Untold History: Stalin, the Soviet Union and WWII

Untold History: Stalin, the Soviet Union and WWII


PAUL JAY: Welcome back to The Real News Network.
I’m Paul Jay in Baltimore. And we’re continuing our series of interviews with Peter Kuznick.
He’s the coauthor of the book and the film The Untold History of the United States. Thanks
for joining us again. So we’ll just pick up the discussion. One
of the things the series does which is pretty courageous, really, is deal with the role
of the Soviet Union in the Spanish Civil War, and then particularly in World War II, and
really unpack and defy the basic Cold War narrative. And so talk a little bit about
that history, and also a little about your discussions about how to deal with it, ’cause,
I mean, in some ways politically it’s the most sensitive stuff in the series. You know,
to talk about Wallace is–people are okay with that. But your version of the Soviet
Union is–. PETER KUZNICK: They’re not so okay with the
Wallace. They think that we’re–because in 1948, when Wallace runs for president again,
the Communist Party is very much involved in that campaign. So we do get a lot of negative
reaction from the right-wingers on the Wallace story. They’re very sensitive to that one. But you’re right to say that the main attacks
we’re getting from the right are about our treatment of the Soviet Union, because they
want to portray the Soviet Union as the equivalent of the Nazis, and Hitler and Stalin are equally
bad. JAY: Yeah, I was–I said in my opening introduction,
in every school in North America–I mean, I grew up in Canada, and it was no different–the
chapter in the history book is communism, fascism, two forms of totalitarianism, and
the whole history is that they are simply the equivalence. KUZNICK: Yeah. And there’s some–not truth
to that, but there is obviously a lot of truth to the critique of Stalinism and the ways
in which Stalin hijacks and subverts the Russian Revolution, and from a left perspective, undermines
the Russian Revolution. We on the left in the United States in the 20th century had
that albatross around our necks for much of the 20th century, and people felt for some
understandable reason that they had to defend certain features of the Soviet Union. And
under Stalin there’s not very much that is defensible of what’s going on inside the Soviet
Union–the massacres that took place, the millions and millions of victims of Stalinism.
And the repression is real. And the left in the United States didn’t know that in the
1930s. We didn’t learn that till much later. So we’re actually quite critical of Stalin,
but we also understand the important role that the Soviet Union represents, the idea
of the Soviet Union representing something as a socialist society in which there is socialized
medicine and education and tremendous advances in the sciences in the 1930s. I mean, there
are certain things that are positive about Soviet Society that you can recognize without
saying that Stalin was a good guy. JAY: And, one way or the other, had pretty
massive popular support, Stalin. You don’t rally a country to make the kind of sacrifices
the Soviet people made. KUZNICK: But there’s still a lot of nostalgia
for Stalin inside of Russia. JAY: Still, even now, yeah. I mean, dictators
can be popular too, so–. KUZNICK: Yeah. Yeah. And he was as brutal
a dictator as is imaginable in certain ways during this time. That doesn’t mean that everything
that the Soviet Union did was bad. The Soviet Union was often on the right side of history
on these things. The Soviet Union in the Spanish Civil War was the main support for the republican
causes. JAY: But the main problem in terms of the
American historical narrative is he wasn’t our brutal dictator. KUZNICK: Right. JAY: Like, it’s not like historically the
United States has problems with brutal dictators. KUZNICK: No, we love brutal dictators. JAY: They’ve just got to be ours. KUZNICK: Yes, and he was never ours. And he
represented something that was very threatening to the people who liked our brutal dictators.
He was–he believed that the world could be organized on principles very different than
capitalist principles. And even though his works, like, philosophical material, whatever
his big book in ’36 was on Marxism, it’s really pretty lousy Marxism. He was very crude and
mechanistic, and his understanding was, I say, very shallow. But he still represented
something that American capitalists hated. And these same capitalists who didn’t hate
fascism, because fascism was a form of capitalism, hated the Soviet communism because that was
a threat to American capitalism and it said the world could be organized in a different
way and that way could work. And it did work in a lot of ways in the 1930s.
And you have the tremendous economic boom. And there was a lot of literature in the United
States in the early ’30s when the American was hitting the nadir of its depression, in
late 1932, that the only country that was immune to depression was the Soviet Union.
And that was not just in liberal papers and publications like The Nation and The New Republic;
that was in The Christian Science Monitor, it was in Businessweek, it was in Barron’s.
It was in very conservative places [crosstalk] JAY: And also something interesting–and it’s
too complicated to unpack all this right now, ’cause it’s not the history of the Soviet
Union, but one of the facts that comes out in your series, which–I didn’t know the scale
