[ home / overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / lgbt / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Captcha
Tor Only
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)
Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble
ReturnCatalogBottom

File: 1627446371762.jpg ( 571.51 KB , 555x831 , stalin.jpg )

 No.406511[View All]

Half of this board is an Stalin acolyte but no one follows his actual views. He is without a doubt a traditionalist/conservative. He recriminalized homosexuality, recriminalized abortion, reversed all the women's rights laws put in by previous government, put restrictions on divorce. He hated the avant garde of the Soviet Union and built traditional buildings and had a generally traditional view of art. He would have sent postmodernists to the gulag.
75 posts and 24 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.
>>

 No.406742

>>406545
>>406566
>>406568
>Stalin was antisemitic
>Despite literally appointing people who happened to be Jewish to government positions and being close friend with multiple communist Jews
Stalin removing Zionists is not the same as removing them because they're Jews you faggot.
>>

 No.406747

>>406724
No a dead guy who's ideology is irrelevant in the 21st century is meaningless to me
>>

 No.406749

>>406724
Also I'd be a fan of Stalin since he is a conservative so this meme doesnt really work
>>

 No.406751

>>406727
>That's not what traditionalism or conservatism mean. I've stated this in another thread, but the term "traditionalist" and "conservative" has become so watered down and has moved ahead with the times (just two steps back from it), that the polices laid out earlier are defining to "traditionalism", despite the overall politcal theory of the person being no such thing. If I gave you a liberal from the 50s, you'd probably think they were "traditionalist" as well. It should also be put into context that many of the more heavy handed natalists policies came in the fallout of major population loss.
Just because the definition is relative doesn't mean it doesn't exist
> The building constructed were in no way traditional, and neither was the art. Soviet realism isn't traditionalist. as a traditionalist would have flat
Yes they were. The baroque, gothic, classicist etc building that Stalin made were in the form of the traditional styles. Traditionalism doesn't mean just copying the past masters but innovating within that same mold of beauty + form which is where Socialist Realism comes in.
>>

 No.406757

>>406639
NTA, but you're completely wrong in what traditionalism and traditionalist art actually is. "Beauty and form" isn't even something restricted to traditionalism either, and a traditionalist would state that art is by definition something with "beauty and form", and that anything else is not art.
>>

 No.406759

>>406747
yeah, you mad
>>

 No.406764

>>406511
>He is without a doubt a traditionalist/conservative
Read literally anything by him
>>

 No.406766

>>406757
So tell me what it actually is
>>

 No.406777

>>406751
>Just because the definition is relative doesn't mean it doesn't exist
If your "traditionalism" is progressively relative, its nonsense.
>Yes they were. The baroque, gothic, classicist etc building that Stalin made were in the form of the traditional styles. Traditionalism doesn't mean just copying the past masters but innovating within that same mold of beauty + form which is where Socialist Realism comes in.
That's not what socialist realism is though fag, socialist realism isn't about beauty + form, but rather the is concerned with the message behind the art which itself is more fixated with an optimistic presentation of workers as opposed to beauty itself. And there was no singular piece of architecture which defined the architecture under Stalin, and Stalin had little input on the actual design process. Architecture under Stalin varied from architects building things which were inspired by the past but eclectic, and more simple modern designs.
>>

 No.406790

>>406766
Which is, traditionalism or art under Stalin?
>>

 No.406792

>>406777
It's not nonsense. Is the definition supposed to give us an objective time period? People have different ideas of what counts as traditional.
>socialist realism isn't about beauty + form,
It is though. Notice they didn't make avant garde paintings even though it was popular in the country
>>

 No.406809

>>406790
Traditionalism
>>

 No.406810

>>406792
>It's not nonsense. Is the definition supposed to give us an objective time period? People have different ideas of what counts as traditional.
So how is Stalin a traditionalist in the context of the time period he is in then? If you want to argue he regresses, then he merely regresses to the same level the rest of the world is at, and not to any state prior.
>It is though. Notice they didn't make avant garde paintings even though it was popular in the country
Not the same thing. As someone who likes soviet avant garde art, not having avant garde art is not the same as fixating entirely on beauty and form as what is defining of art. Avant garde is itself contextual.
>>

