Those lovely Guardian commentators

On an article discussing Sakharov\’s 90 th birthday, including how the zeks returned from the Gulag, we get this delight:

Dekulakisation was a necessary strategy moving forward. If you will not play ball, then consequences must be suffered. Stalin understood that the Dictatorship of the Proletariat was in actual fact not an option, particularly when trying to achieve Socialism in one country and dictated himself.

Words fail…..

9 comments on “Those lovely Guardian commentators

  1. I expect that commenter would describe themselves as a ‘humanist’. In my experience humanists tend to dislike humanity the most.

  2. He’s being ironic, I think, or as ukliberty said, it’s a wind-up. He does go on to call Ivan the Terrible his man, after all.

  3. Hahaha oh wow. Check out the rest of the Stalinist crap from Helianthe:

    “The majority victims of the “great Stalinist purge” were Kulaks who resisted collectivisation of land . Collectivisation started in 1928 when shortage of food occurred in major Soviet towns. Many Kulaks preferred to destroy crops and slaughter all livestock instead of cooperating with the collectivisation program, which together with catastrophic weather conditions created famine and resulted to open confrontation with the Soviet state. Millions died in famine and these are often counted as victims of Stalinism by right wing historians.”

    Vast right wing conspiracy!!111

    Words fail me.

  4. Knifing would be too quick. I think a slow, lingering death by starvation is the correct treatment for Communists.

  5. With all due notice being paid to Godwin’s Law, one wonders whether a similar article trying to justify the inhumanity of another early 20th Century dictator would have gotten past the Graun’s editors so easily.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.