I believe in socialism, but I feel Stalin shouldn’t be idolised due to things like the Gulag.

I would like more people to become socialist, but I feel not condemning Stalin doesn’t help the cause.

I’ve tried to have a constructieve conversation about this, but I basically get angry comments calling me stupid for believing he did atrocious things.

That’s not how you win someone over.

I struggle to believe the Gulag etc. Never happened, and if it happened I firmly believe Stalin should be condemned.

  • AnonomousWolf@lemm.eeOPEnglish
    92·
    3 days ago

    Thanks, this is the kind of response I was looking for. I’ll look into what you said further.

    With the image that Stalin has in the west, I think it alienates people when he’s not condemned. I can’t think of a singe leader that we should praise (Mandela maybe?) if anything we should praise ideas not people.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      291·
      2 days ago

      If you don’t directly challenge false, bourgeois narratives, then they are used as ammo against related subjects. “Stalin was a butcher of 100 million,” if accepted, means the Soviet Union was a horrible failure as well. This means Socialism was a horrible failure in the Soviet Union. This cascading power of bourgeois narratives prevents real radicalization, and moreover allows repitition of failures if not properly analyzed.

      Take another example. Stalin synthesized Marxism-Leninism. As a Marxist-Leninist, there is no avoiding Stalin when talking with liberals. Because of my belief that Marxism-Leninism is correct, I cannot avoid the topic of grappling with Stalin’s existence.

      As Marx said, “The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living.”