General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Андрей Борцов
Knowledgia
comments

Comments by "Андрей Борцов" (@Mentol_) on "Knowledgia" channel.

Poland killed 17 thousand Wehrmacht soldiers in 36 days (472 people a day). France and allies killed 46 thousand Axis soldiers in 43 days (1070 people a day).
24
@cgabriel777 I am Russian. Stop spreading lies about the history of my country. If you want to understand the Bolsheviks, then instead of reading the books of the nationalists (Solzhenitsyn), read the works of the Bolsheviks themselves. Shock!
19
@cgabriel777 In science, it is customary to use primary sources of information. For the Nazis, this is Hitler's book and his orders. For fascism, this is Mussolini's book. For Soviet communism, these are the works of Lenin-Stalin. If, in order to understand the policy of the Bolsheviks, you begin to read the opinion of their opponents (nationalists, liberals), then you see the interpretation of people who do not like this system, but you do not see the thoughts of the authors of the policy. What is a crime for Solzhenitsyn is not such for the Bolsheviks. For example, the Molotov-Ribentrop Pact. What did the USSR get? Non-aggression pact, economic treaty and sphere of influence in Europe. How is this bad from the point of view of Soviet interests? Or fighting religion. The Bolsheviks believed that religion had a bad effect on the critical thinking of a person. Therefore, the fight against religious propaganda makes your society healthier. But the nationalists believed that this was the destruction of Russian culture. However, the Bolsheviks divided culture into progressive and regressive - they supported the first and fought against the second. Do you see how things change when you use the right context? Or are you saying that the Soviet invasion of Europe was a crime. Now look what happened: Romania annexed Bessarabia in 1919, the USSR returned this region in 1940. Poland annexed part of Ukraine in 1921, and the USSR returned it in 1939. How is this bad for the USSR? Any state has its own national and geopolitical interests. But Solzhenitsyn was able to convince you that the defense of Soviet interests is a crime.
18
@cgabriel777 The opinion of people who suffered from the policy of the Soviet government is also propaganda, only anti-Soviet. Using such a source of information, you will understand the position of the opponents of communism, and not its authors. If your goal is to study communism, then you will use the original source of information. But if your goal is to fight against communism, then you will continue to study the opinions of the victims.
13
@cgabriel777 Open the Soviet constitution and you will see that freedom of religion was proclaimed in the USSR. But religious propaganda is prohibited because it negatively affects a person's thinking. Those dissatisfied with the policies of the Soviet government were a minority in the USSR, and Solzhenitsyn is trying to show that they were in the majority. This is manipulation. There is a lot of false information in his book. In reality, there is no division into normal Russians and communists - they are all Russian. You insult the history of my country when you say that the USSR had nothing to do with Russia. The civil war and the war against Germany were won by Soviet patriots. Industrialization, the atomic bomb, the eradication of illiteracy, the equal rights of women, the reduction of the working day, the reduction of class privileges, the separation of church and state, the collegial government of the state - all these are the achievements of Russians under the leadership of the Bolsheviks.
13
@cgabriel777 1. You need to take statistics from Soviet documents, not from Solzhenitsyn's book. During the Great Terror (1937-1938), 4 million people were restricted in their rights. Of these, 682 thousand were sentenced to death. This is a statistical minority. The total population during this period is about 170 million people. 2. During the war with Germany, being a communist was considered very prestigious. Therefore, according to statistics, from 30 to 50% of all Soviet soldiers were members of various communist organizations. The activities of the NKVD did not differ from the activities of the soldiers. 3. You constantly say that the Bolsheviks were criminals. This is the point of view of Solzhenitsyn which you do not check for authenticity. Just look at what state Russia was in after the civil war and how could such a state win the war against Germany? Because the main policy of the Bolsheviks was aimed at the development of the state, and not at repression. Solzhenitsyn is deceiving you. Adequate people will not allow you to erase the Soviet period from Russian history.
6
@roguestate6221 Which of the things I said is wrong?
4
Soviet casualties killed in all Rzhev operations amount to 392 thousand people. But if you add the wounded, there are 1.1 million. People confuse the wounded with the dead.
3
This is an old myth. In fact, after the Polish campaign, Germany had enough ammunition for a war in the west even without taking into account current production.
3
@radomirratkovic4407 Show me a soviet order with the goal of capturing Europe.
