It should be noted that the claims of Stalin impregnating Pereprygina at 14 come from Simon Sebag Montefiore, who himself is not a historian, was not given access to the soviet archives (which is the starting point for modern soviet historiography), and who himself is in Epstein's black book.

It does seem plausible that Stalin may have fathered a child in Siberia with Lidia Pereprygina while in exile based on modern evidence, but no such evidence presently exists backing up when this may have happened. The fact that primary sources are practically nonexistent and that the only one pushing this narrative of Stalin being a pedophile wrap back around to Montefiore's claims (themselves based largely on hearsay for the more absurd claims), points to it likely being propaganda and Red Scare fearmongering.

[+] Pman@lemmy.org -6 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Yeah, the Soviet union is not a place I would have liked to live in during its time in power, and from stories I've gotten from family that fled during Stalin's time it is a safe assumption to have as those who remained did not have a great time during the Holodomor.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

The USSR had steady and consistent economic growth, and provided free, high quality education and healthcare, full employment, cheap or free housing, and fantastic infrastructure and city planning. This rapid development resulted in dramatic democratization of society, reduced disparity, doubling of life expectancy, tripling of functional literacy rates to 99.9%, and much more. Living in the 1930s famine would not have been good, but it was the last major famine outside of wartime because the soviets ended famine in their countries.

Literacy rates, societal guarantees in the 1936 constitution, reports on the healthcare system over time, and more are good sources for these claims.

The USSR brought dramatic democratization to society. First-hand accounts from Statesian journalist Anna Louise Strong in her book This Soviet World describe soviet elections and factory councils in action. Statesian Pat Sloan even wrote Soviet Democracy to describe in detail the system the soviets had built for curious Statesians to read about, and today we have Professor Roland Boer's Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance to reference.

When it comes to social progressivism, the soviet union was among the best out of their peers, so instead we must look at who was actually repressed outside of the norm. In the USSR, it was the capitalist class, the kulaks, the fascists who were repressed. This is out of necessity for any socialist state. When it comes to working class freedoms, however, the soviet union represented a dramatic expansion. Soviet progressivism was documented quite well in Albert Syzmanski's Human Rights in the Soviet Union.

The truth, when judged based on historical evidence and contextualization, is that socialism was the best thing to happen to Russia in the last few centuries, and its absence has been devastating.

Capitalism brought with it skyrocketing poverty rates, drug abuse, prostitution, homelessness, crime rates, and lowered life expectancy. An estimated 7 million people died due to the dissolution of socialism in the USSR. A return to socialism is the only path forward for the post-soviet countries.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 8 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

You should of had to live there in pre-Soviet times. Or post Soviet times for that matter

[–] Pman@lemmy.org 0 points 13 minutes ago

I am living in post Soviet times, but if you mean in a totalitarian regime in Russia pre USSR, during USSR, or post USSR they all sucked, be it Trotsky's terrible decisions which, had he been appointed as the head of state after Lenin's death would most likely have led the Soviet Union to war against western europe, including Nazi germany, years ahead of time and united them all against the Soviet union, to Stalin destroying crop yields due to bureaucratic inefficiencies to be charitable or a genocide similar to what happened in Ireland or India in the 1800's due to profit extraction and to quell popular uprisings. And those are just pre WW2 events, that doesn't condone any of Tzar Nicholas 2nd's terrible decision making but the Soviet union was doing at the end of the unions existence what the US government is doing now, allowing for seniority to rule leaving a less vibrant and more entrenched political elite who doesn't need to deliver anything to the people to keep their power.

If you want communism to work you can but only on small scales like Kibbutzs or Co-ops where the workers actually own and control the means of production in a meaningful manner, but the Soviet Union, or any other communist government by name has people who don't know the intricacies of how a certain field works dictating not only regulations but quotas which are only truly fulfilled on paper. Also I find it rich that people who support anti colonialism and think America or Israel have done some bad ethnic cleansing, to put it mildly in America's case, ignore the continual Russification of all places Russia can, be it in Romania, Ukraine, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Hungary, or even within its borders in areas which had a large non Russian population more similar in culture to Mongolians; they did it during the time of Ivan the Terrible, Katherine the Great, when they took Saint Petersburg from the Sweeds to have a Baltic port, under all the Tzars, but not just them under Lenin and Stalin Russian became the de facto language of all nations part of the Warsaw pact and they suppressed other languages, that's why Crimea doesn't have the Tartars anymore for example. I would not like to live in a Russian occupied nation until Russia has true democracy and reduces its corruption issues, these issues having been in place since they were part of the Kievan Rus, and didn't go away under the Soviet Union.