> I don't agree with you. That kind of camps should be called prisons or something else. It takes more than just disagreeing to prove your point, and no - thos

> I don't agree with you. That kind of camps should be called prisons or something else. It takes more than just disagreeing to prove your point, and no - those camps shouldn't be called prisons, because prisons existed as separate entities at that time and the abbreviation "gulag" contans a word "camp" in its definition. Next, where's your verifiable proof that New Yorker is a reliable source of information?