2 ms·

> ...because everyone and his brother suddenly realized Stalin was not angel in WWII due to Russian latest invasion. Erm, that was pretty much clear and offici

> ...because everyone and his brother suddenly realized Stalin was not angel in WWII due to Russian latest invasion. Erm, that was pretty much clear and official since Stalin's death right? Even the Soviet Union had its own de-Stalinization process, as well as the Eastern European countries under Soviet rule. If anything, the behaviour of the Russian army in Ukraine makes the excesses of the Red Army in WW2 in the 'liberated' areas more believable (this was very much a taboo in East Germany for instance, while Stalin's crimes could at least be discussed).

watwut 4y ago
A bit offtopic, but in Russia, Stalin victims were not rehabilitated like they were in other countries. And lately in Russia, Stalin was getting framed as good maligned manager. Purges kinda just happened, as natural disasters happen, not that someone is responsible. Even years before this war, the Russian archives were closed to researchers and memoir organizations dedicated to communists crimes persecuted. But here, I am referring to popular discussions where people really liked to ignore that Stalin was in alliance and that purges and such happened already before WWII. Claiming that WWII was real world example of clear good aliance vs clear bad. I mean, Germany was clear bad sure. And East and Russia were victim, absolutely. And also, German behavior in East was more brutal then their behavior in West - the colonization and quest for living space were different then quest for dominance. Nevertheless, it the whole good vs bad framing here is kinda funny, cause one of good guys is Stalin.
- badpun 4y ago
  I'm not sure how much about purges was known in the West at the time (USSR was pretty well cut-off from the rest of the world), but by 1940, the West already knew about the Katyń Massacre. I think it was clear for leadership there that they're allying with one monster to defeat another one, and they could very well do the same thing in reverse order if circumstances called for that. It was just that, at the time, it was Hitler who was bombing London and not Stalin, so he had to go first.
  - watwut 4y ago
    To be clear, I do not blame them. It was right choice. I am reacting to what people wrote on various discussion forums including HN now. I remember reading in history book about Germany that news about purges affected situation in there - people seen communists and bigger threat and nazi as protection against communists more. So, at least something was known.

watwut 4y ago

A bit offtopic, but in Russia, Stalin victims were not rehabilitated like they were in other countries. And lately in Russia, Stalin was getting framed as good maligned manager. Purges kinda just happened, as natural disasters happen, not that someone is responsible. Even years before this war, the Russian archives were closed to researchers and memoir organizations dedicated to communists crimes persecuted. But here, I am referring to popular discussions where people really liked to ignore that Stalin was in alliance and that purges and such happened already before WWII. Claiming that WWII was real world example of clear good aliance vs clear bad. I mean, Germany was clear bad sure. And East and Russia were victim, absolutely. And also, German behavior in East was more brutal then their behavior in West - the colonization and quest for living space were different then quest for dominance. Nevertheless, it the whole good vs bad framing here is kinda funny, cause one of good guys is Stalin.

badpun 4y ago
I'm not sure how much about purges was known in the West at the time (USSR was pretty well cut-off from the rest of the world), but by 1940, the West already knew about the Katyń Massacre. I think it was clear for leadership there that they're allying with one monster to defeat another one, and they could very well do the same thing in reverse order if circumstances called for that. It was just that, at the time, it was Hitler who was bombing London and not Stalin, so he had to go first.
- watwut 4y ago
  To be clear, I do not blame them. It was right choice. I am reacting to what people wrote on various discussion forums including HN now. I remember reading in history book about Germany that news about purges affected situation in there - people seen communists and bigger threat and nazi as protection against communists more. So, at least something was known.