Discussion of Stalinism

[Aemilius Paulus]

Hello Backroom dwellers! I am AP, some of you may already know me. Anyway, following the suggestion of another Orgha, Kralizec, I am going to post the following for discussion.

As a brief introduction, I am largely political and fiscal conservative with mostly liberal social ideals (I am arguably still in transition, holding quite a bit of conservative ideals as of now). Religion is no longer my thing, being an atheist currently. However, I am a supporter of authoritarianism, despite being well aware that it holds many dangers. Throughout my life I have first been a strong liberal and Christian and then changed into a strong conservative and atheist (what an irony!) before becoming the more moderate that I am today.

Now, onto the main material. As some of you may know, the recent Frontroom "Manliest person" poll has been edited out. While it was mostly rightful edit, as the Frontroom is not for politics, the causes of the edit were rather unrighteous in my opinion. Certain person was "offended" by Stalin and his supporters.

Here are my two posts on this in the Watchtower thread, Stalinist and Nazi sympathizers:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

This is bull. Merely saying that you support Stalin should not get one in trouble.

I personally support authoritarianism, as I am a Russian, and authoritarianism is an excellent way to keep Putin as the dictator of Russia. I would not let other people attain such position, but Putin is an extraordinary person; he is a patriot comparable to Washington, Bolivar, Garibaldi, de Gaulle, Cincinnatus, and etc. He only does what he thinks is best for the country, and usually it is the best. In a democratic society this brilliant man would have been replaced by some average, corrupt drunk in 8 years, which would have annulled all that he has done for Russia. To sum it up, he might not be perfect, but he is best Russia has seen in a long, long time. There is no reason to believe that any other politician in the Duma is better than him.

Anyway, enough of the rant. Everyone has different views. I loathe Stalin because has done more to kill USSR than Hitler. During his purges, he slaughtered the best of my country and Soviet union as a whole. Not to mention he was a Georgian. Still, some people might like him. That is their choice. To censor racism and profanity is one thing; it is common decency; but to censor support for an unpopular party is totalitarianism.

All that "offensive" bemoaning puzzles me. How is it offensive? People are just whining. Offensive is when your feelings are hurt. You might be angry at Stalin/Hitler, but how are they offensive? Also, how can you exclude history from .Org? How do you regulate who can one support and who they cannot?

Final Note: despite hating Stalin, I still voted for him as the manliest person in that poll. Seriously, Hillary Clinton?? Manliness is usually synonymous with brutality, and paranoid butcher such as Stalin is a perfect candidate.

[SPOIL]%5