3
@boombap1176 1. I know that this is a series. To save time, I watched only those fragments that relate to the history of Russia. I have a lot of experience in the study of history, so I immediately see the main idea of the film - to swap the Nazis and their victims. Some right-wingers in Russia use similar tactics. 2. Find the text of the Soviet constitution and read it. For example, let's take the constitution of 1936. Article #123 says that all citizens, regardless of nationality, should have equal rights. Article #124 says that in order to ensure freedom of conscience, the church is separated from the state, and a person retains the right to any faith, including anti-religious propaganda. Article #125 says that everyone has the right to freedom of speech, press and rallies. Of course, some articles were violated in the USSR. For example, during the Great Terror (1937-1938), an article was violated that said that only a court can establish a person's guilt. But special commissions of 3 people were created who violated this procedure. However, with regard to the equality of citizens, I do not remember that there were facts of the introduction of slavery. When they talk about the gulag, they forget to say that a person received freedom after the expiration of the sentence. 3. With regard to German plans for Europe, I recommend that you find the text of the following conferences between Hitler and the generals: - November 5, 1937 (also known as the Hossbach protocol). - May 23, 1939 - August 22, 1939 - November 23, 1939 - January 9, 1941. It is also necessary to remember that Hitler, for propaganda purposes, spoke one information to the public, and at closed meetings he spoke another (truth).
3
@boombap1176 You don't understand the difference between left and right ideas. The left supports social progress, while the right supports traditions. It didn't start in 1917, but after the French Revolution (1789). The left supported the transformation of the monarchy into a republic, while the right saw it as a worldwide conspiracy to destroy traditional values. After the revolution in Russia, they simply said that this was a new stage in the conspiracy. The right sees religion as a good foundation for society, while the left (Bolsheviks) see religion as a relic of the old society that negatively affects the critical thinking of a person. The Bolsheviks set a goal to modernize society, so they supported anti-religious propaganda. They had a positive purpose to give society a scientific foundation, which they called Marxism.. But the nationalists interpreted their policies as a plot to destroy public morality. The right does not understand that public culture has progressive and regressive currents. The Bolsheviks supported the progressive and suppressed the regressive. Therefore, the interpretation of the right-wing in relation to the Bolsheviks is incorrect at the level of worldview.
3
@boombap1176 The modern far left and the Bolsheviks are not the same. There were several periods in the USSR. During Lenin, women received equal social rights with men, abortions were allowed, and non-traditional orientation was considered part of the freedom of the individual. It was a revolutionary period. But it ended, and during Stalin's time, non-traditional orientation was considered a mental illness, and gays were treated in a psychiatric hospital. Abortions were allowed only for medical reasons. Prostitution was banned by law, as weel as pornography. In any case, this does not give the nationalists the right to create a fake reality of life in the USSR.
3
@IblewuponyourfaceIII Anthony Sutton is a economist, not a historian. He created a conspiracy theory.
3
@boguslawgajdeczko6207 I rely on rational arguments. You rely on a conspiracy theory.
2
@boombap1176 1. The theory of class struggle was discovered by the French in 1820. 2. You still have not provided any evidence that the Bolsheviks believed in Judaism. Not a single quote from Lenin, Stalin or Trotsky. You can't use a theory as fact until it's proven.
2
I am Russian. Why are you spreading false information about the history of my country? Why do you say that the fight against religion that oppresses critical thinking is bad? Why are you talking about fake medical experiments? Instead of reading right-wing literature on communism, open the work of the Bolsheviks themselves.
2
@guyvert49 1. State control in Germany and Italy was aimed at preserving the hierarchical system. According to the compass, this is the "authoritarian right wing" idea. State control in the USSR was aimed at suppressing the exploiting class and the idea of the gradual withering away of the state. This is a left wing idea. 2. Open Hitler's book and you will see that he rejects Christian morality which says that inflicting pain is evil. For the Nazis, the struggle that creates pain is part of the laws of nature that they believe make their race stronger (good). Hitler's opinion here is the primary source. The opinion of liberals is secondary. 3. Lenin's idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat is the primary source in relation to Soviet politics. He believes that society is divided into classes that have different interests. You cannot give complete freedom to all people because in this case the minority will exploit the majority. In order to change this, the rights of the minority (the exploiting class) must be restricted so that the majority are free from their economic exploitation. Most often, the restriction is just a formal one, but sometimes you can be placed in a prison. Thus, the prison system in the understanding of Lenin is part of a democratic system, and not part of slavery, as the liberals say.
2
Stalin, May 4, 1935: “We must finally understand that of all the valuable capital available in the world, the most valuable and most decisive capital is people, cadres. We must understand that under our current conditions, cadres decide everything. We will have good and numerous cadres in industry, agriculture, transport, the army, our country will be invincible. If we will not have such personnel - we will limp on both legs. "
1
This is a conspiracy theory.
1
The aim of the Western policy of appeasing Germany was to prevent a war. But in the USSR, this was perceived as pushing Germany into a war against him. But the documents do not prove this.
