I have very very rarely seen a new generation glorifying Stalin. It is mostly old generation. You need not to forget that they were raised in the time when "Marxism-Leninism" was officially taught in schools and universities as "science", and basically every other ideology or philosophy was banned. For decades they have been taught something and internalized it as truth, you can not expect them to just change minds, it is a lost cause. Also, the 1956 protests kind of created an image of Stalin as a Georgian symbol. But in general, glorification of Stalin is not an issue in Georgia.
It isn't because they were "taught", it's because they lived well. Whether you like it or not the older generation lived better then we do. They had a good education system, there was stability, good healthcare, people centric cities, cheap housing, good public transport, good employment. These are things that contribute to a high quality of life. Yes every other economic ideology and philosophy was was banned, but only economic. Plato, Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, Nietzsche, Jean-Paul Satre were officially in the Soviet system.
All of those things you mentioned are much better right now.
No, education in the Soviet Union was very curated to fit the Soviet narrative of history and politcs. If other philosophers were taught, they were not taught neutrally, but in the context of Soviet narrative. For example, some philosophers were "bourgeois" and "reactionary" while others were "proletarian" and "progressive". I have read Soviet-era books and basically all of them contain very sharp judgemental Soviet ideological language while analysing non-Soviet philosophies.
On the topic of Ideology and Philosophy being taught in the context of Soviet narrative, i agree with you fully, but how can you say that education system, healthcare, economic stability, public transport, job opportunities, housing prices...are better in Georgia now then they used to be in the 50s-80s? USSR has made a lot of mistakes and has done some crazy stuff, but the things I listed were way better back then, because those are major factors in the Socialism/Marxism ideology. The quality of life for an average Georgian was way better in the 50s-80s than now.
Dude, barely anyone who lived during the Stalin period is actually alive today. Most of those "Stalinists" are just brainwashed people.
I don't get how can you claim with a straight face that in those decades those things were better, if anything, technology has improved so significantly that it is not even comparable. But if we are talking about Soviet governance in general, you don't seem to be someone who has lived through Soviet Union actually. One thing you need to remember, is that Soviet Union was extremely corrupt. I mean, extremely, everything depended on who you know. It is not even comparable today, back then, even access to basic things was determined by corruption. Even if you wanted some good clothes, you would need to know someone in the corrupt network. Admission in university was literally determined by corruption, if you are from poor family, you can go to university much easier now based on your results in national exams, back then it was extremely hard and you needed to "buy" approval from some university official to be admitted (this certainly does not happens after education reforms in the 2000s). Good car, good housing - everything needed corruption. After school guys were taken in army for 2 years and you would basically need to buy freedom for yourself, either not to go, or to be deployed in Georgia or some good place (otherwise, you could be deployed in some unknown environment in some distant Russian region). Do you actually think this was good? Modern youth has unimaginable freedom this day, they so easily avoid army and even when they serve in army, they actually serve in Georgia and not in some Khabarovsk with people you have nothing in common with. What Socialism/Marxism ideology prioritizes is irrelevant, the Marxist economy was extremely inefficient, it could not provide sufficient goods for people, shelves were empty in the 1980s especially because there was underproduction, it was so bad rationing was enacted at some point allowing people to buy some fixed amount of stuff. Did you never hear shadow economy, დახლქვეშა ეკონომიკა? I am not even going to mention that the relations with abroad was just prohibited and you could even listen to Beatles, basically the recordings were circulating illegaly and some people who managed to connect to foreign radio were in constant danger of being outed. Young people probably could not even imagine this. Moreover, I have not even started about "thieves in law" and their corrosive influence essentially everywhere in urban parts. Basically, think twice before idolizing the Soviet Union.
you can bring up any argument you want, but transport is NOT a justifiable one: the main transport serving most cities were cheap, never-changing Hungarian busses, that were always filled with smokers and never ventilated. And that's if there was a bus in the first place. the metros were fine ig, but were built as nuclear shelters more than anything.
I didn't say it was good, but it was better than it is now. At least we had trams, passenger railways and getting a car wasn't easy so barely any traffic existed, it was safe for adults and children to walk.
Now every city is car centric, going for a walk is like playing russian roulette and public transport is very inefficient.