of it–was the extent of the millions of people that are moved– KUZNICK: Yes, massive. JAY: –east to get out of the way of the German
army, and the complete rebuilding– KUZNICK: Rebuilding of the economy. JAY: –of Soviet economy. Yeah. Tell a bit
about that story. KUZNICK: Well, it’s, again, a remarkable mobilization
of Soviet resources. The Soviets were fighting Germany. In fact, that’s part of the story
about World War II that Americans don’t know but need to know, that we always think that
it was the United States who won the war in Europe and that the bomb ended the war in
the Pacific, two very, very big misconceptions that Americans have. Throughout most of World War II, the United
States and the British were fighting ten German divisions combined. The Soviets were fighting
200. The United States lost about 300,000 people in combat, 400,000 overall in World
War II, which was terrible, but the Russians lost 27 million people in World War II. There’s
good reason why Churchill says it was the Russians who tore the guts out of the German
army. And Roosevelt recognized that, and Americans at the time recognized it, which is partly
why the Soviets were considered–viewed so positively by the United States and by American
people during World War II. It’s part of the reason why there was a possibility for post-war
friendship and collaboration as Wallace and Roosevelt envisioned after the war and as
Stalin desperately hoped for. The whole Russian vision after the war was
based upon this idea that the United States and the Soviets would remain allies. That
was essential for Stalin’s political dreams, as well as for his economic vision of how
you rebuild the Soviet economy, which was devastated. It was Kennedy who recognized
that in his famous AU commencement address, when he says that the destruction of the Soviet
Union was the equivalent of the entire United States east of Chicago being wiped out and
destroyed. I mean, what they suffered was, you know, beyond imagination, really, what
the Soviets suffered, which was why there was such an abhorrence of war afterwards inside
the Soviet Union, but also why they were so defensive and why they wanted Eastern Europe.
This wasn’t part of some grand imperial design that Stalin had; this was his defensiveness
as a Russian nationalist who understood that the Soviet Union [incompr.] attacked by Germany
through Eastern Europe twice within the past 25 years, and he was going to do anything
he could, from the Russian nationalist standpoint, to make sure that never happened again. JAY: I did a series of interviews with Ray
McGovern, who was a CIA analyst for many years, and in the interviews he says that as they’re
briefing Reagan and some of the other presidents, even at that time they’re saying that the
fundamental posture of the Russians is defensive. KUZNICK: Yes. JAY: It’s not–you know, this idea that Russia’s
going to invade Europe and march through Europe and all this is not real, that from an analyst
division of CIA they were saying that, but nobody wanted to hear the argument. And your
series, again, you’re contradicting the whole narrative that the Soviet threat is the fundamental
character of post-World War II period. KUZNICK: Which is why the United States doesn’t
change, really, after the Cold War ends. Have we cut back our defense spending? Have we
gotten rid of our bases overseas? Have we gotten rid of our nuclear weapons? Do we not
have this massive defense apparatus that still is looking for enemies around the world? You
know, we’re expanding, we’re shifting. We’re shifting now to the Pacific from our previous
emphasis in the Middle East and in Europe. But we’re not changing our policy. JAY: Now, one of the critical moments in terms
of World War II–and it’s been a big debate–is Stalin makes a deal with Hitler and a nonaggression
pact of some sort. And one version of this is Stalin did everything he could to have
an alliance with United States and England and against Hitler, and the other version
is Stalin really didn’t care who he made a deal with, and he was happy to have a deal
with Hitler, and the only reason it broke is Hitler attacked him. What are your sources?
How did you come to terms with what you thought was the correct version of this? KUZNICK: Well, Stalin was not always a man
of great principle. As we know, Stalin could be ruthless and bloody and tyrannical and
could make a deal with Hitler. None of what we’re saying is a defense of Stalin. We’ve
got a portrait of Stalin that portrays him to be quite brutal. We’re very, very critical
of Stalin. However, from 1935 to 1939 he did everything he could to form an alliance with
the United States and the Western capitalist nations because he knew that there were forces
who wanted to push Hitler to attack the Soviet Union. JAY: My uncle was a writer at the time, a
journalist as well, and he was at one of the conferences that they allowed the media into,
and he said the Soviet foreign minister was practically begging for an alliance with the
West against Hitler, and they just weren’t interested. KUZNICK: You know, they went so far that the
Communist Party in the United States basically supported Roosevelt. That’s–the whole Popular
Front period from ’35 to ’39 was about tamping down the revolutionary forces and having the
communist parties throughout the world, the Western capitalist world, become allies of
liberal and centrist democratic forces. The Communist Party was basically an adjunct of
the Democratic Party between ’35 and ’39 at a time when its popularity became great. And they were saying–during the Popular Front,