1
You are not providing any arguments.
1
> The Soviets are equally complicit in starting WWII fake. > and have the blood of 50 million lives on their hands Proof? Of course not.
1
You do not understand what world war is. World war is a coalition conflict. None of the coalitions declared war on the USSR in 1939. Thus, the USSR was outside the war and could not be its initiator. This war was between Germany on the one hand and Poland and the west on the other. And the Soviet operation in the east was a separate war that was not part of the world war. And what about 50 million people killed by Stalin?
1
USSR opposed fascism in Spain (1936) and Japanese imperialism in China. This was unchanged until the conclusion of the Munich Agreement (1938). After this event, the Soviet government began to trust the West less and could already choose between it and Germany. Germany was able to offer better conditions than the west, so the USSR entered into an agreement (but not an alliance) with it. The official status was friendly neutrality. The USSR did not help Germany because trade is a two-way exchange, not a one-way aid. When neutral Sweden trades with Germany, it does not help her. USSR invaded Poland for a cause independent of Germany. Germany planned to create a puppet Ukrainian state on the territory of eastern Poland and occupy the Baltic states. The USSR prevented this. A joint war against Poland shows the hostility of the two states, does not prove a military alliance between them. The reason for Poland’s defeat was the lack of military coordination with France. If the French army launched a major offensive in the west, the USSR could abstain from its operation.
1
For the USSR, the operation in Poland is the return of territories that Poland annexed in 1921. This also prevents Germany from gaining all of Poland. Therefore, one cannot say that this is a joint operation, because there is not even a joint military plan (the secret protocol contains spheres of political influence, and not a military plan). The killing of Polish officers is an operation against the military and class enemies of the USSR. For the USSR, crime is not murder, but inaction. Yes, this is brutal, but state interests are always more important.
1
Losers.
1
Here is a brief list of the achievements of the two revolutions of 1917: - The peasants were given more land. - The working day is reduced from 10.5 hours to 8 hours. - Improvement of the health care system. - The policy of eliminating illiteracy of the population. - Equality of men and women is presented. - Elimination of class privileges. - Separation of church from state. - Cessation of economic exploitation of man by man.
1
If communism is always weakness and poverty, then the USSR should have lost the war to the Hitler's European Union. Try again.
1
1. During feudalism, the first capitalist revolutions also ended in failure. 2. The Berlin Wall was created to facilitate border controls, and not to keep people locked. 3. Western civilization has a long history of colonialism (today financial and political monopolies). Now we have the illusion of democracy: no matter which party you vote for, you will get control of the bourgeoisie under you and commercial ideology instead of the lack of ideology. 4. What you just said is an attempt to gain the moral superiority of some countries over others. This is a form of dominance which means a lack of democracy.
1
@wildec2 Why is the spread of communism evil and capitalism not? Why is North Korea being isolated is bad for you, and foreign politicians who talk about destroying it is good? Don't you see any propaganda here?
1
@wildec2 1. When the USSR liberated part of China and Korea from the Japanese army, is this aggression for you? It’s strange. Is it "bad" to act in your geopolitical interests and expand your zone of influence? But for whom, for the West or for the USSR? For some reason, you forbid any nation other than the Western one to protect their interests. 2. When socialism in Europe was destroyed, the United States did not begin to conduct peace negotiations with the new Russia, but simply moved its military bases and cultural influence to the east. If you do not condemn it, then this is a double standard. 3. Nuclear weapons are a guarantee of your safety. Do you forbid Korea to have security, but do you mind the security of other nations? This is double standards again. Is the nation that does not submit to the political dictatorship of the United States creates a problem for you? But these are your problems, not theirs. 4. You say that in North Korea there is an ideology of national exclusivity. But how did you know about this if this country is isolated? From the western press (lol)? But when an American president says that the United States is an exclusive and free nation, then you don't judge it, right?
1
@wildec2 1. North Korea and communists from other countries considered the South Korean government to be under American influence / occupation. Thus, the war against the south is a war for the liberation of all of Korea from foreign domination. If for the USSR this can be considered an expansion, then for North Korea it is a war of independence. This is by no means an analogue of German aggression (lol). 2. I have the same attitude to North and South Korea, but you consider the south as a democracy and the north as an empire of evil (propaganda). For this reason, I consider my position more objective than yours. If you are looking for the truth, you should not create privilege for one country by demonizing another.
1
@wildec2 Why don't you just leave North Korea alone? The aggression comes from you, not from her.