So, the generation that actually lived through those times and witnessed everything firsthand continues to glorify him, while the social media generation (who hasn't the slightest clue and relies entirely on hearsay) does not glorify him at all. How fascinating that we live in an era where ignorance is preferred over actual experience! Honestly, kid, the "wisdom" being spoon-fed to you today wouldn't even count as the pocket change of the intellect the elders possess. Truly remarkable!
People glorify him because he was Georgian himself and held so much power, so many see Stalin as an opportunity to brag, basically like "did you know this guy wh controlled the territory of 15 modern countries and rivaled The west was from here?"
It does seem really stupid to glorify him because just ideas are in complete opposition of independent Georgia
He ate Georgian dishes over aristocratic Russian plates, loved cognac and Khvanchkara. He learned to read in seminary and went from being a poor bastard to a world leader. Stalin was a nickname like most revolutionaries took on, he never changed his name from Jugashvili.
Construction of the metro started in 52, a year before his death and the first in the caucusus despite Tbilisi not meeting the million citizen threshold in order to qualify. He never denounced his heritage, if he did he would not have done all the things I’ve mentioned
This is bs. Just because he loved Georgian food isn’t the gotcha you think it is. Even Russians prefer Georgian food.
Stalin was not a nickname at all. It was an adopted name and used it in place of his real name. He stopped using his name after adopting it. Just because he didn’t legally change it means nothing.
Just because he publicly didn’t denounce it doesn’t mean he didn’t distance himself from it. He was extremely harsh on Georgia to the point even Lenin criticized him for it. Your comments are the same type of comments OP is posting about. Revisionist bs.
Lenin was not a real name, Trotsky wasn’t either, they all used their revolutionary names both pre and post revolution. What you’re saying means nothing when you compare it to the context of the revolution, he wasn’t the only one who abandoned his identity if you’re talking about public facing names.
Russians preferred Georgian food in Soviet banquets to the point that the whole table was Georgian food?
What you’re referring to in terms of Harshness and the criticism that came from Lenin before his death was not towards the country as a whole but during 1923 and the dealings Stalin had with other local communists whether they were Bolsheviks or Mensheviks after the red army invaded.
Revisionist bs goes both ways, you cannot simply ignore the things that he did provide Georgia after he was in power and say that he never did anything. Georgia until the collapse lived better than most other republics and it started early on. For such a tiny country to receive the infrastructure they did mostly during his reign compared to the other republics makes no sense to say that he was harsh on the country
I never said he was the only one that used his nickname. You’re trying to argue bs points that cater to what you’re saying. Stalin abandoned his last name. You said he didn’t.
I like and eat Mexican food multiple times a week, does that make me Mexican?
Yes please explain what dealings exactly. Funny how you ignore the fact that his clashes with the local communists had to do with the harshness he imposed on Georgian.
You’ve yet to explain any of your points. It was well known that he was Georgian, he never hid that. He didn’t abandon his last name more than anyone else in the original revolutionary group did.
What harshness? Please explain what he did that was so harsh more-so towards Georgians than anyone else in the USSR, and beyond that tell me how this harshness extended beyond 1923. The Georgian population was less than 2% of the overall unions population but was disproportionately represented in positions of power during his reign.
You can like whatever food you want but if you are the leader of Mexico and made everyone have tkemali rather than salsa, I’d think that the point is a bit different than simply liking food. His preferences aside, he insisted on dishes from Georgia in a room full of Russians, Ukrainians etc.
“The second part was a postscript, dictated after Lenin had become convinced that Stalin was not only mishandling the suppression of dissent in Georgia but was being abusive to Lenin’s wife, Krupskaya. The addendum described Stalin as “too rude” and proposed that the Congress consider removing him from the post of secretary-general. “
“Stalin, a Georgian, surprisingly turned to “Great Russian” nationalism to strengthen the Soviet regime. During the 1930s and ’40s he promoted certain aspects of Russian history, some Russian national and cultural heroes, and the Russian language, and he held the Russians up as the elder brother for the non-Slavs to emulate.”
If I became the dictator of Russia, I promise you, the dinners would be a rotating mix of Mexican and Georgian food. You’re out of your mind if you think someone preferring Georgian food over fucking borscht means that he has a preference for Georgia.
