Wikipedia is where liberal nerds go to slapfight, inconsistently using various rules to push their agendas. There is, for example, someone that spends a ton of her time fighting Nazi apologetics on Wikipedia that would otherwise still be there and she receives a lot of pushback. While her task is just, ask yourself why she needa to do it in the first place. Why is Wikipedia so friendly to Nazi apologetics? Why is it so hostile to corrections of it? Do you think the reasons might apply to other articles?
Wikipedia will mislead you on topics with more room for politics. It is fine if you want to use it to learn some math or something, but on anything social or political you should assume it has been written by someone sympathetic to Nazis and instead read books before forming any opinions.
Wheatcroft (who you have already cited) and Davies have some good overviews based on thr archives. Instead of using selected quotes provided by Wiki editors, I would recommend reading the source material. And then compare it, critically, to the intended message from Wikipedia.
Sure, it might have some contentious pages, but it does get edited by people who care enough. Just like the article you linked says.
And you said it yourself the source I used was fine. If I misinterpreted the quote or of there's more to the story you can clarify that and I'll correct myself.
No sort of serious review. Known to keep outright bad and highly (and intentionally) misleading material even after it is conclusively proven to be wrong. Have stuff like 'Radio Free [something]' listed as good sources.
The only stuff that you can trust Wikipedia on is math, basically, and even then only because they provide the proofs, and even then they also keep errors found in their sources with no notes on the matter.
If we’re being intellectually honest, we actually do have to hand it to Stalin that he did many good things. You’re proving the meme correct because I guarantee you don’t hold any other world-historical figure to the same standard.
Intellectual honesty is when you make vague unfounded claims and broad statements about moral values that are immediately contradictory to what you're doing in the very same moment. If you then get pissy when people aren't taking things seriously then you're being very intellectual
Unfortunately, because Stalin didn't go to medical school as a small child and perform open heart surgery on a grandmother in Tashkent in 1912, he was required to stand down and let Hitler take over the world.
Stalin's greatest crimes were his failures to discover and implement penicillin and the polio vaccine, directly making him at fault for everyone who died of any disease or old age in the Soviet Union.
Because this is your 2nd comment, I'm assuming you hopped over to .ee from .world. I hope you don't get banned so you can actually learn something. In the meantime, please send us your pacifist manifesto.
If you truly believed that then you'd be a vegan hermit living in the mountains, and you'd be doing all you could to strike those who crossed your indefensible number
That's extremely vague and could easily describe Nazis, who, as others have stated, absolutely deserved to be killed. Do you have any names? Events? Places? Timespans? Anything beyond unnamed "political opponents" and "military figures"?
According to declassified Intel from the soviet union after it's fall there was a recorded amount of deaths of 3.3 million with approximately 1 million of them being on purpose and the rest due to neglect. You telling me they were all Nazis?
Which declassified intel? Again with the vagueness. Got a link to this intel so we can all read it and decide for ourselves what it says instead of just taking your word for it?
Wheatcroft, Stephen G. (1999). "Victims of Stalinism and the Soviet Secret Police: The Comparability and Reliability of the Archival Data. Not the Last Word" (PDF). Europe-Asia Studies. 51 (2): 315–45. doi:10.1080/09668139999056. "During 1921–53, the number of sentences was (political convictions): sentences, 4,060,306; death penalties, 799,473; camps and prisons, 2,634397; exile, 413,512; other, 215,942. In addition, during 1937–52 there were 14,269,753 non-political sentences, among them 34,228 death penalties, 2,066,637 sentences for 0–1 year, 4,362,973 for 2–5 years, 1,611,293 for 6–10 years, and 286,795 for more than 10 years. Other sentences were non-custodial"
Where's your outrage at capitalists then, cac? The magnitude of capitalism's four fucking times your bullshit settler's-encyclopedia-sourced figure; but you can only fix your face to talk about the spooky scary (extinct) soviets.
Placeholder: I made a comment about who was killed in gulags, it was removed.
noooo I can't make unsubstantiated claims that perpetuate nazi talking points about double holocaust noooooo
Also yeah, nazis got killed in gulags.