1
@wildec2 You really sound like a victim of massive propaganda. North Korea starts war first? These are their internal affairs (the union of their nation into one state), not yours. Is she building nuclear weapons to defend her independence? This is their internal policy, not yours. You have no moral right to say that their weapons or economy should be destroyed because if you do that, you become a barbarian like a Nazi. You say that propaganda in North Korea inspires people that they are exceptional, but you think that you have the moral right to decide whether the sovereign state should be preserved or not. You are deeply ill my friend.
1
@wildec2 Where did you get the information that North Korea threatens other countries if this country is closed? From Western media? If so, do you still believe that you are not a victim of propaganda? You probably think that you live in a democratic country in which there is no propaganda? Have you ever read the original speech of the leader of North Korea? How can one country threaten several countries that are superior to it militarily and economically? Have you ever thought about it?
1
@wildec2 I asked where did you get the information that the leader of North Korea is threatening to use weapons against other countries and you did not answer. Until you prove your thesis with the help of original sources, then you will not have the moral right to consider your opinion as real. This is the basic logic.
1
@wildec2 In normal dialogue, each side is responsible for what they say. If a mistake is made, then the person apologizes for the misinformation and the discussion continues. You did not provide the original (North Korean) source of information that confirms your words about the armed threats to the address of other countries. Instead, you start to say over and over again that this regime is one of the worst in history. But a person who is looking for the truth never uses those words that he cannot prove - this is unscientific. I try to be neutral in this situation and not defend either side, but I want to make sure that your words are true, and they not an interpretation of the yellow press that you mistook for the words of the North Korean leader.
1
@wildec2 > paying any attention to news reports of the crazy threats This is the main reason why you are so negative towards this country. There is media from your country between North Korea and you that distort information. How did I know this? Because you were not able to show me the original text of the speech of the leader of North Korea. The researcher is always looking for the primary source of information and if he does not find it, then such information is unreliable.
1
@wildec2 You could not show the original sources of information, but you keep thinking that you know everything about North Korea? Then you are either a child or an idiot. If you were normal, you would delete all your posts on this forum because the information in them is unreliable. Instead, you save your ego and say that this conversation is not interesting to you, but you have already written more than 20 posts on this forum. Thus, you showed that you are a liar in addition to being an idiot.
1
How can you take care of the lives of your people in a war of total destruction?
1
@scorpioferrous7621 Hitler at a meeting with the generals said that he originally planned to invade France, and Poland would remain an ally. But later he received information that Poland could stab in the back and decided to destroy Poland first. It's documented.
1
> Soviets persecuted and murdered Holocaust survivors in the Rootless Cosmopolitan Campaign lol, this is fake. Cosmopolitanism is also not related to the Holocaust. > and continued to use Auschwitz as a concentration camp for their political prisoners. Also not true. The USSR took equipment from German camps to improve living conditions in Soviet labor camps. > World War II would never have happened if Stalin had not allied with Hitler in 1939. Fake. There is a documented speech by Hitler in May 1939 where he says that war with Poland is inevitable. The position of the USSR was not the cause of the conflict between Germany and the west.
1
1. The fight against cosmopolitanism does not mean anti-Semitism. Use the search: "Stalin about anti-Semitism." 2. Use as a concentration camp does not mean use as a death camp. 3. The text of the secret protocols does not contain the goal of creating a military alliance. Negotiations on the entry of the USSR into the Axis bloc failed in November 1940. The USSR and Germany invaded Poland for various reasons.
1
Totalitarianism was created by Mussolini only for Italy. Germany and the USSR had no relation to him.
1
This is a tabloid myth. The Russian opposition passed through the territory of Germany in exchange for the Germans interned from Russia.
1
Why do you think that in a war of total destruction there should be liberal humanism?
1
Romania annexed Bessarabia in 1918. The USSR returned in 1940. What is the problem?
1
So says Romania, but not the USSR. The USSR relies on its own opinion, not on the Romanian one. Do you have a problem with this?
1
Why do you think that the USSR did not have the goal of national reunification? The USSR is a union of several different republics, and not a Russian national state.
1
The Romanian army was the most effective: it almost took Moscow and completely captured Berlin.
1
> And Russian army had to recruit half of the country to win the war. USSR had a population of 190 million in 1941. Half is 95 million. But 34.5 million were called up in the Red Army. > Most of them were sent bear handed against tanks and machine guns. In real life, the USSR created more infantry weapons and tanks than Germany. > Great tactics. Cannon fodder Russian style. Too much Hollywood propaganda in your head. Try to quote Soviet documents. > Luckly germans run out of ammo otherwise you were all speaking german now Germany produced 16 billion bullets for infantry weapons. Apart from artillery and aerial bombs. Conclusion: you live in virtual reality created by Hollywood and Nazi propaganda.
