5 million range according to wiki.

    For example, if the Tsarist regieme was so great, why were there a minimum of 50 rebellions just in the 19th Century

    There were probably more than that after the Bolshevik Revolution. Bolsheviks even used poison gas against Russian peasants in the Tambov rebellion of 1920-1921:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tambov_Rebellion

    And then of course mass desertions when the Germans came, and greeting Germans as liberators.

    The Romanovs lasted over 300 years. The Soviet people overthrew Communist rule after only 70.

    It’s great that you have to go back to the 18th century serfdom to try to find something that was as bad as Soviet collective farms in the 20th century 🙂

    Elsewhere in the world rural white people were living good normal lives, but under the Soviets, Russians were competing with 18th century serfs, maybe they were even a little better off than them.

    So when Karlin (or others) claim that Russia was growing at 8% per year (doubtful statistic) but even if taken to be true, is not the result of effective Tsarist administration but rather a result of having no starting base whatsoever.

    This might have been true at the beginning but by World War I Russia had surpassed one of the Great Powers, France, so this level of growth was already substantial:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrialization_in_the_Russian_Empire#The_industry_of_the_Russian_Empire_of_the_XX_century_in_the_First_World_War

    Ukriane never fought against Donbass in Total War, but nonetheless the full might of the Ukranian Army could not defeat a few Spetsnaz Boys (TM) since 2014.

    Ukraine had no “full might” and no real army over 5 years ago, in 2014 and January 2015.

    Since that time there have been no operations by either side. Both sides shell each occasionally. Ukraine sends special forces into Donbas with impunity, killing people like the Donbas president or kidnapping them and bringing the back to Kiev, like they did to the MH17 suspect Vladimir Tsemakh whom they exchanged with Moscow:

    https://novayagazeta.ru/articles/2019/07/07/81160-muzhik-s-trudom-derzhalsya-na-nogah

    You can rationalize however you want – Ukraine still lost both Donetsk and Lugansk (and Crimea) to a few Spetsnaz boys, who not only managed to destroy a large Ukranian Force at Debaltseve but also fought them to a standstill for 6 years.

    Debaltseve involved 6,000 Ukrainian soldiers. 185 of them died. This was not a “large force” nor was it substantially destroyed.

    Again, Ukraine took about 30% of Donbas territory and stopped. USSR took only 10% of Finland’s territory and stopped.

    “Rather, they went to hide among large numbers of civilians, abandoning areas where they were exposed.”

    Sounds like good tactics for guerilla fighters – when confronted by a force with overwhelming number.

    Human shields are indeed good tactics for guerrilla fighters. Just don’t whine when civilians become collateral damage because you chose to hide amongst them.

    Also, don’t these tactics sound familiar? I wonder who used them – oh yeah! They were the favorite tactic of UPA and various bandera supporters since WW2.

    Your historical illiteracy is on display again. UPA didn’t flee and hide among civilians in cities; they fought in the swamps of Volhynia and in the Carpathian mountains, areas that were sparsely populated.

    Shall we continue this lesson in history? Also, you happen to be very selective in what battles you pick.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgy_Zhukov#Khalkhin_Gol

    Did you know that Khalkyn Gol was not fought against the Germans?

    Again, you are historically illiterate.

    In the Invasion of Poland the Soviets lost 3000 men and took 300,000 prisoner. Good odds I’d say.

    Did you know that the Poles were not Germans?

    In World War II the Germans got all the way to Moscow and St. Petersburg and killed about 27 million Soviets.

    In World War I the German Empire + Austria-Hungary + Ottoman Empire which the Russians were fighting had a total of 149 million people, vs. the Russian Empire with about 172 million people.

    LOL. That is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard.

    Not only are you conflating populations, you are also comparing German military deaths to Soviet military and civilian deaths. All I can say is you’re a fucking egregious liar that only discredits himself.