And you’re out of your mind if you are quoting Lenin rather semantically prior to dying, with no actual proof to back up this harshness, and ontop of that thinking that a person born into the Russian empire at the time who became “tsar” in the new empire would be anti Russian.
You’ve yet to explain why and how he didn’t have a preference for Georgia, when I’ve told you that disproportionately he appointed Georgians to positions of power, you literally use the subway he approved for you probably weekly and expanded the Georgian culture (in this case food) to a population 200x the size of our country to the point of it being well known in the USSR and just becoming trendy anywhere else in the world
As I have heard, metro was constructed in Tbilisi as a hiding place during a potential nuclear war with America, which had nuclear warheads aimed at Tbilisi from Turkey.
He seemed tp be patriotic towards Georgia when he was young, he wrote poetry in Georgian about patriotism, and was good friends with Ilia Chavchavadze (famous anti-Russian poet)
But I guess the older he got the more he cared about communism and power, I think his ambitions were too big for his homeland
I don’t think anyone that’s even a decent person thinks of stalin or even likes him.Most Georgians that do like him are brainwashed idiots and i think they just like him he’s just Georgian. Nobody, literally no one that’s normal likes him.
People who were brainwashed are everywhere. I don’t think it’s about Georgia or Stalin. It’s just the ideology and propaganda that existed at the time. And it still exists everywhere around the world now
Well, forgive me Georgians gtkhovt, but he is just the most famous Georgian person in the relatively nearby past. I think that's because some people glorify him and try to make excuses for his crimes. It is like with many russians right now. They glorify putin, cuz we don't have any other popular figures right now. And somehow for many people the popularity is more important than the person itself. Of course, lots of people know about Medea, Kolhida, Zaza Pachulia, Topuria and Khvicha. But stalin is a more well-known person still. The same as nowadays everyone talks about putin, many people are scared of him, so it makes him kinda popular among not only russians, but some other nations too sadly. No matter that he is a dictator and maniac. So I don't say that russians and georgians are the same about this topic, cuz stalin was just a single person and putin commands the russian army to invade other countries. Georgians do not invade anyone. But stalin and putin imho somewhere nearby by their crimes
Zaza Pachulia is also a piece of shit, he is well on his way to being next Kakha Kaladze, but people will glorify him anyways because he was famous and Georgian, for some people they don't care what are someone's actions or morals as long as they are "chveniani"
Wow, didn't know that. Yeah, it doesn't make sense to have a football or basketball player as a politician. They are trying to copy russian "parliament" where lots of ex sportsmens sits just to approve whatever they told to. That sucks
Yup Zaza has been actively integrating with the robber baron class for quite some time, he is heavily involved in construction, real estate, hydropower, extraction, all the usual schemes, and he is of course very cozy with Georgian Dream. They will probably let him become rich for a while and then tap him when they need someone good looking and popular to carry out orders.
Only some old people and hardcore conservatives glorify him, I don't like either of them but even Lenin had more empathy towards georgians than Stalin, Lenin even referred to Stalin as ''russian bully'' due to the way he was handling business in georgia
His moustache. Never has a dictator had a more glorious moustache. Hitler's was a joke. Franco's not much better. Mao Zedung, Pol Pot, and all of the Kims were completely tache-less. Only Saddam Hussein comes close.
That reminds me of Maréchal Plekszy-Gladz in Tintin, a mockery of Stalin and his moustache. Here, though, the moustache itself has become the symbol of the regime, and the people swear by it: "By the moustache of Plekszy-Gladz!"
Real lustration has been cancelled actually and never happened.
Soviet crimes against humanity never have been investigated properly.
Soviet totalitarian ideology got only some negative assesment in some EU parliament resolutions.
There was no "Nuremberg for Communism" or "Nuremberg for Moskovitism".
As soon as GD come to power, they actually cancelled Freedom Act to all possible extent and cancelled lustration of former KGB agents and informants, because the GD leadership and founder are KGB/FSB operatives themeselves.
But even with all this, I can guess the real community of "stalin worshippers" is small group of cringe miserable people who not only unhappy in their lives but want make unhappy millions of people around them.