1
Armies are guided by orders. Try to quote a Soviet order that aims to create human waves.
1
Also. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzsKnKcb1-A
1
Also #2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7BE8CsM9ds
1
Human waves are a myth that you use to create the military and moral superiority of Romania and Germany over the USSR in this war. Primitive propaganda. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfZXlpJkDJg
1
> Communists killed more people than Hitler Fake info.
1
@cgabriel777 1. I do not deny that the Soviet government killed people. I say that 5% of their policy was aimed at terror and 95% at the development of the state and society. Solzhenitsyn's book is propaganda because it creates the illusion that 95% of politics in the USSR is terror. I suggest you look at what was in the USSR besides terror. 2. I answered your question why the Bolsheviks fought against religious propaganda, but you ignored it. 3. You have not read a single work of Lenin or Stalin, but you have already concluded that the Bolsheviks wanted to become a new religion and turn their citizens into slaves. This is your mistake. 4. You have not read the discussion in the Soviet government about the burial of Lenin's body. 5. Excellent. Now you take another anti-communist book (Orwell who collaborated with British intelligence) and tell me what kind of society the Bolsheviks wanted to create. Why don't you read the works of the Bolsheviks themselves? It seems that your goal is not to study history, but to fight against the Bolsheviks. Moreover, these Bolsheviks are virtual because you do not study the real ones.
1
@boombap1176 Russia before the revolution had anti-Semitic laws. This was the reason why many Jews supported the revolution. But this is not a Jewish conspiracy. These Jews were not nationalists, they were internationalists. You use right-wing propaganda that calls the revolution in Russia Jewish, but you never read the works of the Bolsheviks themselves. After the revolution, any religious propaganda was banned because it has a destructive effect on the critical thinking of a person.
1
@boombap1176 The Jewish conspiracy theory is a myth created by right-wing Russian emigration. They needed to explain why they lost the civil war and they found the reason. Please do not believe those sources of information that love such theories, just take and read the works of the Bolsheviks themselves. It must be available in your country.
1
@boombap1176 The qualities of a man depend on his ideas. Your mistake is that you think that all Jews are automatically Judaists. You are looking at the nationality of a person, and not at what ideas he supports. I don't see that you read any of the works of the Bolsheviks. Instead, you use false information that the Jews control the revolution (the right-wing emigration created false lists of the Soviet government). This is a classic conspiracy theory.
1
@boombap1176 Right-wing emigration created a fake list of the Soviet government where 90% were Jews. In reality, here is a list of the first Soviet government: Vladimir Lenin - Russian. Alexey Rykov - Russian. Vladimir Milyutin - Russian. Alexander Shlyapnikov - Russian. Vladimir Ovsienko - Ukrainian. Nikolay Krylenko - Ukrainian. Pavel Dybenko - Ukrainian. Victor Nogin - Russian. Anatoly Lunacharsky - Russian. Ivan Skvortsov - Russian. Georgy Oppokov - Russian. Ivan Teodorovich - Polish. Nikolay Avilov - Russian. Iosif Stalin - Georgian. Leon Trotsky - Jew. But it does not matter because the quality of a person is determined by his views, and not by nationality. If you say that Soviet Jews were supporters of their religion, which had the goal of destroying Christianity, then you need to find in what documents or speeches they declared this. Hint: the "Protocols of Zion" is a fake that has nothing to do with the Soviet government.
1
@boombap1176 1. You have not provided any evidence that the Bolsheviks relied on Judaism. No quotations from the works of the Bolsheviks. 2. You use the fact of closing churches in Russia as evidence of Judaism. But that's just your interpretation. You have not provided evidence that the Bolsheviks put such a meaning into their policies. 3. The communist ideology arose after the French historians (Augustin Thierry, Francois Meunier and Francois Guizot) created the theory of class struggle. The first communist revolution also occurred in France in 1871. France is part of Europe, and its culture is part of Western European culture.
1
@boombap1176 1. This movie is a classic conspiracy theory that tries to swap the aggressor and his victim. Science studies primary sources of information. We have documented records of Hitler's conversations with German generals where he says that he plans to start a war in Europe. 2. As far as communism is concerned, its root is an attempt to overcome the shortcomings of the capitalist system. Neither in Marx's manifesto nor in the works of the Bolsheviks is there anything about Judaism.
