Do you believe Joseph Stalin should be celebrated?

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Touchy subject. Remembering world war 2 is a major part of Russian culture (especially recently under Putin, as part of his effort to militarize Russian society). One element of this is nostalgia for Stalin's leadership of the Soviet Union.

[Farmlands]

Not a touchy subject for most people outside deep left-wing circles, to which the answer is a clear no. Stalin having approved the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact should make it clear it's stupid to equate the Soviet Union's triumph over Nazi Germany with him.

[Storr]

No, any generic leader could have led the USSR to victory in WWII. You could say this about the US as well, but Roosevelt never made idiotic paranoid decisions like purging the Army of many of its officers in the years preceding a major war everyone saw coming as Germany remilitarized.

Everything else he did was either evil or had serious negative complications. For example, sure he industrialized the USSR, but he did it in a way that unnecessarily cost many lives simply in order to do it as fast as possible. His obsession with heavy industry was kind of weird tbh.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Stalin signed Molotov-Ribbentrop and wasn't going to fight the Nazis until he got invaded. He also purged much of the military meaning the Soviets were weakened. This probably lengthened the war substantially.

[GeneralMacArthur]

I don't think it's a touchy subject, Stalin is one of the worst monsters in history and deserves to be vilified just as much as Hitler.  The main reason he's not is that people outside of Eastern Europe and Central Asia aren't familiar with the various ethnic groups he mass-murdered, just like they're not familiar with many of the non-Jewish ethnic groups who received the same treatment from Hitler.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

I don't think it's a touchy subject

Just to be clear, since now 2 separate posts have mentioned it, I don't think it is a touchy subject either. I just said that to copy the wording SirWoodbury used in the other, uh, companion poll in order to make a point about that other poll (and really, about pro-Putin Republicans).

[LBJer]

I didn't vote in the poll.  My honest answer is that people should celebrate who they want to celebrate.  While Stalin was obviously an extremely ruthless individual, I can see how some in Russia, Georgia, and to a lesser extent other former Soviet republics would want to celebrate him.  As far as official commemorations and such--I'll leave that to the countries mentioned to decide.  

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Stalin did way more good, and way more bad, to the world than Stephen Bandera did.

[HillGoose]

no, he was a COMMIE

[TML]

I don't have any concrete opinions on celebrating specific individuals, but I do think we need to be objective about them - by pointing out the good, the bad, and the neutral things about them as they actually are and not blow any of these things out of proportion. For Stalin, we can point out his contributions to the development of the Soviet state as well as his totalitarian rule and associated death toll.

[CumbrianLefty]

Even if he did do good things, the bad is bad enough that he shouldn't be "celebrated" in any fashion.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Some people consider him worse than Hitler, so no.

The Russian people could have been so much more with different leadership.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

No, of course not. The Soviet Union helped defeat the Nazis largely in spite of Stalin's leadership, not because of it.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

no, he was a COMMIE

Demetris Christofias was a commie too, and yet a very different person than Stalin.

[The Simpsons Cinematic Universe]

Obviously Americans will not, and among Russians you see a very mixed reputation too, because despite the historic accomplishment of defeating the Germans, the negative aspects to his rule are obvious and potent to modern Russians.

I don't think so, obviously, but the general confidence Americans might have to say "no" comes from being removed from the relevance of Stalin's actions. Maybe being distant from a subject can make one more objective about it, but when the potential cost is the entire existence of your people, then, well, that also factors into it.

[dead0man]

yes, as a cautionary tale

[LAKISYLVANIA]

USSR, yes
Stalin, absolutely not.

Touchy subject. Remembering world war 2 is a major part of Russian culture (especially recently under Putin, as part of his effort to militarize Russian society). One element of this is nostalgia for Stalin's leadership of the Soviet Union.

USSR did win WW2 not because of Stalin, but despite Stalin.

Yes, in Russian culture the USSR leaders they have nostalghia for are the wrong ones, while the good ones are despised today (the more ideological Lenin, the more pragmatic Khruschnev, the reformer who tried everything to save a lost empire Gorbachev but is unrightfully blamed for its fall and should be credited for a relatively peaceful collapse, and not a violent one).

Russian communists today are fake communists. And it's more of nazism with communist characteristics or Russian culture/USSR nostalghia embedded in it.

While i'm more of a Eurocom, as opposed to them.