Here's some reading material for you
This Soviet World - https://archive.org/details/this-soviet-world
Blackshirts and reds - https://welshundergroundnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/blackshirts-and-reds-by-michael-parenti.pdf
Notice how I don't make vague notions towards "wikipedia" but instead direct you to the basis of my understanding of the world. Also notice how this basis isn't a faulty online service with direct ties to the US state department and a long history of right-wing infiltration and power-user squabbles. I would put in the effort of adding the links I usually add if I thought you'd actually read them.
Edit: or just go here https://hexbear.net/comment/168034
I made an epub of this soviet world, check https://comlib.encryptionin.space/ if you are interested. There is also an epub of Blackshirts and reds, but I didn't make that one.
You techbros always have all the energy for 'gulags' but then sit on your hands about the SLAVE PENS the Department of Corrections call prisons. This is a bad-faith position from origin just based off that.
Yes it is; and it's frankly kinda weird as fuck to me that you know more about a western-mythologized concept than you do actual existent 21st century slave pens masquerading as prisons. You talk so much unverified shit about gulags, but don't have the time to even research one of the last bastions of slavery in your actual time period?
I know you intended to use this question as that smug redditor gotcha like "hah, I'm not even Amerikan" but that one question implies that you know more unverified, most-primary-sources-were-bullshit cruft about your conception of gulags than one of the largest examples of chattel slavery masquerading as 'rehabilitation' in your actual fucking lifetime; and honestly, it only disgusts me that much fuckin more
Maybe stop digging yourself deeper if you're already up to your ears in it
Yeah, he may be a controversial historical figure to some people, but under his watch the Red Army killed more Wehrmacht soldiers than any other faction in WW2 managed to, that's ofc a pretty big W.
No doubt and he definitely was a very influential figure. But he was also a very bitter pill that the Soviet union took to elevate themselves on the world stage.
He killed a lot of political rivals or potential rivals as well as military figures. There was the Purge that happed in the late 30s. He didn't just kill Nazis.
Removed by mod
Yeah he killed Nazis, too
And a lot of others. He wasn't very discriminatory in that regard.
Which black book are you pulling your numbers from and how high will they be this time?
Wikipedia.
Wikipedeez nuts
you may not be old enough to have heard this in school, so let me do it now:
wikipedia is NOT a reliable source.
alright cuh is loweffort trolling twas fun while it wasn't obvious
That was the most underwhelming ending to that gif. And you missed the opportunity to make it a 5 second countdown with that username.
Since we're talking numbers, do you have a negative number of braincells? Most of us don't make the emojis lib
What your shitposting isn't homemade?
This needs to be a tag line. Lmao Wikipedia, fucking hell at least read a book first before embarrassing yourself
Tf is wrong with Wikipedia?
Wikipedia is where liberal nerds go to slapfight, inconsistently using various rules to push their agendas. There is, for example, someone that spends a ton of her time fighting Nazi apologetics on Wikipedia that would otherwise still be there and she receives a lot of pushback. While her task is just, ask yourself why she needa to do it in the first place. Why is Wikipedia so friendly to Nazi apologetics? Why is it so hostile to corrections of it? Do you think the reasons might apply to other articles?
Wikipedia will mislead you on topics with more room for politics. It is fine if you want to use it to learn some math or something, but on anything social or political you should assume it has been written by someone sympathetic to Nazis and instead read books before forming any opinions.
Wheatcroft (who you have already cited) and Davies have some good overviews based on thr archives. Instead of using selected quotes provided by Wiki editors, I would recommend reading the source material. And then compare it, critically, to the intended message from Wikipedia.
Sure, it might have some contentious pages, but it does get edited by people who care enough. Just like the article you linked says.
And you said it yourself the source I used was fine. If I misinterpreted the quote or of there's more to the story you can clarify that and I'll correct myself.
No sort of serious review. Known to keep outright bad and highly (and intentionally) misleading material even after it is conclusively proven to be wrong. Have stuff like 'Radio Free [something]' listed as good sources.