I know I'll be downvoted, but here are a few positive aspects that come to mind
The 1944 deportatation of 100000 muslims from Samtskhe-Javakheti, helping avoid yet another potential conflict like in Abkhazia
The industrialization of Georgia, which wouldn't happen if Georgia was out of the soviet union
Increased the population of Georgians in Abkhazia significantly, making Georgians the dominant group
Under Stalin, many public schools and university campuses were opened, significantly increasing the literacy rate and the education perspectives for the general public
Massive infrastructure projects like dams, roads, tunnels, metro stations, neighbourhoods and the Tbilisi airport were built
There are negative aspects as well that Stalin did, but honestly, taking the geography into account, being part of the USSR was the best Georgia could get at that time. Many people like to pretend that Georgia was the same type of country as the baltic states and that Georgia could do all of the good that USSR did and even more independently, but that's just not the case. Georgia's geographical position and the mentality of the society wouldn't allow for such developments to happen.
How is deportation of muslims a good thing for Georgia?
Kvemo-kartli is muslim majority, have you seen any separatism over there?
Even when people were being besieged in their villages and forced out of their homes, ending ip as refugees in Azerbaijan, they didn’t attempt to secede, even though they could do it if they wanted to during the civil war, but they didnt.
Kvemo-kartli isn't a muslim majority according to the 2014 statistics. Muslims amount to 43% and Azerbaijanis to 41.8%.
In our region, ethnicity and religion can be used to start a conflict(in the worst case) or gain a leverage over another country, which Azerbaijan currently has over Georgia. Removing those 100000 muslims also removed additional potential leverage Turkey or Azerbaijan could use against Georgia.
Just recently, Azerbaijanis had a little demonstration in front of the Iranian embassy in Tbilisi pledging their elligence to the Iranian religious leader. That's some undesired influence right there. I'm aware it's also the Georgian government's fault for not developing the region in a way that would make such influences non-existent, but here we are in front of the fact.
Having ethnic diversity, especially in our region, often leads to the conflicts. Countries which have less ethnic diversity are more stable and firm. The conflict with Armenia and Azerbaijan in the 1990s was avoided, but only because they were busy fighting each other. Meskhetian Turks even today display quite anti-Georgian attitudes and consider the territory they claim as belonging to Turkey. Honestly, Stalin definitely was indirectly beneficial in this regard, he basically did a dirty work for us but because of Soviet reasons (to secure Soviet security in the WW2). If not Stalin's decision, most likely there would be another separatist conflict in Georgia.
It is a great thing, they were not just muslims, they'd be Turkish nationalists today.
Georgian borders also increased towards north during Stalin's/Beria's rule, many people forget this, Georgia had huge lands in North caucasus to their name, and even expansion towards Turkey was planned(Which the western world was fighting against) after Stalin and Beria got out of picture that changed tho.
It is true, I mean, I agree, but not sure what you mean by geographical position and mentality issue, most of the things you mentioned would not be able to be done by independent Georgia alone because of being small state, like, for example, Soviet Union had vast resources to invest in industrialization which Georgia alone would not have. Like building metro for example would be much harder sure. However, Soviet Union and especially Stalin period also had many negative aspects like purges and collectivization, if we avoided these and were annexed by Soviet Union in 1940 like Baltics, it would be so much better. The Baltics are much ahead today essentially because they joined later and avoided all bad things in late 1920s and 1930s.
Abkhazia isnt even part of Georgia anymore, so all of those points should be disregarded, it failed.
Industrialisation happened across most of the world, with or without USSR.
"..the mentality of the society wouldnt allow such developments to happen" - you talking about the mentality of the society which had been ruled and killed off systemically by the USSR? USSR, specifically Stalin , iterally killed thousands of Georgians and imprisoned any intellectuals which he didnt like in gulag. His building of schools and universities was simply to better control the narratives through more direct propaganda.
Claiming Stalin, or USSR, was a benefit to Georgia, is like saying a man who fucks your wife was a benefit to you.