 No.406812

>>406810
By preferring to make his buildings in the style of 400 year old architecture instead of architecture of the time
>>

 No.406823

Where the great libs of the time pro gay/woman or whatever? I never really got this point of stalin being a social conservative when he let women into the red army anyways.
>>

 No.406825

>>406823
IDRK about that. All I know is that soviets are pro-women and gayism is banned again under him.
>>

 No.406829

>>406809
Just look up Traditionalist Conservatism
>>

 No.406830

>>406812
Stalin was a politician, not an architect
>>

 No.406833

>>406830
A politician who told architects to make buildings
>>

 No.406835

>>406829
I've read all the traditionalist conservatives. They all have different ideas of what counts as tradition. You seem very sure of yourself so feel free to enlighten me and tell me what counts as tradition and what doesn't
>>

 No.406839

>>406833
Surely you have a document or two that backs that up
>>

 No.406842

>>406839
Why would you even post if you know nothing about Stalin and his buildings
>>

 No.406843

>>406812
>By preferring to make his buildings in the style of 400 year old architecture instead of architecture of the time
That wouldn't make him a traditionalist though. When you call someone a traditionalist, you are calling them wholly a traditionalist, not somebody who happened to let his countries architects eclectically smash together a bunch of western architecture. Let me ask you this, lets imagine for a second some liberal president after Biden commissions the creation of another building in the capital, and that building is going to be made in some kind of classical style. Because of that build, would they then be a traditionalist wholesale?
>>

 No.406844

He did these things in order to stop pusbback from the mostly orthodox population as he implemented economic planning
>>

 No.406846

>>406842
Now he's also built them? Damn, a man of many talents. You got a source for that though?
>>

 No.406847

>>406835
>I've read all the traditionalist conservatives. They all have different ideas of what counts as tradition. You seem very sure of yourself so feel free to enlighten me and tell me what counts as tradition and what doesn't
This wasn't about tradition, this was about traditionalists. Those may sound related, but they rather aren't.
>>

 No.406849

>>406843
Traditionalist in art and politics are different terms but even then he would probably still count because he sent gays to the gulag and made abortion illegal
>>

 No.406851

>>406846
https://www.re-thinkingthefuture.com/rtf-fresh-perspectives/a1443-stalin-as-an-architect-shivangi-agarwal/

Do you think these guys just built all these buildings on their own accord?
>>

 No.406853

>>406847
?? Are you retarded. They are related.On the wikipedia page

"Traditionalist conservatism places a strong emphasis on the notions of custom, convention, and tradition."

Can you please enlighten me and just explain this all to me because you seem to have such a good understanding
>>

 No.406854

>>406849
Stalin sent them all personally or the law was part of the democratically created criminal codex?
The punishment for sodomy was just prison, though, people only went to gulag for rape.
>>

 No.406856

>>406849
>Traditionalist in art and politics are different terms but even then he would probably still count because he sent gays to the gulag and made abortion illegal
How is that traditionalist though in the context of the time? We aren't talking about a world or even an Eastern Europe which is exactly on board with either of those things in the present time which Stalin was in. In term of politcal ideology, Stalin is not a traditionalist (for obvious reasons). In terms of the social views of the time, Stalin is not a traditionalist if you want to just use it to mean traditional views. At no point is Stalin a traditionalist. If you want to critique him as falling to the status quo of the time and not progressing further, fine, but that isn't the same as being a traditionalist.
>>

 No.406857

>>406856
Have you been diagnosed with autism
>>

 No.406860

>>406853
What I mean is that the use of tradition does not a traditionalist make. A traditionalist utilizes what they see as tradition, but not everyone who uses tradition is a traditionalist. A traditionalist is more then just someone who likes tradition.
>>

 No.406861

>>406851
Cool sauce

>considered the chief architect of totalitarianism
Now that's real architecture.
The article doesn't explain what his actual involvement with soviet architecture was and talks as if he literally controlled every aspect of building the union. Usual lib shit.