1
@boombap1176 I have watched this movie twice. It contains too much fake information and misinterpretations. Here are some examples: - It says that the murder of Tsar Nicholas 2 and his family was a ritual sacrifice for the Jews, although there is no documentary evidence for this. It's just another conspiracy theory. - Or a quote from Karl Marx about the need for a revolutionary holocaust. If you open the indicated book, you will see that there is an article by Engels "the struggle in Hungary" which divides the nations into revolutionary and reactionary. - Or a quote from Trotsky where he wants to turn Russia into a desert. This fake quote is well known today in Russia, but its author is not Trotsky, but a newspaper of the Russian fascist party that was in exile in China. - The film says that communism was based on the idea of conquering the world. Although if you open Marx's manifesto, you will see what it says about the struggle against capitalist exploitation. - The film says that a slave-owning regime was organized in the USSR, but if you open the Soviet constitution, you will see that slavery is officially prohibited. - Fake information that the American bankers' money was part of the plan of Judaism. Although in reality, some bankers supported the February revolution because it was democratic in nature. - Fake information that the Red Army and the NKVD consisted of Jews. In reality, in 1920, there were 79% Russians in the Red Army, 5% Ukrainians, 3.4% Tatars, and 2.2% Belarusians. In the NKVD there were 77.3% Russians, 9.1% Jews + other nationalities. - Fake information that the white army consisted of Christians. In fact, religion and the monarchy had a low popularity after the February Revolution. - Wrong interpretation of the condemnation of anti-Semitism in the USSR as an indicator of Judaism. In reality, this is a process of democratization of society. You can find what Lenin said about this on July 25, 1918. - Quotes from the book of the nationalist Solzhenitsyn as a criterion for understanding Soviet policy. In reality, this person waged an information war against this government. Fake data from his book is well known today in Russia. - Fake information that the famine in the USSR was man-made. - Fake Lenin quotes that are not in his works. - etc.
1
@boombap1176 Science studies the subject based on primary sources of information. For soviet politics, these are soviet documents, the constitution, the works of Lenin, orders of Stalin etc. If you start watching films from foreign nationalists or their Russian counterparts (Solzhenitsyn) to study soviet communism, then you are making a big mistake. Because these people do not have full access to the documents, but they have a great motivation to show their ideological opponents as the devil. Then you tell me that my picture of the world is far removed from reality. But your reality was created by the nationalists, not the Bolsheviks. You can rely on the works of nationalists only in case of their own policy.
1
Sutton is an economist, not a historian. He created a conspiracy theory that the United States financed the revolution. Another theory says that the revolution was financed by Germany. Instead of looking for foreign roots, try to study the internal situation in Russia. Try to read the works of the Bolsheviks themselves.
1
> Sutton was not a conspiracy theorist. > You live in the NWO lie.
1
The concept of two totalitarian regimes was propagated in Europe after the capitalist counter-revolution.
1
Poland killed 17 thousand Wehrmacht soldiers in 36 days (472 people a day). France and allies killed 46 thousand Axis soldiers in 43 days (1070 people a day). The USSR killed 383 thousand Axis soldiers (1984 people per day) in 193 days (1941). The allies after the opening of the second front killed 340 thousand German soldiers in 216 days (1944), which gives 1,574 people a day. Moreover, the Allies had numerical, technical and material superiority over the enemy, in contrast to the Red Army.
1
Fake information. When the Bolsheviks gained power, they blocked access to foreign capital in the Soviet economy.
1
Can you quote any order of the Bolsheviks that aims to kill white Christians? Because it is religious propaganda, and the Bolsheviks were atheists and acted outside of religious logic.
1
Their faith was not the cause of the murder (Bolsheviks are atheists). The reason for the murder was a crime against the state, armed gangs, crimes against the revolution, class enemies, etc.
1
The Communists do not consider their activities criminal, the Nazis, too. This is how history works. The Nazis lost the second world war. The USSR lost the Cold War. As a result, the history was rewritten and the point of view of these governments was lost.
1
What exactly do you disagree with? What documents do you mean?
1
You misunderstood my position. We can find out the main facts from the documents, but we cannot recognize the position of the current government on this issue. For example, during the war, the Nazis considered the Holocaust the right policy because it cleans Europe of lower races. But Germany lost the war and the Holocaust was called a crime. But for the Nazis, crime was inaction.
1
1. Germany was not socialism because socialism is the socialization of the means of production. 2. Numerous documentary sources show that even ordinary people in the USSR wrote letters to Stalin and he even answered some of them. It's just that modern propaganda creates a virtual image of the evil empire.
1
@KenjaTimu 1. There is scientific nationalization and there is the nationalization that Hitler used. And these are two different things. 2. I only use historical facts. And you create a virtual image of an evil dictator who does not listen to criticism.
1
The war of annihilation for eastern Europe and the imperialist war for western.
1
Millions? And of course you can prove it.
1
@hughmungus1767 This is an old myth that was created by supporters of de-Stalinization in the USSR. In reality, Stalin knew that the war would be on June 10, 1941, but there was not enough time to complete the mobilization. And of course you can find "Stalin's office visit log" and see that he did not leave his workplace after the German invasion.