they were saying communism is 20th-century Americanism. That was their line. And they
traced their lineage back to Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln. This was not a very revolutionary
force at that point, but that was the policy out of the Soviet Union, because they wanted
alliances with the Western capitalist governments. They never did anything to form an alliance
with Hitler during that time. And by 1939 they were desperate. They knew that Germans
would be launching an invasion. But this was after the Western forces capitulated repeatedly
to Hitler. JAY: Well, this kind of goes back to the point
I was making in one of the earlier segments, though: where is Roosevelt in all this? I
mean, Roosevelt is in on not building an alliance. I mean, if he really wanted to stop Hitler,
it was the obvious thing to do. KUZNICK: Yeah, Roosevelt could have done that,
but he would have had to buck American public opinion. As you said also, 95 percent of the
American people were opposed to even getting involved in World War II when the war was
going on and Britain and France were under the gun. JAY: But what I’m getting back–we’re getting
back into the Roosevelt argument again, but I don’t mean intervening militarily, but sanctions
against American companies that help Hitler. I saw something–I mentioned it to you off-camera,
but I saw something at the Holocost Museum in Washington. It said–my memory is it was
something like 70, 75 percent of newspaper editors who were asked in 1936 whether to
send the Olympic team, American Olympic team to the Nazi-held Olympics, said, don’t do
it, and they did it anyway. So there was a fair amount of public opinion here against
Hitler, even if there was public opinion against military intervention or getting involved
in the war, getting into Europe’s war. But they were also anti-Hitler. So, like, Roosevelt
would have had a platform for at least sanctions for doing various things. KUZNICK: He would have and he should have.
I’m not disagreeing with you. Of course I wish Roosevelt would have intervened against
fascism and formed the alliance much earlier, and of course I believe that Roosevelt should
have supported the Republican forces in the Spanish Civil War. And we could have–’cause
Hitler at that point was going to back down. Hitler did not have the strength to do the
things he was doing. And of course [crosstalk] JAY: And you have an interesting quote from
Hitler about that, that he–when they first start moving into the Rhineland, is it, that
he expects to get beaten. NARRATOR: In March 1936, German troops occupied
the demilitarized Rhineland. It was Hitler’s biggest gamble to date, and it worked. The
48 hours after the march were the most nervewracking in my life, he said. The military resources
at our disposal would have been wholly inadequate for even a moderate resistance. If the French
had marched into the Rhineland, we would have had to withdraw with our tails between our
legs. KUZNICK: That is a bluff. But we never called
his bluff on that, and that’s partly because you had a lot of forces in Europe who were
sympathetic. They were either afraid of war or they were sympathetic. JAY: Well, then, why is Stalin’s deal with
Hitler unprincipled? I mean, if he’s facing the destruction of the Soviet Union, what
else is he supposed to do? KUZNICK: What’s unprincipled is the way it
was defended. If you would say publicly that this was a desperation move done in order
to prevent an attack or to preserve the Soviet Union, that would be one thing. But the left
forces of the United States defended this on principle, and there was no principled
way to defend an alliance with fascism. There was a pragmatic way that you could explain
an alliance with fascism for that period of time, and Stalin wanted to buy time; however,
by the time the Germans do invade in 1941, he was being warned that an invasion was imminent,
and he didn’t believe it. Stalin, who doesn’t believe anybody and trust anybody, did not
realize that this mobilization was–. JAY: And how do we know that [crosstalk] KUZNICK: [crosstalk] We know that his generals
and others, intelligence people, were warning him, and he said that he didn’t–that they
were not about to invade, that the German invasion was not going to come. The Russians
were caught totally unprepared. The Germans blitzed right through them in the beginning.
And many people, including in the United States, felt that the Russians were about to capitulate. That’s part of why the British rushed in there
so quickly, to try to keep them in the war. They wanted the Russians in the war against
Hitler ’cause they knew it was–the key to the Europeans, the Western Europeans, the
British actually surviving the war was keeping the Russians in, and they were afraid that
the Russians were going to cut a deal with Hitler because they were so badly wounded
in those early steps. But Stalin said no. Stalin said, give me some material aid so
we can fight them, and we will fight, we will defeat them. JAY: And 27 million lives– KUZNICK: Twenty-seven million later, yeah. JAY: –and some of the most horrific battles
in the history of warfare, somehow they did it. KUZNICK: Somehow they did it. And we show
how they did it. And the Russian people were heroic in their resistance. JAY: Okay. We’re going to pick this discussion
up in another segment. Please join us for the continuation of our discussion with Peter
Kuznick on the real history of the United States.

