Belarus

BrookBond

Clanker
while Hitler foremost used the populations of the occupied countries a
Yeah true but a lot of German Jews, homosexuels, political enemies, anyone with mental or physical handycaps. Were in camps too. But the Slavic countries suffered. I don't think Stalin cared either if you were Russian or not. Other nationalities got the Gulag too. God knows how many poor souls perished in syberia. Remember Stalin ruled much longer than Hitler.
 

BrookBond

Clanker
When they refer to him as peasant stock doesn’t mean he was uneducated.
He was cunning. Like a Wolf but like most of these dictators, very paranoid. He slaughtered his best staff officers just before He really needed them. Look at that Chinese Revolution leader. Forget his Name. His young Revolution and he loved his young girls. Was like a God for them.
 
How educated Was Stalin?
I'm going from memory so I may get some of the details wrong, but the following is what I recall from several biographies of Stalin.

As previously mentioned, Stalin was educated in a seminary. His mother's plans were for him to become an orthodox priest, which was one of the few paths open to him to rise in society. He was from the working class, his father was an alcoholic shoe maker who regularly abandoned his family, returning when he needed money for booze. Stalin's mother was the one who supported the family.

His father used to beat his wife and children. When Stalin became a young teen he beat the crap out of his father and told him to never return.

His mother put everything into her son, wanting to make a success of him. Attending a seminary was part of her plans for him.

Stalin became exposed to communism during his time in the seminary. I haven't seen anything which details how that happened, possibly nobody knows at this time. However, he became one of a group of communist agitators in the city where the seminary was located.

Eventually the authorities became fed up with him and he was kicked out of the seminary. The details again are vague, but he moved to Baku in Azerbaijan where he became one of the leading figures of the revolutionary cause. Baku was a major city and one of the leading oil producing centres of the world at the time, second only to the US. There Stalin organized kidnappings, bank robberies, and extortion to finance the revolution. The money sent abroad supported the upper class Russian revolutionaries living in places such as Paris.

Stalin was arrested multiple times and sent into exile in Siberia. Remarkably the Russian imperial government didn't have him executed. Internal exile in Imperial Russia meant being sent to some remote Siberian village or town and being told you had to live there while finding your own means of support until your sentence expired. I suppose it was cheaper to run than prison. The really serious criminals were sent to work in the mines and the like. All movement in Imperial Russia was controlled via an internal passport system, so you couldn't just hop on the next train out once you arrived at your place of exile.

At some point during this period Stalin's first wife died. She had lived in poverty while Stalin had dedicated everything to the revolution. At least one biographer thinks that this event caused Stalin to seriously re-evaluate his life and was one of the major steps along the road of turning him into the man he later was.

When war came and then revolution the exiled intellectuals returned to Russia. Stalin showed up in St. Petersburg to be in on the events. Lenin picked Stalin to be next to him while things were up in the air. According to at least one biographer this was because Lenin was worried about his personal safety and he saw Stalin as being the sort of handy fellow he needed next to him in the event that things got dangerous and he needed to escape into hiding.

Stalin was put in charge of the party newspaper but didn't take direct part in most of the revolutionary events. He did however get exposed to the leading communist intellectuals and (again according to at least some biographers) came away less than impressed with them. He realized that while he was fighting and sacrificing everything for the revolution, these dilettantes had been spending the money he was sending them in Paris cafes debating pointless crap. This again was supposedly one of the major points in Stalin's development.

He later find himself in charge of much of the internal administration of the party, something that he put to good use in putting "his" people into key positions.

When Lenin had a stroke (or whatever it was) Stalin was well positioned to take control of everything. He was by that point mainly concerned with accumulating power into his own hands and exercising it. He was a ferocious worker, looking into every detail and whose primary pleasure was power for the sake of power.

At this point I don't think that he saw communism in terms of a lofty ideal anymore. Instead it was a means by which to rapidly transform Russia into a modern state on par with Germany, France, or the British Empire. That people would suffer along the way didn't matter in the greater scheme of things to him, he was thinking in much broader terms. This by the way is a very important point to understand, as many other of the communist movements in poorer countries were driven by the same considerations rather than any actual commitment to communism itself.

When he died, he ended much as Lenin did, with his successors gathered about his cooling corpse, each plotting on how to be the one to rise to the top.


There is a story about Stalin which is probably apocryphal (actually there are many such), but which I think shows what people in Russia thought motivated Stalin. According to the story, when Stalin had attained complete ascendancy over his colleagues he decided to move his mother into one of the many Czarist palaces, this one in either southern Russia or in Georgia. When his mother saw the palace she turned to her son and said "Iosef, what are you?" He turned to his mother and said "remember the Czar mother? I'm like the Czar."
 