The only stuff that you can trust Wikipedia on is math, basically, and even then only because they provide the proofs, and even then they also keep errors found in their sources with no notes on the matter.
Removed by mod
Any number greater than 1 is indefensible.
Pretty sure any number of Nazis is entirely defensible.
Clearly in relation to killing others, but you’re too dishonest to follow the comment chain.
If we’re being intellectually honest, we actually do have to hand it to Stalin that he did many good things. You’re proving the meme correct because I guarantee you don’t hold any other world-historical figure to the same standard.
I can admit he did some right.
Can you admit he did some wrong without your comment being deleted or you eventually banned?
Intellectual honesty is when you make vague unfounded claims and broad statements about moral values that are immediately contradictory to what you're doing in the very same moment. If you then get pissy when people aren't taking things seriously then you're being very intellectual
You heard it here: the Bolsheviks stopping the distribution of anti-Semitic literature and the mass-killings of Jews is indefensible.
Unfortunately, because Stalin didn't go to medical school as a small child and perform open heart surgery on a grandmother in Tashkent in 1912, he was required to stand down and let Hitler take over the world.
Stalin's greatest crimes were his failures to discover and implement penicillin and the polio vaccine, directly making him at fault for everyone who died of any disease or old age in the Soviet Union.
eat shit nerd lmao
ok so you condemn every single world leader in history then?
Local Georgian man discovers weird trick to fight anti-semites and the social structures that are the root cause of antisemitism.
Liberals hate him!
Because this is your 2nd comment, I'm assuming you hopped over to .ee from .world. I hope you don't get banned so you can actually learn something. In the meantime, please send us your pacifist manifesto.
Oh I hope I do get banned. It’s a badge of pride to be banned from hex.
Given .ee's notoriety for Wehrmacht apologia, i expect that badge to have a skull and runes on it.
What happened to your veneer of intellectual honesty and good faith participation in your earlier comments?
Looking at most .ee users that have been banned in the modlog and it's all just for being cringe dorks that fail to have a basic social interaction
Gotta dunk on you chuds at any chance.
Wait so who's the one person you can kill before you become indefensible?
Everyone gets their one guy they can beat to death with hammers before it stops being cool.
serious question: how do u feel about cops killing people?
Same as I do about cops who aren’t killing people, I hate them.
You must hate yourself then
If you truly believed that then you'd be a vegan hermit living in the mountains, and you'd be doing all you could to strike those who crossed your indefensible number
In other words, this you?
Oh please cry more and comment on all my stuff again, this is delicious.
:
deleted by creator
Wish I was banned.
Actually no, I wish you were all dead. Would be a more productive outcome than simply not having to interact with you.
lol shut up turkey
Indefensible in that you dorks never have an answer to it, yes
Eleventy gorillion people if I remember correctly
Pretty sure it was 11.5 gorillion.
Like who?
Political opponents, military figures. A lot of people that would have threatened his rule.
Yeah we already mentioned the nazis
yeah, the nazis, we mentioned them
I'm pretty sure there were more than just Nazis in his kill list. The Old Bolsheviks for example.
Well seeing as how your "pretty sure" is from wikipedia, I don't really give a shit what you think
Then what should I be reading?
That's extremely vague and could easily describe Nazis, who, as others have stated, absolutely deserved to be killed. Do you have any names? Events? Places? Timespans? Anything beyond unnamed "political opponents" and "military figures"?
According to declassified Intel from the soviet union after it's fall there was a recorded amount of deaths of 3.3 million with approximately 1 million of them being on purpose and the rest due to neglect. You telling me they were all Nazis?
Which declassified intel? Again with the vagueness. Got a link to this intel so we can all read it and decide for ourselves what it says instead of just taking your word for it?
