• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    5
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Its why they defeated the nazis, who had a 50-100 year industrialization lead when the USSR started doing a command economy. The USSR also ended up liberalizing, especially in its last decade, creating the circumstances for a coup that resulted in balkanization and massively decreased living standards.

    And all Eastern European countries experience explosive growth post communism?

    This is counterfactual

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -42 months ago

      I thought a massive international effort defeated the nazis, including strategic bombing, embargos and lend-lease. Weird.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        5
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The USSR killed 80-ish percent of the nazi troops, and suffered 26 million casualties, mostly civilians exterminated by the nazis. They were mainly responsible for the victory and suffered the heaviest losses, including a lot of the lower level communist organization whose absence lead to the bureaucratic centralization (that Stalin opposed heavily before his death) that let corruption gradually take over the project.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -42 months ago

          Yeah, when you organize your army based on politics and not on, you know, military capability, you end up sucking at war and need to make it up in numbers. You ignore intelligence of imminent invasion you let hundreds of thousands of troops get encircled and begging the Yankees for resources.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                3
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Why would I need to seriously argue against what is essentially tropes, including the asiatic hordes trope? Your argument speaks for itself.

                Compare the size of the soviet army at the start of the war to the size of the French and German armies. Now compare the Soviet delaying actions to the invasion of France.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    3
                    edit-2
                    2 months ago

                    Remind me how many French and British troops were bypassed and encircled during the invasion of France?

                    Remember that the combined forces in France were much larger and more mechanized than the soviet army during barbarossa, and were invaded by less troops

    • @DarkCloud
      link
      -6
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      They defeated the Nazis by throwing conscripts into a meat grinder regardless of whether they even had a weapon, and by threatening to shoot them if they tried to retreat.

      That’s the nature of Authoritarian regimes. Not very working class of them.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        42 months ago

        They defeated the Nazis by throwing conscripts into a meat grinder regardless of whether they even had a weapon, and by threatening to shoot them if they tried to retreat.

        You are mistaking the movie enemy at the gates for a history lesson, or are absorbing myths that ultimately originate with that movie… During particularly desperate times troops would have to split rifles during training. General order 227 created penal detachments for officers who kept ordering retreats without cause, and created blocking units to turn back retreating units. They weren’t machine gunning conscripts in the back.

        Also even if not one step back was as US propaganda claims, every step back allowed the nazis more population to exterminate or enslave. The Soviets lost 19 million civilians, exterminated by the nazis.