    Okay, let’s look at military deaths using your beloved wikipedia.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_(World_War_I)

    In World War I the Romanovs lost 2.2 million military dead.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_(World_War_II)#Casualties

    In World War II the Soviets lost 6.8 million military dead. This does not include those who died in captivity.

    So the Soviets got about 3 times more of their soldiers killed than did the Tsar.

    And the price of epic Soviet military incompetence was handing over huge amounts of territory to the Nazis and concomitant mass numbers of killed Soviet civilians.

    We can safely discredit everything else you wrote too.

    It’s been adequately demonstrated that this is true of you. As we have seen, you can’t read, you don’t know history, and you can’t add. Well, hopefully you will grow up. I am being very nice to you by calling you a 16 year old. Because if you are not one, it is very sad.

    • Replies: @Jatt Arya
  121. Jatt Arya says:
    @AP

    Soviets lost more than the Tsar in the 90s alone didn’t they?
    They basically fucked over the entire Slavic world for a few centuries.
    The Russian Empire would be as populated as the USA with less nogs by now no?

    • Replies: @AP
  122. AP says:
    @Jatt Arya

    Soviets lost more than the Tsar in the 90s alone didn’t they?
    They basically fucked over the entire Slavic world for a few centuries.
    The Russian Empire would be as populated as the USA with less nogs by now no?

    If not for Communism, the Russian Empire would probably have more people than the USA – probably 400 million at least. Communism is the virus that permanently debilitated Russia. Russia can of course recover and has recovered to an extent, but it is never going to be a global superpower, thanks to Communism. At best it will be something like France + Germany. Or a half step above Japan, but with nukes. If Charlemagne’s Empire reappeared it wouldn’t be a global superpower either. Just a strong regional power.

    • Replies: @Jatt Arya
    , @Jatt Arya
  123. @Anatoly Karlin

    Myth #5: https://www.unz.com/akarlin/myths-of-bolshevik-revolution/

    OK.
    Why than, did the “reds” win?

    It is obvious to me that without the support of a clear majority of the ethnic Russian population, including a considerable percentage of the imperial officer’s corps, “reds” would not have won.
    Why was that?

    I think it would be far more beneficial if you (or we if you like) try to honestly answer this question.
    For the sake of not repeating the same mistakes in future.

    PS. Apologies for steering this thread away from its topic.

    • Replies: @AP
  124. AP says:
    @Simpleguest

    It is obvious to me that without the support of a clear majority of the ethnic Russian population, including a considerable percentage of the imperial officer’s corps, “reds” would not have won.

    It is nonsense, sorry.

    Reds got 25% of the vote in the 1917 election. They had substantial support, but they lost. They did not have the clear nor any majoirty of support.

    Reds had popular support among workers in cities, particularly St. Petersburg and Moscow. This allowed them to seize the capital and large industrial centers. They were helped (saved, rather) by non-Russian Latvian troops who had their own, non-Russian, reasons to support the Reds.

    Their enemies did not have mass support either (though altogether, probably more than did the Reds). Moroever, their enemies were disorganized, with different leaders and armies, and geographically scattered, with a smaller industrial base. Reds were also generally more ruthless. Reds conscripted people by holdng their families hostage and murdering them if the conscripts showed disloyalty.

    But much of the population was passive. They were sick of war and didn’t understand the stakes; Bolshevik horror was unthinkable for normal people. My own peasant great-grandfather left the front when the Russian army collapsed, came home and spent the Civil War in his house tending to his family. Over ten years later he would be in a Bolshevik mass grave, for the crime of being too hardworking and future-oriented, and therefore too prosperous. This was very typical.

    AK described the myth of Red officers:

    Prilepin’s numbers are an arbitrary fiction concocted by the Soviet researcher Alexander Kavtaradze in the book Military Specialists in the Service of the Soviet Republic 1917-1920. His speculations were refuted in Sergey Volkov’s ground-breaking research manuscript The Tragedy of the Russian Officers.