Wheatcroft, Stephen G. (1999). "Victims of Stalinism and the Soviet Secret Police: The Comparability and Reliability of the Archival Data. Not the Last Word" (PDF). Europe-Asia Studies. 51 (2): 315–45. doi:10.1080/09668139999056. "During 1921–53, the number of sentences was (political convictions): sentences, 4,060,306; death penalties, 799,473; camps and prisons, 2,634397; exile, 413,512; other, 215,942. In addition, during 1937–52 there were 14,269,753 non-political sentences, among them 34,228 death penalties, 2,066,637 sentences for 0–1 year, 4,362,973 for 2–5 years, 1,611,293 for 6–10 years, and 286,795 for more than 10 years. Other sentences were non-custodial"
Well according to declassified intel they were all concentration camps guards each and every one of them
Where's your outrage at capitalists then, cac? The magnitude of capitalism's four fucking times your bullshit settler's-encyclopedia-sourced figure; but you can only fix your face to talk about the spooky scary (extinct) soviets.
4000 times, actually, and 12 times even the Black Book's grossly inflated numbers for all communist countries!
Placeholder: I made a comment about who was killed in gulags, it was removed.
Also yeah, nazis got killed in gulags.
Here's some reading material for you
This Soviet World - https://archive.org/details/this-soviet-world
Blackshirts and reds - https://welshundergroundnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/blackshirts-and-reds-by-michael-parenti.pdf
Notice how I don't make vague notions towards "wikipedia" but instead direct you to the basis of my understanding of the world. Also notice how this basis isn't a faulty online service with direct ties to the US state department and a long history of right-wing infiltration and power-user squabbles. I would put in the effort of adding the links I usually add if I thought you'd actually read them.
Edit: or just go here https://hexbear.net/comment/168034
I made an epub of this soviet world, check https://comlib.encryptionin.space/ if you are interested. There is also an epub of Blackshirts and reds, but I didn't make that one.
That was you! I appreciate your work so very much! I hadn't bookmarked it and couldn't find it
You techbros always have all the energy for 'gulags' but then sit on your hands about the SLAVE PENS the Department of Corrections call prisons. This is a bad-faith position from origin just based off that.
Is the department of corrections a us thing?
Yes it is; and it's frankly kinda weird as fuck to me that you know more about a western-mythologized concept than you do actual existent 21st century slave pens masquerading as prisons. You talk so much unverified shit about gulags, but don't have the time to even research one of the last bastions of slavery in your actual time period?
I know you intended to use this question as that smug redditor
gotcha like "hah, I'm not even Amerikan" but that one question implies that you know more unverified, most-primary-sources-were-bullshit cruft about your conception of gulags than one of the largest examples of chattel slavery masquerading as 'rehabilitation' in your actual fucking lifetime; and honestly, it only disgusts me that much fuckin more
Maybe stop digging yourself deeper if you're already up to your ears in it
Slavery being legal is also a us thing. The 13th amendment didn't outlaw slavery
Several US prisons are just old cotton plantations, like the farm
Soviet gulags had a higher survival rate in 1956 than the US prison system has today.
Removed by mod
Unironically Stalin did more to ensure freedom of expression than any western "democracy" ever has.
haha hell yeah
and?
And he killed a lot of people. That's the point.
Yeah, he may be a controversial historical figure to some people, but under his watch the Red Army killed more Wehrmacht soldiers than any other faction in WW2 managed to, that's ofc a pretty big W.
No doubt and he definitely was a very influential figure. But he was also a very bitter pill that the Soviet union took to elevate themselves on the world stage.
Such a bitter pill that he was overwhelming popular
Still is, in Russia at least
Victory over the Nazis and going from fuedal conditions to the space age sure is bitter
The deaths of millions is definitely bitter.
Not millions of nazis and those are the only ones who's deaths are in the millions
He killed a lot of political rivals or potential rivals as well as military figures. There was the Purge that happed in the late 30s. He didn't just kill Nazis.
Why do you act like nazis are humans worth counting? Mr. Sundial, are you a nazi-lover?
Millions of dead nazis is actually about as sweet as dead CEOs
killed more nazis, bigots and compradors than anyone else in history, stalin stay winning
Yeah bunch of dead nazis, good riddance
they deserved it 👍
Death to America
CFOs, CTOs, CHROs, a myriad of Cs and Os
inb4 you make the same comment a third time
You can eat my whole ass off this take, Mr. Sundial; with a side of raspberry jam and a dusting of confectioner's sugar if you so please.