100 Comments on "Untold History: Stalin, the Soviet Union and WWII"


  1. What's up with the masonic symbol? Even the blind would pose to think. And yes, Sutton a scholar who worked at the Hoover Inst. systematically points out the constant supply of US capital that built Soviet technology. He has also written about Skull and Bones.

    Reply

  2. Stupid argument, just because the Soviet Union outlawed private property doesn't mean that it wasn't behaving like a capitalist state in the international market.

    Reply

  3. …busted-again… [email protected]:24…of how "they" the US-of-A suposedly did not known… and closed-their-eyes and looked-the-other-way… and let-it-happen… and probably also encouraged-it and promoted-it… hmmm… and this "chiken-shit" exuse …is the same as when Ronald-Regan also did not know as to what-was-going-on… because no-body-told-him… hmmm… with the entire Iran-contra-whealings-and-dealings  in the 1980s…hmmm… shame!

    Reply

  4. …and at @13:00 is very-interesting… on HOW-fast the French-surrendered-with-dignaty… and very-quickly threw-in-the-towel… and the same must have happend in Eastern-Europe… where even the many diffrent Russians… also wanting to improove their own standard-of-living… and knew-right-from-wrong and just quickly surrendered and then worked-for-Hitler as workers-and-laborers… hmmm… and so then later-on… when Joseph-Stalin began the "house-cleaning" …then anyone who worked-for-Hitler as a prisoner-of-war… was to be worked-to-death… and to continue-working-for-Hitler… and to continue-fighting-on the Eastern-front for Hitler in the Syberian-Gulag-work-camps… and so if anyone had any work-ethic left-with-in him… of knowing of how work-sets-you-free-from-poverty-and-hunger… then those Workaholics where forced to drink-under-the-gun… and to drink-vodka to make any workermen NOT want to get-out-of-bed… from his own muscels self-tearing from drinking late-in-to-the-night the previous-night… and this was HOW… the Soviet-Unions-economy self-collapsed… from nobody-and-no-one wanting to perform any phisical activaty… because being a go-get-er-do-it-your-self-er was wrong… because the more-inteligent-Russians-job-and-occupation was to order someone else to do the phisical-labor for you… the same as the British-Americans!!! …so everyone can be a supervising-manager-finger-pointing-effishincy-expert… of passing the work-load on to someone-else… to micro-manage-the-payroll-budget… of avoiding paying your-own workers… and then to Close-down and to deeclare bankruptcy… and to later-on to again ree-open a new-company under-a-diffrent-name… and to again take-out bank-loans for a big-realestate-investment… and to again to do whatever-it-takes to avoid-payment and to NOT pay the workers… or …or to have so-many middle-men …that those on-the-bottom …will be more-then-encouraged to try-their-luck by suing and useing the legal-system… which takes years and years to come-to-a-decishion of actually holding-someone-accountable… and to try to leggally to try to ree-claim the workers-money from someone… who vanished and mooved-to-Canada…

    Reply

  5. I only managed to watch 3 mins of this, by then I was getting tired of rolling my eyes at all the leftist drivel.

    Reply

  6. The Left in the USA was blinded by Stalin, but so were most leftists. Few genuine communists warned them, but they were called ''trotskyist fascists'' by the Stalinist communist parties. In fact the Left Opposition in the Soviet-Union, put up a heroic fight against Stalin between 1923 and 1927 but they were defeated. Stalin would jail and murder all anti-Stalinist communists, ending with the assassination of Leon Trotsky in Mexico. 