1
@guyvert49 left wing parties orienred to social progress. Right wing oriented to restoration traditions, nationalism, racism and a hierarchical society. In a word, it is the restoration of the laws of nature. Thats why nazis is right wing. Hitler in one of his interviews said that he could use any name for his party, even liberal one. Look with which parties inside Germany Hitler was an ally - these are right-wing nationalists. Look with which countries Germany was an ally in the war - these are the nationalists, the fascists or the monarchy.
1
@guyvert49 I read both the book of Hitler and the book of Mussolini, and the works of Lenin-Stalin. 1. I use the traditional political axis that is generally accepted. You are using an alternate axis that is often used to distort history. But it is not scientific. 2. The Nazis divided capitalism into two types - progressive national and regressive international. They supported the first, and fought against the second. This system was neither socialism nor classical free market capitalism. This is the third way. 3. The classical axis says that the left supports the idea of social progress. The Bolsheviks are on the left because they believe that society is divided into classes that have different interests. Then they say that the real form of democracy is not liberalism, but the dictatorship of the proletariat which expresses the will of the progressive class. The ultimate goal of the Bolsheviks is to build a classless society where people will have equal rights. The Nazis are fighting the division of society into classes. They say that people are united by their blood and soil. The Nazis reject the idea of democracy because Hitler believes that it leads to the moral degeneration of society. The ultimate goal of the Nazis is to build a racial state where people will be unequal according to the laws of nature. This is the right-wing idea (according to the classical axis). 4. Mussolini does not say that fascism is a form of socialism. He says that fascism is a positive alternative for liberalism. He says that a person can be free only in a strong state. He also says that fascism opposes socialism, which historical development understands as class struggle. Instead of class struggle, fascism offers the idea of national unity.
1
@guyvert49 This is not the opinion of Stalinist propaganda, but the generally accepted opinion of the scientific community. The Bolsheviks did not consider Hitler and Mussolini to be socialists. Stalin has an article where he explains that the Nazis are imperialists. But in any case, the terms must be studied from the point of view of the original source. Mussolini's book "The Doctrine of Fascism" says that fascism is not a form of socialism. It is a fact. And with regard to Hitler, everything is simple - he used the term socialism to get more supporters for his party. In the term socialism, he puts not the generally accepted meaning, but his own racist (anti-socialist) interpretation. He says the Marxists stole the term, but he actually did it himself (lol).
1
@guyvert49 1. Your alternative political axis is incorrect. 2. Your arguments about "evil" show that you are fighting against other ideologies instead of studying them. For example, the regulation of the economy in the USSR and Germany have different goals. 3. Open Hitler's book and you will see that the struggle nations is part of the laws of nature (good), and not evil. What you call evil is a liberal interpretation. 4. Open the works of Lenin and you will see that the "dictatorship of the proletariat" does not negate the idea of democracy. 5. Open the Soviet constitution and you will see that it makes slavery and racism illegal.
1
@guyvert49 "3 kinds of socialism" is just an idea in your head. You are not testing this idea for validity. You think that socialism is just state control. But who told you this? According to the primary sources, socialism is social ownership of the means of production. This is correct only for the USSR. Other countries (Italy, Germany, the United States, Britain) used state intervention to regulate the economy, rather than change the form of ownership from private to public. And I don't need to read books by foreign historians because this is a liberal interpretation of other systems. After World War II, liberalism began to dominate the world. As a result, historians began to rethink the history of the war and ideologies from the point of view of liberalism. The idea of a totalitarian state appeared as denying the personal freedom of a person. Although if you open Mussolini's book you will see that totalitarianism for him is a positive alternative to democracy.
1
@guyvert49 I read the book that you recommended to me and found several mistakes that the author makes: - The author says that Stalin never cared about losses in military operations. But if you open the transcript of the meeting after the Finnish war, you can see that this is not true. - The author repeats the old myth that Stalin did not prepare the Red Army for war against Germany. Although it is known that the concentration of the Red Army on the western border began on June 10, 1941, and in the middle of 1940 wartime rules were introduced in the economy. - The author repeats the myth that Stalin was in shock after the start of the war and went to the country. Although the journal of visitors to Stalin's cabinet is now available. - The author says that Stalin forbade the evacuation of civilians from Stalingrad, but does not show this secret order. Because it's a myth. - The author repeats the old myth that Stalin destroyed experienced commanders during the purge. But documents show that the Red Army had the same problems before and after the purge. - The author calls the Siberian troops experienced, although before that he said that Stalin weakened the Red Army. - The author says that Stalin created in the country a great atmosphere of fear in the USSR, but this is only the opinion of people with liberal convictions. The rest asked the government to continue the fight against the enemies of the revolution. - The author accuses Stalin of the fact that his intervention in the offensive near Kharkov in 1942 led to the failure of the operation. Although the documents show that the General Staff allowed this operation to be placed under the leadership of local commanders, one of whom was Khrushev. After the war, Khrushchev tried to shift the blame to Stalin. The author does not analyze the authenticity of his words. - The author says that Stalin was an inexperienced person in military affairs until 1943, although documents show that already in 1940 Stalin knew the basic issues of strategy and operational art and made corrections to the reports of his commanders.
