71–80 of 99 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/putin-first-soviet-government-...
That is the only source I could find as well but I also found others saying it was false and that Putin was lying and misguiding
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He's a writer, not an historian. Thus his non-fiction works do not have to be read like history books, more like journalistic opinion pieces. In that sense, the factual errors on this book are mostly irrelevant, and the work is still very interesting and insightful.
But if it is not factual, what makes it insightful? If you're looking for insights, aren't you better off reading an actual history, rather than the text of an anti-semitic, nationalist, Putin apologist?
Reading The Gulag Archipelago at university changed my life. I'd been reading Dostoyevsky for a bit, which I was enjoying, but The Gulag Archipelago was the book that opened my eyes to the idea that literature could have fierce moral purpose. I also loved the fact it was dripping with deadpan sarcasm and irony. A wonderful response for the powerless to take given the Kafkaesque situations that people found themselves…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand. You assume the book is wrong but that doesn't matter because it isn't serious? It is serious, and I am not aware of anything incorrect in it. The criticism is not its accuracy, it is that it says things you're not allowed to say.
It very much has many factual errors pointed out by historians several times since its publication. If you're truly looking for an objective account and not something to stoke emotions and tell you want you want to hear, I think you're better off reading an actual history.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> genocide denial Please don't use powerful words at the wrong place, you are depleting them of their meaning. A genocide has an actual definition according to the international law, and the Gulag system does not tick any of the boxes. The Gulag system was a very harsh penal colony system (although on a far larger scale that what was done before), in continuation of the ones already existing during the tsarist times…
Please read what you just wrote. The Gulags killed vast numbers of people in an incredibly inhumane fashion (no gas there!), in many cases based on their ethnic religion, and here you are defending it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always wondered why Franco has such a bad rep. I'm not really knowledgeable about the Spanish civil war but it seems he prevented Spain from becoming a Stalinist totalitarian country, which is a good thing in my book. I mean no doubt he was a brutal dictator but in the grand scheme of things he was by far the lesser of two evils. Edit: also I think your comparison of the American prison system and the gulag to be r…
It was not all that clear at the time that communism would become as bad as it turned out almost everywhere it was tried. Edit: downvoted, but I think this is objectively true. The worst atrocities hadn't happen yet in the 1930's. Hindsight is 20 20. A lot of people drew on older ideals from the French revolution which we still celebrate today, not the least in the US. (Do you really think the blood of tyrants can be…
Reading The Gulag Archipelago at university changed my life. I'd been reading Dostoyevsky for a bit, which I was enjoying, but The Gulag Archipelago was the book that opened my eyes to the idea that literature could have fierce moral purpose. I also loved the fact it was dripping with deadpan sarcasm and irony. A wonderful response for the powerless to take given the Kafkaesque situations that people found themselves…
If you found the Gulag Archipelago insightful (the word 'enjoyed' seems wrong in this context), I highly recommend The Kolyma Tales[1] by Varlam Shalamov. Shalamov spent 17 years in 'hard labour' camps, in total. His work is more like a historical novel, akin to "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich", but more raw and visceral. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kolyma_Tales
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you wonder about Franco's bad rep, why don't you actually check it out, instead of challenging people to prove the evil of fascist to you from first principle, and claiming their virtue if they don't. What is your professed naïveté supposed to accomplish, except to serve as propaganda for a universally abhorred fascist while simultaneously retaining your option to claim ignorance when challenged?
It wasn't actually a fascist regime (the Falangists were brought under political control by Franco); it was a standard issue military dictatorship, encompassing many right wing tendencies. Including things most English speakers would consider bonkers, like Carlism, which was a movement to install ... some other guy (from a slightly different branch of the Bourbon family) on the Spanish throne. Carlism was arguably mo…
Many Germans still admire Hitler, many Russians still admire Stalin, and many Chinese still admire Mao.
In Mongolia, Ghenghis Khan is admired as a great leader of their nation, and the negative things said of him are considered to be exaggerations or lies made up the people he fought with.
It seems no matter what a dictator does, or how many atrocities he commits, there'll always be people that admire and defend him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wasn't actually a fascist regime (the Falangists were brought under political control by Franco); it was a standard issue military dictatorship, encompassing many right wing tendencies. Including things most English speakers would consider bonkers, like Carlism, which was a movement to install ... some other guy (from a slightly different branch of the Bourbon family) on the Spanish throne. Carlism was arguably mo…
"Franco also wasn't and isn't universally abhorred; many Spaniards still admire Franco for whatever reasons, and there are large monuments and contemporary political rallies by fairly ordinary people honoring his memory." Many Germans still admire Hitler, many Russians still admire Stalin, and many Chinese still admire Mao. In Mongolia, Ghenghis Khan is admired as a great leader of their nation, and the negative thin…
Franco by any sane measure, was a much lesser goblin. As was his next door neighbor Salazar. For their times, and particularly considering their situations, they were fairly reasonable leaders. Which is probably why they were integrated into NATO.