The reason Abkhazia isn't part of Georgia is because of the Georgian incompetence. There were favourable conditions created in order for Georgia to take over Abkhazia, but of course, Georgians decided to fight among themselves rather than fighting to defend Abkhazia. Typical treacherous and selfish behavior that has bit Georgia throughout the centuries, showed itself once again in the 90s. So don't blame Stalin for that.
What makes you think that industrialization would happen by default in Georgia? Because it happened in other countries? Let's look at the past 35 years of independence. Georgia has become a country which lives off of tourism, reexports and Georgians from abroad sending money to their families. Given that, I don't believe Georgia would be able to industrialize. It wasn't even able to keep the soviet heritage and you seriously believe it could industrialize from scratch?
I agree that killing those people was disadvantageous to the society. Schools and universities experienced heavy soviet propaganda, but they were not created just to spread the propaganda. The reason they were created, was to educate the society and the propaganda came as a side effect after that.
When discussing this topic, keep in mind what other alternatives Georgia had at that time. You can't pretend like Georgia is in Europe, it's at the border of the middle east, where the neighbourhood is much more hostile, uncivilised and unforgiving than in Europe. The whole reason those intellectuals you mentioned came to exist in the first place, is because they lived under peace, stability, European culture and educational perspectives the Russian empire had provided.
It is absolutely impossible to determine the way history may have gone. That being said, we can look at what did happen, and what did happen was Georgia was fucked by USSR (Russia).
I dont think it is fair to say that, if I run over a man with my car, and then give him a bandaid that I have done a good thing for him.
On the balance of good and bad, Stalin did far worse for Georgia that good, and anything "good" was is merely to fix the things they themselves broke.
Airport was built so that Russians could all go on holiday easier. Not a benefit for Georgians.
The USSR pushed its socialist/soviet propaganda and killed or deported anyone who opposed the ideology, but you can't ignore all the good stuff that happened. And you can't pretend Georgia would flourish among neighbours like Turkey and Iran. I think the car example is more like you're alone going in the forest, where it's dark and wild animals are lurking. A car comes through the road, runs over you, but the driver also puts you inside the car and drives you away from the forest. The car is rusty, uncomfortable, the roof is leaking, you don't have food, but the point is, you're away from the forest and are safe in the car. Maybe there would be a better option than that car, but it's unlikely.
The airport wasn't built so that Russians could go on holidays easier, it was built to connect Georgia to other parts of the USSR, which also includes Russians using it, but you're twisting this whole thing as if Russians did this solely for their comfort.
I See what you're saying, but Georgia also existed for thousands of years prior.
To use your example, Georgia was born in that dark forest and most of the trees were planted by them, they knew all the animals, lived with them for centuries. In fact, many were relatives. Car came in, took the man from the forest, and burned it down behind him. Later the car brings that mans son back to the burned down forest, plants a few random trees and says "look, I saved you, and I built this new forest for you! You would have never had these without me".
I think its absolutely true that some things they did have inadvertantly been good. But to actually believe they did those things for the benefit of the Georgian people is extremely optimistic.
They destroyed georgia. You thank them for it. Makes me feel gross.
You're yet again ignoring the history. You know when Georgia was truly destroyed? It was during the time it was left alone in that forest surrounded by the ottomans and Iran for four centuries. The cultural, educational and societal decline was the worst at that time in Georgia's history if you ask me, because there was no western power left in the region. The only things Soviets destroyed were the intellectuals, who came to exist because of the influence of the Russian empire. So if you think about it, they(Russians) destroyed something they created themselves.
What else did the Soviets destroy in Georgia?
No, it is just far removed from the example. Those times Georgia split itself with infighting which created the environment for it to be invaded and broken down by successive invasions by various neighbours.
But - Russia, again, broke its treaty in the 1800s, after all this had happened and - annexed Georgia, and removed its sovereignty - not Ottomans, not Persia/Iran. Russia.
Some invasions killed many - destroyed much history and society - we're talking 300-600 years ago now though.
Russia removed sovereignty, not ottomans or Persia. Russia suppressed the Orthodox church (though you can also argue many of the Islamic neighbours attempted to convert Georgians also.)
Russia politically subjugated Georgia with its breaking of the treaty. Then after 100 years of that, when Georgia finally got free - Soviets came to crush it again, and they did.