Yeah true but a lot of German Jews, homosexuels, political enemies, anyone with mental or physical handycaps. Were in camps too. But the Slavic countries suffered. I don't think Stalin cared either if you were Russian or not. Other nationalities got the Gulag too. God knows how many poor souls perished in syberia. Remember Stalin ruled much longer than Hitler.
Hitler's plan for the Slavs was to exterminate them. This is something that we must always keep in mind.

In Stalin's Soviet Union you might die because you got in the way or because of incompetence, but ultimately humans were a valuable resource to be put to use rather than something which must inherently be gotten rid of wholesale.
 
Hitler embraced the aristocracy and made it worth their while to work with him. Stalin wiped out his aristos.
Hitler had to keep the German army and associated officer upper class on side if he didn't want to get overthrown before he could conquer "Russia" and achieve his goal of a new German homeland in the east. He wasn't however a fan of the upper classes. The Nazis idealized the peasantry instead.
 
1638142448961.png


1638142802433.png

More at the linked source: Nazi And Soviet Propaganda's Shared Aesthetic
 
Last edited:
Avant-garde and other related artistic movements didn't catch on to the same degree in the UK as they did on the continent. The UK (and US) mostly stuck to traditional styles, although they were influenced to some degree. This why continental artistic styles of the early 20th century are often quite distinctive and often appear odd to our eyes which are not used to them. The themes emphasized simplicity and directness, often with "industrial" imagery. British graphic art tended towards pastoral and allegorical imagery.

You can find UK propaganda posters which follow continental styles if you look for them.
 
Interesting as it may be and the aesthetic merits/demerits of mid-XX century totalitarian regimes art styles notwithstanding; can we try to stay reasonably on topic, please? :)
 
Interesting as it may be and the aesthetic merits/demerits of mid-XX century totalitarian regimes art styles notwithstanding; can we try to stay reasonably on topic, please? :)
Relevance was National Socialism vs Communism argument but yes it can be argued it was adding to the existing drift from Belarus itself.
 
Hitler had to keep the German army and associated officer upper class on side if he didn't want to get overthrown before he could conquer "Russia" and achieve his goal of a new German homeland in the east. He wasn't however a fan of the upper classes. The Nazis idealized the peasantry instead.
Well it was quite normal for the Bavarian/Austrian mentality. They love their rustics as opposed to the more industrialised north. Away with your Bauhaus.
 
Moscow has achieved the total military integration of Belarusian armed forces under its command.

And they have been prepared to act in conjunction with Russian troops in Moscow's further invasion of Ukraine, should it decide to go ahead with this option (as seems increasingly more likely).
 
Following on from and confirming my last post:

Relevant extract:

Russia and Belarus have a so-called union agreement that envisages close political, economic, and military ties, but for years Lukashenka had refrained from deepening ties and ceding sovereignty even as he relied on cheap energy and loans from Moscow.

Analysts now say that Belarus and Russia are advancing the union agreement as the Kremlin seeks to use Lukashenka's vulnerability to extract tough concessions.

Belarus is under Moscow's heel and is a de-facto part of Russia again. Formalities will follow in due course
 
Published by: Steven Swinford, Political Editor, The TIMES, on Tuesday 30 November 2021.

Liz Truss takes after Margaret Thatcher in a tank as she criticises Russia.

Liz Truss channelled Margaret Thatcher today amid further speculation about her leadership ambitions as she was pictured in a tank during a visit to Estoni
a.

The foreign secretary warned Russia against making a “strategic mistake” by invading Ukraine, accusing it of “malign activity”.

She was speaking as Nato foreign ministers gathered in Latvia to consider how to respond to Russia’s military build-up near the Ukrainian border and tensions on the frontier between Belarus and Poland . . .

[Damn PAYWALL].

%2Fmethode%2Ftimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2Fa79294f4-5233-11ec-8d72-b8ab431649b1.jpg
Photo: Liz Truss warned Russia against making a “strategic mistake” by invading Ukraine, accusing it of “malign activity”.


Posted on the "russian-troop-movements-reported-near-ukraine" thread, and on this "Belarus" thread.
 
Liz Truss channelled Margaret Thatcher today amid further speculation about her leadership ambitions as she was pictured in a tank during a visit to Estonia.
The thing is, we had one thousand of them when Maggie was around. Under her government we will only have one hundred and fifty. The party of strong defence. Indeed.
 

Latest Threads

Top