    Kavtaradze arbitrarily sums up completely different categories, such as:

    1. The 8,000 officers who voluntarily signed up with the Bolsheviks to participate in the “curtain forces” shielding Russia from German forces in the spring of 1918. These were men who wanted to continue fighting the German enemy, but were betrayed by the Bolsheviks, and subsequently, a signifcant number of them left the Red Army, or even joined up with the Whites.

    2. The 48,000 former officers conscripted into the Red Army from 1918-2020, often coercively.

    3. The 14,000 imprisoned White officers, who entered the Red Army to save their own life. These former officers constituted around a quarter to a third of the command of the Red Army, but their percentage steadily declined, since the Bolsheviks didn’t trust the Tsarist military experts.

    It also a manipulation to put the numbers of the officers corps of the Russian Empire at 150,000. That was the number of officers in the active Army, whereas the numbers given as serving the Bolsheviks included all officers, regardless of where they were in 1918 – in the rear, in hospital, etc. According to Volkov’s calculations, the size of the Russian officer corps was 276,000 at the end of 1917. Consequently, less than a quarter of all Russian officers ended up serving the Reds.

    For comparison, there were 170,000 officers who took part in the White movement, of whom 55,000 died in the Civil War, and a similar number of whom ended up in the emigration.

  125. Jatt Arya says:
    @AP

    We have a similar story..

    “William Dalrymple, author of “Return of a King: The Battle for Afghanistan”, accepted that the military edge in the First Anglo-Sikh War was with the Sikhs.”

    https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/nation/brits-would-have-lost-to-sikhs-but-for-treachery-by-2-gens-510884

    “Virgins could walk alone by day and night.”
    (GW Leitner, 1882)

    ਸਿੰਘਰੁਚੈਸਦਭੋਜਨੁਮਾਸ॥ਰਣੁਦੇਖਿਸੂਰੇਚਿਤਉਲਾਸ॥
    A Singh (tiger) always craves flesh. Looking at the field of battle, a warrior’s heart is delighted.

    ਕਿਰਪਨਕਉਅਤਿਧਨਪਿਆਰੁ॥ਹਰਿਜਨਕਉਹਰਿਹਰਿਆਧਾਰੁ॥੩॥
    A miser adores his wealth. The servants of Hari, place their faith in Hari.

    I would not worry too much for:

    ਚਾਰੇਜੁਗਕਹਾਣੀਚੱਲਗਤੇਗਦੀ||
    The tale of the Sword echoes through the 4 Ages.

  126. Jatt Arya says:
    @AP

    We have a similar story..

    “William Dalrymple, author of “Return of a King: The Battle for Afghanistan”, accepted that the military edge in the First Anglo-Sikh War was with the Sikhs.”

    https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/nation/brits-would-have-lost-to-sikhs-but-for-treachery-by-2-gens-510884

    “Virgins could walk alone by day and night.”
    (GW Leitner, 1882)

    ਸਿੰਘਰੁਚੈਸਦਭੋਜਨੁਮਾਸ॥ਰਣੁਦੇਖਿਸੂਰੇਚਿਤਉਲਾਸ॥
    A Singh (tiger) always craves flesh. Looking at the field of battle, a warrior’s heart is delighted.

    ਕਿਰਪਨਕਉਅਤਿਧਨਪਿਆਰੁ॥ਹਰਿਜਨਕਉਹਰਿਹਰਿਆਧਾਰੁ॥੩॥
    A miser adores his wealth. The servants of Hari, place their faith in Hari.

    I would not worry too much for:

    ਚਾਰੇਜੁਗਕਹਾਣੀਚੱਲਗਤੇਗਦੀ||
    The tale of the Sword echoes through the 4 Ages.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Anon comments are not allowed. If you are new to my work, *start here*. If you liked this post, and want me to produce more such content, consider *donating*.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS