Interesting and Humour - page 3492

[Alexandr Saprykin]

https://inosmi.ru/science/20161221/238426385.html

[Дмитрий]

СанСаныч Фоменко:

I, for myself personally, am trying to understand how it happened in Churchill's formulation: "Stalin took Russia with a sokha and left it with an atomic bomb". This was done from 1928 to 1953.

Here, look, I am STILL exposing you as a liar - NEVER ANYWHERE did Churchill say or write such a thing!

Never anywhere!

And this lie was invented by the "famous" person Nina Andreeva, who was once expelled from the Party for actively writing anonymously, in an article in the late 80s.

[Дмитрий]

How many times have I asked you - well, don't lie!

Well, the facts of real life do not coincide with your idealized world, but why lie and make things up?

[Alexandr Saprykin]

Дмитрий:

Here, look, I'm FREAKING you out with a lie - NEVER ANYWHERE did Churchill say or write such a thing!

Never anywhere, ever!

And this lie was invented by the "famous" person Nina Andreeva, who was once expelled from the party for actively writing anonymously, in her article in the late 80s.

Dmitry, you are trying to accuse San Sanych of lying yourself (which is not good)))

This characterization of the results of the modernization of the USSR was first used by Isaac Deutscher (who, however, was by then no longer a Trotskyist) in an article in the Manchester Guardian, March 6, 1953, on the death of Stalin:

The core of Stalin's historic achievements consists in this, thathe had found Russia working with wooden ploughs and is leaving her equipped with atomic piles. He has raised Russia to the level of the second industrial power of the world. This was not a matter of mere material progress and organisation. No such achievement would have been possible without a vast cultural revolution, in the course of which a whole nation was sent to school to undergo a most intensive education.

"The essence of Stalin's historical achievements is that hetook Russia with a sokha, and leaves it with nuclear reactors. He raised Russia to the level of the second industrial power in the world. This was not the result of purely material progress and organisation. Such achievements would not have been possible without a comprehensive cultural revolution in which the entire population attended school and studied very hard".

[Sergey Golubev]

Wednesday has come and the week has gone

[Дмитрий]

Alexandr Saprykin:

Dimitri, you are lying to San Sanych yourself (which is not good)))

This characterization of the outcome of the modernization of the USSR was first used by Isaac Deutscher (who, however, was no longer a Trotskyist by then) in an article in the Manchester Guardian, March 6, 1953, on the death of Stalin:

The core of Stalin's historic achievements consists in this, thathe had found Russia working with wooden ploughs and is leaving her equipped with atomic piles. He has raised Russia to the level of the second industrial power of the world. This was not a matter of mere material progress and organisation. No such achievement would have been possible without a vast cultural revolution, in the course of which a whole nation was sent to school to undergo a most intensive education.

"The essence of Stalin's historical achievements is that hetook Russia with a sokha, and leaves it with nuclear reactors. He raised Russia to the level of the second industrial power in the world. This was not the result of purely material progress and organisation. Such achievements would not have been possible without a comprehensive cultural revolution in which the entire population attended school and studied very hard."

I know about Deutscher.

What has he got to do with what I wrote?

Did Churchill say or write such a thing?

So I'm not fooling myself.

[Dmitry Fedoseev]

Alexandr Saprykin:

Yeah, if the author of this poem had served in the Soviet army in a 50/50 unit with Caucasians, he would have written poems about friendship between peoples

[transcendreamer]

СанСаныч Фоменко:

You and I have fundamentally different perspectives of evaluation, which are well demonstrated in our evaluation of the 1947 monetary reform. I measure it by the majority, not by individual, however extraordinary individuals.

For you, the fairness of the reform is an equivalent exchange of money in terms of volume and time.

In my family there was no such question and could not have been: the whole family, which had survived the revolution and the war, including my grandfathers, had no savings at all. The whole family lived from paycheck to paycheck. And there was an overwhelming majority of such people in the country.

One last thing.

I am not an idealist or a propagandist for the red project or anything like that...

I, personally, for myself, am trying to understand how it happened in Churchill's formulation: "Stalin took Russia with a sohoy and left it with an atomic bomb". This was done from 1928 to 1953.

To understand it adequately, I had to discard many ideologemes and base myself only on facts, without any ideological evaluation of them.

How was such a monumental step taken? Initially in a poor, illiterate country, with 80% of the population living on farms, without managerial elites and educated class? Given the terrible war... How? That is the main thing, not how the restaurants were stormed (were there any in 1947? There was a famine year in 1946).

I hope I am not provoking you or offending you with my previous message and I understand quite well what you are writing about and the role of Stalin and the need for industrialization, all that I am not disputing, but I want to say a little different: were camps and stories with "enemies of people" and all these drastic measures and class purges really necessary on the verge of normalcy? (actually beyond normal) - and why in the end did it all gradually degenerate into the most banal nomenklatura trough for "cronies", and completely strange notions began to emerge, such as the concept of "I got it" because even money could not buy it? - Doesn't this indicate a fundamental contradiction in the structure of such a society? - and undoubtedly yes, the labour feat of the people and the industrial breakthrough and rockets are all super, but for some reason one does not want to live in that era and repeat that experiment... as for the war, it is an exogenous factor because there are 2 clear counter-examples: surrendered Germany with tremendous inflation, devastation, debt and concessions, now suddenly the 1st economy in Europe, and surrendered Japan with minimal land and resources survived nuclear explosions and now suddenly one of the leading innovative economies in Asia - does this not suggest that there was something wrong in the USSR initially? - How did the victorious country (USSR) end up as a resource colony?

[Dmitry Fedoseev]

Alexandr Saprykin:

Dimitri, you are lying to San Sanych yourself (which is not good)))

This characterization of the results of the modernization of the USSR was first used by Isaac Deutscher (who, however, was no longer a Trotskyist by this time) in an article in the Manchester Guardian, March 6, 1953, on the death of Stalin:

The core of Stalin's historic achievements consists in this, thathe had found Russia working with wooden ploughs and is leaving her equipped with atomic piles. He has raised Russia to the level of the second industrial power of the world. This was not a matter of mere material progress and organisation. No such achievement would have been possible without a vast cultural revolution, in the course of which a whole nation was sent to school to undergo a most intensive education.

"The essence of Stalin's historical achievements is that hetook Russia with a sokha, and leaves it with nuclear reactors. He raised Russia to the level of the second industrial power in the world. This was not the result of purely material progress and organisation. Such achievements would not have been possible without a comprehensive cultural revolution in which the entire population attended school and studied very hard".

And how is it that the United States managed to develop nuclear reactors without Stalin?

[transcendreamer]

Alexandr Saprykin:

https://inosmi.ru/science/20161221/238426385.html

first the sixth ocean, now the iron river...... it seems the ancient mythology is correct.....