So, I guess sort of like Hamilton, but with Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin.
This idea is either brilliant or incredibly terrible. You be the judge.
Discuss.
So, I guess sort of like Hamilton, but with Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin.
This idea is either brilliant or incredibly terrible. You be the judge.
Discuss.
This is a mix of takes. To say that the Moltov-Ribentrop Pact was cooperating disturbs the situation at the time, a lot. You could add that the soviet union did send oil to baci Germany, too!
During a post revolutionary time in a country that just managed to squash the counter revolution to say geopolitics is cooperating like at the wild as idealistic instead of materialist.
Idealistic criticisms of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact are common, but to say that materialistic critiques of it is impossible is plain wrong.
The M/R Pact marked a reversal of the Comintern line from one of Anti-Fascism to one of implicit cooperation. This lead to the disillusionment of a great deal of formerly committed Communists, and a weakening of global Anti-Fascism, and Communist Parties.
It's very arguable that Nazi Germany benefited far more from the economic components of the M/R Pact, than the Soviet Union. They were deeply reliant on Soviet resources to fuel its conquest (like 60-80% of their total imports in 1940-41 came from the USSR ), and later; Operation Barbarossa. The Third Reich only paid out a third of what it promised, while the Soviet Union supplied the full quantity of resources demanded.
Furthermore, the M/R Pact ended American arms supplies to the USSR. The Red Army was far more dependent on American,not German, arms for their rearmament programs.
Contrary to the idea that the M/R Pact was only a decision of realpolitik to better prepare for War with the Third Reich, it instead induced a degree of complacency in Soviet Leadership, to the point that the Red Army divisions on the border were deeply unprepared (and only partially mobilized) during the initial stages of Operation Barbarossa. And Stalin was similarly shocked by the Nazi invasion, despite him being warned of it's imminent possibility by reliable sources dozens of times prior.
"but to say that materialistic critiques of it is impossible is plain wrong."
Completely with you. It just can't remain in a realm where moralistic arguments are used, instead of those that are aware of consequences.
I'm glad to see that we seem to be in agreement.
I actually regret my brief and unsubstantiated reference to the M/R Pact in my original comment, it clearly only distracts from my overall point, and am only leaving it up so that the context is preserved for any future lurkers.