It’s interesting to me, how Russians view Stalin. In school and at Stanford, I was generally taught that besides Hitler, Stalin was one of, if not the, most evil dictator of all time (I concede that this is a debatable statement, but for my purposes, just accept it). He caused a man-made famine during forced collectivization, resulting in millions of deaths by starvation. He sent millions to their deaths and to the gulag during the Great Terror. He was a crazy fucker who ordered executions for anyone who stood in his way. I personally cannot fathom believing that any good came out of the Stalin period.
However, it appears that I am wrong. Having spoken with two different Russians over the last couple of days about their views on Stalin, I am shocked to find that there is no clear anti-Stalinist sentiment among Russians my age. It seems to be symptomatic of a greater “Russian” tendency toward viewing the world in shades of gray. I have yet to meet a Russian who believes in “good” and “evil”. The canned answer I often hear is that there is “some good and some bad” to everyone and everything.
According to two of my Russian friends, Stalin had his positives and negatives. They claim that, although he did order executions and impose starvation on his own people, he also made the USSR the most powerful country in the world. Besides, they were quick to remind me, the Germans were responsible for at least 20 million Russian deaths, so relatively, Stalin wasn’t so bad! And he apparently did a lot for the economy (what specifically, I was not told). According to these two friends, no person is completely good or completely bad, and therefore we should not categorize Stalin as evil, per se. And don’t forget, he produced some great architecture. Most importantly, he conquered the Germans!
One of my friends pointed out that maybe what I have been taught is American propaganda. Of course, this is a possibility. America is definitely not free of propaganda; in fact, I think our sources of information are some of the most sensationalized and nationalistic in the world. On the same coin, however, I’m sure that what my friend learned was also propaganda. So which side is correct? And where is the truth? Is it somewhere between the American version and the Russian version of Stalinist history? The US and USSR did, in fact, engage in an information “war”. Our word against theirs. Although I will concede that Stalin's USSR was essentially one massive living conspiracy theory and a great, rambling machine that turned out monstrous lies, the US was guilty of its own crimes. McCarthyism, for example. And our movies. Even today, two decades after the Cold War ended, we still produce movies that are highly prejudiced against Russians. Grossly false portrayals of the Russian character are pretty common. Just watch a James Bond movie. America had, and appears to still have, a vested interest in defaming Russia and Russians.
I am reluctant, however, to buy into the Russian portrayal of Stalin. Every country has its biases. A dictator who garnered power through fear is, to me, just that: a dictator (and yes, I do qualify Bush 2 as a dictator in his own right, although certainly not on par with Stalin or Hitler). And if you have to kill millions of your own people in the name of economic growth, I’m not sure you’re ultimately “good” for your own country. Power and economic strength, but at what cost?
