There is not much that qualifies this blog to be entitled "Stalin," you could have named it "Russian history," or "Russian studies and the History Channel," another thing that peeved me was that the colorful figures you mentioned were not chronologically listed.

Stalin was a fine title. I personally admire Stalin and Hitler a bit more than I'm comfortable admitting. They may not have been the most moral people in the world, but at least they've left their mark, which is more than most people do.

~Dan

I wonder if you have read Tolstoys War and Peace?

an excellent account of Russian Nobility during the Napoleonic wars... its fictional of course, but it is an area/time novel, thats for sure.

If you haven't read it, i assure you that you will enjoy it immensely.

Well, one can appreciate the study of Stalin and/or Hitler without necessarily approving of their actions. I'm studying 20th Century Russia now, and have specifically studied the Russian Revolution previously under the same professor, and I must say I've gained a new appreciation for what was going on. Did a lot of bad stuff go down? Hell yeah... Was Stalin pretty much a crappy guy? Hell yeah... Was he the embodiment of evil, like Hitler was? Absolutely not. I've come to an appreciation of why Stalin did what he did. I don't agree with it, and I think he had a pretty warped mind, but when you study him, and the conditions in the Soviet Union at the time, you realize that if you put the two together, that his actions seem, in a somewhat paranoidly twisted way, justifiable. Hitler on the other hand, cannot be explained as anything but the embodiment of evil. I wouldn't want to live in either country - but if I had to choose between 1930's Germany and 1930's Soviet Union (excepting the famine in '32), I'd take the Soviet Union. At least there if you showed up to work, worked hard, and kept your head down politically, saying "Yes comrade, I sure love communism" you weren't subjected to much abuse. Most of those who suffered under the Purges were political leaders and managers who were given to corruption (which, unfortunately, was about the only way you could survive in 1930's Soviet Union as a manager). As a worker, under Stalin, you were generally pretty safe, unless of course you were a Kulak that got sent to work camps in Sibera. Then you were screwed.

Btw, if you haven't yet, you definitely should read John Scott's "Behind the Urals".

Was he the embodiment of evil, like Hitler was? Absolutely not.

Righto, and the murder of over 4000 Polish officers at Katyn was because he was only having a bad day. The thousands of Red Army officers that he ordered executed was just a folly. Allowing millions of his countrymen to starve or work themselves to death was because...meh, whatever. Stalin was as evil as they come, in many ways even more derranged than Hitler was.

I guess, on hindsight, it's easy to misread what I was saying as justifying Stalin. I absolutely didn't want to do that. I know what happened in the Gulags, and it was pretty much meted out to people on basis of perceived wrongs which in most cases didn't exist. And the purges of his own military officers was criminal. Stalin committed crimes against humanity - that I will not deny. He was evil - that I will not deny. What' I'm saying is that I can see how he actually did think he was doing good for his country, and trying to build a better future.

Okay, this peeves me... I had written a very detailed argument of my point... which my introduction does not make sense without - that got CUT OFF when I clicked on post comment...