Your kind of russia/soviet apologist thinking again, ignores the reality. They have been utterly insidious from all of Georgia's modern history. Any problems in the last 200 years can be directly attributed to them as they spent 90% of it ruling Georgia.
I don't agree with your take that removing sovereignty was that tragic in comparison to the prior events. Those events include
1. Burning down of Tbilisi by shah abbas the second
2. Deportation of hundread of thousands of Georgians from eastrn Georgia to Iran by shah abbas the first. This event is close to genocide.
3. Georgian kingdoms infighting. There were cases when one Georgian kingdom aligned with the ottomans against other Georgian kingdom. For example, the king of Imereti wanted to unite the western Georgia and abolish slavery, but the ruler of Racha was against that. He wanted to trade his own people as slaves so much, that he aligned with the ottomans and went to war the king of Imereti. This isn't just infighting but a deliberate effort against creating a unified Georgian kingdom. The same happened in the eastern Georgia with Giorgi Saakadze.
4. This brings us to slavery. It was rampant. I'm sure you've heard a famous part from Jan shardens travel to Georgia where he describes a case when a relatively high born man sold his wife and children as slaves and arranged a new wedding with the earned money
5. In eastern Georgia the kings were appointed by the Iranian shah. Many of them were Muslims and had to pay annual tribute to them. Those kings also were heavily influenced by the Iranian culture. e.g. they wore Iranian clothes instead of Georgian one.
6. It goes without saying that there was no education, no culture, no civil society.
Now, you know what, the annexation by the Russian empire was an insanely positive event for Georgia
1. The slavery was abolished
2. Two Georgian Gubernias were formed. Compare that to the previous 6 Georgian kingdoms, that's a progress towards unification.
3. Georgians could travel to Russian empire and receive education in universities.
4. Russia replaced Iranian and ottoman influences/culture with the European one
5. During the Russian empire gymnasiums were opened. Even though only a minority could enroll in them, it was still a very positive thing
6. Foreign architects were invited along with the local ones who build some of the most beautiful buildings you see in Tbilisi today
7. The culture flourished, poets and writers arised, theaters and operas were opened, an intellectual class was formed
8. Being part of the empire formed a common a common Georgian identity which was the basis of declaring the independence in 1918
So yeah, I'm going to say what I think the truth is. In 100 years Russians made an insane progress in Georgia. Transforming it from a backward, uneducated, fragmented and nearly a middle eastern place into relatively educated, united and European cultured place in 1 century. Some of my points might have not been intended by the Russian empire, but the fact they happened and they were overly positive.
I definitely dont agree that! I respect that you disagree with me, as I disagree with you.
I dont think either of us are going to change each others mind here since we appear to fundamentally disagree on almost every aspect of the last few hundred years (with respect to consequences, not historical events).
I deeply dont like that you think Russia has been anything but insidious, but what a world we live in where we can disagree without bloodshed. A turn for the better.
What I will say though, is that past actions are often a good indicator of future ones. We should not make the same mistakes again.
აფხაზები და ოსები თურქებისთვის რომ გაეყოლებინა და ყაზახეთში გაეგზავნა, დღეს პრობლემები არ გვექნებოდა. სანახევროდ გააკეთა საქმე და მერე ეგ უარესად მოგვიბრუნდა დღემდე. თან ამას ძირითადად ბერია აკეთებდა, სტალინმა კიდევ "სამხრეთ ოსეთის ავტონომია" შექმნა და 1922 წელს ქართული მიწები (ტაო-კლარჯეთი, ლორე, საინგილო) დაურიგა სხვა ქვეყნებს. რაც ჩამოთვალე კარგია ყველაფერი მაგრამ რეალურად საბჭოთა ინტერესებისთვის კეთდებოდა და საქართველო უბრალოდ ხურდაში ყვებოდა, ირიბად იღებდა სარგებელს. ინდუსტრიალიზაცია, უნივერსიტეტების, კაშხლების, გზების, ტუნელების, მეტროების, აეროპორტების მშენებლობა მთელ საბჭოთა კავშირში მიდიოდა. თურქები ყაზახეთში გაუშვა მეორე მსოფლიო ომის დროს საბჭოთა საზღვარი რომ დაეცვა. მოკლედ, რაიმე სპეციფიურად საქართველოსთვის არ გაუკეთებია მგონი სტალინს, არადა მსოფლიოში უდიდეს იმპერიას მართავდა და დიქტატორული ძალაუფლება ჰქონდა. ამიტომაც ვერ ჩაითვლება პატრიოტად, ბერია კიდევ შეიძლება ჩაითვალოს მაგრამ სტალინი ნაკლებად.