1
> The Poles had no intention of voluntarily allowing Soviet forces into their country so this idea was (rightly) seen as impractical. Therefore, they were divided between Germany and the USSR. A good choice is to try to avoid Soviet influence in your country, but completely lose your sovereignty.
1
> probably Poland would resist better than against Germany... Stalin had killed lot's of officers and red army was in really bad condition Poland killed 17 thousand Wehrmacht soldiers in 36 days (472 people a day). France and allies killed 46 thousand Axis soldiers in 43 days (1070 people a day). The USSR killed 383 thousand Axis soldiers (1984 people per day) in 193 days (1941). The allies after the opening of the second front killed 340 thousand German soldiers in 216 days (1944), which gives 1,574 people a day. Moreover, the Allies had numerical, technical and material superiority over the enemy, in contrast to the Red Army.
1
From various sources - Rüdriger Overmans, Lopukhovsky, etc. What specific numbers do you doubt?
1
The data is plus or minus accurate. The data is plus or minus accurate. Now I have not found a source for the French campaign, but you can find it yourself using the search. Source for Wehrmacht losses in Poland - Wehrmacht Zentralstatistik, Stand 30.11.1944, Bundesarchiv-Militärarchiv Freiburg (BA-MA RH 7/653). Source for losses of the Axis armies in the USSR in 1941 - video "The Numbers Say it All | The Myth of German Superiority on the WW2 Eastern Front". The source of Wehrmacht casualties on the western front in 1944 is the Rüdriger Overmas - Deutsche militärische Verluste им Zweiten Weltkrieg.
1
@AtroFear You do not understand why the Soviet losses were high. There are two reasons. First, the Germans have more heavy artillery shells on the eastern front until 1944. This allows them to inflict more casualties than they themselves have because they are winning an artillery duel. Second, the great mobility of the Wehrmacht means that they can surround Soviet divisions at the beginning of the war and take many prisoners. Thus, repression has nothing to do with it. The purpose of the repression was to STRENGTHEN the state and the army, not to weaken it. Everything that could be considered the fifth column / potentially disloyal was destroyed. The old officers and the new ones had the same experience, but the new ones were more loyal. Therefore, I find it funny to read that the old officers called the most experienced. Who is this? Tukhachevsky who lost the battle for Warsaw? Lol.
1
@AtroFear 1. The big purge in the USSR took place during the summer 1937 - autumn 1938. This happened before the invasions of Poland and Finland took place. Soviet officers had experience of the civil war and the war with Poland in the 1920s. 2. The argument about Stalin's paranoia has no value. If you, instead of reading foreign literature about Stalin, take and read the books of Stalin himself, then you will see that this person retains sanity. He understood that a new big war in Europe could become a reality already in the late 1930s, so his purge of the army, the NKVD, the party and internal enemies was not a manifestation of virtual paranoia, but part of the country's preparation for a new war. Even before the purge, there was a public discussion in the party about the internal situation in the USSR and one of the speakers (not Stalin) said that: "We must destroy internal enemies in such a quantity that the positive effect lasts for a long time." 3. In fact, this topic of large Soviet losses has no real value. Why? If you compare the losses of countries in the Polish and French campaigns of the Wehrmacht, you will see that the losses of Germany's enemies exceed the German ones. Now compare the Soviet losses with these campaigns and you will understand that the difference is not so great (Polish losses are greater than Soviet ones, and French ones are slightly less). People look at these losses and see that in absolute terms, Soviet losses are greater than those of other countries, but the war in the east lasted longer. In fact, losses are more influenced by the economy than by the decisions of individual officers. If a country as poor in industry as Poland cannot provide its army with weapons and equipment in large quantities, then its losses will be higher.
1
@Abidkhan-fe3uk Because Hitler did not see England as a second front. After the destruction of France, there was only one front in Europe - the eastern one.
1
It is a myth. The evacuation from Stalingrad was in progress, but new refugees came from the west and therefore the number of civilians in the city was slowly decreasing.
1