>Do you think these guys just built all these buildings on their own accord?
USSR had enormous organizations in charge of building shit, and "these guys" were members.
>>

 No.406864

>>406860
Yes understood but the traditionalist will still have his worldview framed through some period of time. Obviously there is no objective definition hence it's relative.
>>

 No.406865

>>406857
>Have you been diagnosed with autism
No. Obsessively compulsive? Admittedly, but my point still stand. Calling Stalin a traditionalist neglects the broader context which makes him no such thing. Even if he's a communist who took two steps back in your view, that still leaves him as not a traditionalist
>>

 No.406867

>>406861
I never said he controlled every aspect you dumb uyghur. He just told them to build in the traditional style hence them being built in the traditional style and winning Stalin Prize for it
>>

 No.406868

>>406865
Obviously no one here actually thinks Stalin is a Christian traditionalist who wants to bring back the monarchy.
>>

 No.406869

>>406864
>Yes understood but the traditionalist will still have his worldview framed through some period of time. Obviously there is no objective definition hence it's relative.
You can set some objective criteria for the framework. Even in terms of how you "define" it then, how exactly is Stalin a traditionalist contextually? There's nothing I can see that would have him be such in the context of his time.
>>

 No.406870

>>406867
>I never said he controlled every aspect
The article you linked did
>He just told them to build in the traditional style
If he did then surely you have a document proving that.
>>

 No.406872

>>406870
Answer this question you think all the buildings in the USSR were built in the traditional style without the go ahead from Stalin. He has no decision in all the buildings being made in the traditional style and he gave them prizes in closed competitions without telling them the build in the style. This is what you are implying correct?
>>

 No.406873

>>406868
>Obviously no one here actually thinks Stalin is a Christian traditionalist who wants to bring back the monarchy.
The issue here is that that was literally what constituted being a "traditionalist" (as you use it) in the 1940s, because the monarchy and its religious culture was literally what defined the vast majority of "tradition" up to the creation of the USSR
>>

 No.406874

>>406869
We aren't talking about Stalin anymore. You said you have the objective definition of Traditionalism and it's been 5 posts now and you haven't provided it.
>>

 No.406877

>>406874
>You said you have the objective definition of Traditionalism and it's been 5 posts now and you haven't provided it.
But I literally did? I referred back to the actual political ideology.
>>

 No.406887

REVTVRN TV TRVDITVION
>>

 No.406888

>>406872
>all the buildings in the USSR were built in the traditional style
They weren't in the first place, they were built in a variety of styles, most of which wouldn't even count as "traditional" in Russia.
>without the go ahead from Stalin
He was the general secretary of the party, not minister of architecture or construction, yeah this wasn't under his jurisdiction. The prizes being given is the closest his personal taste could be influencing the architects but even then they would have to guess what kinda shit he'd like and majority of buildings weren't designed with prize in mind anyway.

I get that you like the era's style (I do as well) but there's no reason to both classify it as "trad" and attribute it to tastes of a single guy, it reflects the taste and aspirations of the whole of soviet society of that time.
>>

 No.406896

File: 1627467183484.png ( 39.33 KB , 813x853 , soyus goyus.png )

WAOW SAGED?????? THIS IS HOW MUCHJ THE LEFT CAN TAKER CRITICISM AT THEIR IDOLS!!!!!!!!1111111111
>>

 No.406899

"Staling was based and trad" isn't exactly criticism.
Just factually wrong, not to mention projecting contemporary culture war on a history figure.
>>

 No.408061

>>406899
he was "trad" as compared to the developed country portrayal of the Marxist archetype. The criticism is that the 21st century Marxists have been infiltrated by clear subversives and preach progressivism over Marxism.
>>

 No.408983

>>406896
It was saged because the OP's post history was just bad-faith shitposting and so was the OP, but the thread had already become half-decent so deleting wasn't appropriate. Nothing to do with the topic itsef.

Unique IPs: 12
[Return][Catalog][Top][Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / lgbt / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
ReturnCatalogTopBottomHome