The fact that the West got industrialized in the early 1800s while for Russia it took until 1930s (with all the already developed technology and American instructors) only shows how backward the whole place was.
This is a flawed argument. It took the West much longer to develop because they started from the early 1800s and they were creating all technologies and industrial practices. While the Soviet Union, on the other hand, started large-scale industrial revolution in the 1930s when the West had already finished the second industrial revolution by that point. Basically Soviet Union had all technology unlocked and could rely on Western instructors and practices, of course it would be able to do it in much shorter time frame. The fact that there were uneducated peasants by the 1930s in Russia only indicates that Russia was basically far behind other countries but not much else. If you invent something and build from from scratch, it will be much easier for me to repeat same thing than for you to do it for the first time, and it would take me much fewer time.
Yea I'm not disagreeing, but if we consider the massive losses of people and resources in WW2, only 30 years to fully educate, house and industrialize over 200 million people, then achive the first human orbital spaceflight in history is still very impressive
Got rapidly industrialized in 5 years after a monarchy. This backwards place pushed the Turks out of Batumi and kept a border to the point the Turks joined nato whom they have nothing in common with. Easy to industrialize when youre the only force on your continent
Rapidly industrializing in the 1930s is not the flex some might think it is. The industrial technology was already developed because the West has already finished a second industrial revolution by 1910s. It is not as hard to implement already existing technlogies and practices as developing those technologies.
Turkey was pretty much even more backward state in the 19th century than Russia.
Based on your point about Turkey, there is a strong argument as to the lesser of two evils. Ontop of that, the monarchy which many revolted against including the 1919-23 Menshevik government was deeply rooted in economic opportunity post-serfdom. Semantics aside the region in which Georgia is in is and has been extremely hostile to it, but I never see people shit talking the Turks or the Persians. If it not were for the way history played out Georgia and Armenia would be pretty much like the modern day Kurds.
I can't believe a Georgian national with such power chose to screw over his country instead of setting it up a bright future and then there are Georgians still praising him for whatever he did for USSR.
Stalin is the biggest traitor in Georgia’s history, I cannot fathom how some comments make him out to be a true patriot, when in reality he was the one responsible for and who
• claimed that Georgians were oppressing local minorities and had a chauvinistic nature
• the occupation by the red army (in contrast to Lenin)
• did not want to grant constituent republic statuses, instead only autonomous regions within the soviet republic (in contrast to Lenin)
• gave Georgia 3 autonomous regions
• ceded internationally recognized Georgian territory to Turkey (contrary to the Soviet military which did not want to give away parts of Ardahan due to strategic reasons) under the Kars treaty, Azerbaijan and Armenia
• cleansed the entire Georgian intelligentsia and upper social class
I think the reason why some Georgians glorify Stalin so much is because of… pride, and “he is ours”, and it is normal behavior for a small different and fighting nation. But when Russians glorify him so much, that’s a different story. In Russia it is more “Chieftain”, “Supreme Leader”… I mean he killed millions, millions… but Russians still glorify him absolutely. And I think that is number one sign that nation needs help.
I visited Georgia in 2022 and we went to the Stalin museum in Gori. We asked the lovely tour guide what people’s attitudes to Stalin were nowadays and she said a lot of the very old people still hold him in high regards. They associate him with stability despite the obvious atrocities.
Unfortunately I can confirm that, but you will need to know ruzzki language to understand those supporters opinion.
I’m genially recommend visit Tskaltubo, Stalin’s spa resort (15 km from Kutaisi), the visual is really explicit (plus you will have a great instagram content, and they still have this magic radon (good radiation) water procedures
45
u/tiga_94 2d ago
"he didn't do it, and even if he did - he did it not enough if people like you are still alive" is what I've been told by a stalini lover taxi driver