    But what the communist left still does not understand, is that socialism was not build. Not even under Lenin who knew Soviet Russia faced major bureaucratic deformations. Trotsky called it a degenerated workers state, but Lenin knew Soviet Russia was deformed by birth because of the civil war, their international isolation and the rise of a new caste ( later the party nomeklatura ). Unfortunate for Lenin his strokes forced him out of office, leaving Stalin with enormous powers!  

    Reply

  7. "Out of the Night" by Jan Vlatin includes Comintern Parties allying with Nazis under the policy immediately preceding Popular Front – Social Fascism.

    Reply

  8. I love learning history that wasn't taught in grade school…America's history education is so fucked up

    Reply

  9. I live in Canada, we didn't talk about the Soviet Union nor Germany in school at all. Get over yourself Russia. All they talk about in Canada is British and French Colonial history. Anyways Russia sucks balls they attacked Poland in the 17th of September along with the Nazis in order to effectively start world war 2 so they got what they deserved. This was confessed by Putin along with the Katyn massacre of already surrendered polish officers, scientist and doctors.

    Reply

  10. The biggest thing wrong with this and un-questionably make the incoherent argument an absolute fallacy, is the absolute blatant disregard for what Marx and Lenin actually wrote about. I have read many Marx books because it's educating, and it's quite liberating when you come to understand the complexities of a smooth running large civilization. I hate to say this fellow Americans, on paper I can almost guarantee youd "morally" side with communism. If you read the latest scholarly articles on philosophy, Capitaliism has gained a lot off attention in the way of Utilitarianism. And I'm not gonna explain that.

    Stalin was bad….So that means communism is bad. Thart's the most blatant disregard for the basics of social science and argumentative analysis.

    Go ahead, go to wiki and punch holes in what you think is my argument. I only stated 1 opinion.

    I can't tell you seriously, how truly embarrassed I am, when Americans are so quick to form an opinion and haven't done the research, and are tragically biased to a level greater than the Americans negative reception of the phrase "Allah Ackbar" followed by an loud exploding sound.

    I say this with respect. Shut the fuck up, please.

    Reply

  11. Oh crap, I commented on the wrong video.

         I never read that authors book, but he's much closer to the truth of the history. It's not a secret though, it was just swung as some kind of great American victory. The fact is we just got out of world war 1, our military was trash, and it's been speculated that when British intelligence found out Germany was definitely planning an offensive Eastward, Italy might indeed send enough military to essentially guard the gates to Berlin. This causes all kinds of complex potential issues that could be debilitating not necessarily All of Europe, but Across the pond to Britain, and eventually the United States.

        We did in fact, in "good" faith, tell Stalin shortly after the invasion that we'd send the troops in and help out etc. I know from British history and military records that Hitler did in Fact send over Rammels Panzer unit south to Africa..

    Well in a nut shell, in an act of self protection, and possibly outright neglect, we sent in a "feeler" small American Military into Africa. that was largely destroyed. It's been stated that Churchil signed an agreement with Stalin shortly after basically stating plans to on how to divide up Germany after the allies and the soviets destoy germany.

    The only truth that matters is the "secret" of  just how terrible the Soviet-Nazi war was. It made World war 1 look like an ant farm.

    The Soviets were extremely brave, and no doubly fought with honor. The truth in that is a stark contrast to "greatest Allied powers war ever".. In America WWII history is this simple: Nazi Germany comes to Power, they're Jew killers, he's greedy, America marches in on a white horse and destroys Hitlers army without impunity.

    It's quite sad, I know

    Reply

  12. Jay please say who your Uncle was….Its interesting to know he was also a journalist.  Hope you do tell.

    Reply

  13. "Tremendous" advances in the sciencies in the 1930S Soviet Union?? what shit is that? and what is "socialized" medecine? so US people received no education and no health care? the impoverished and totalitarian USSR had something to learn a  dynamic society like USA??..sure progress in the USSR with falsified data and propaganda??

    Reply

  14. when stalin spoke his stooges would clap.each man was afraid to stop ,why ? because they were afraid to be singled out and eliminated.(they put up a light,when it turned everyone was to stop clapping) this is the world america seems to want ,with a dictator running every part of life. obamacare will accomplish this .
            history will continue to repeat as the saying goes. 

    Reply

  15. Величайший правитель РОССИИ, которого по сей день обливают грязью, ибо боятся его возвращения… Он был справедливым человеком, ДИКТАТОРОМ, который необходим Великой России, особенно сейчас. Вам все промыли мозги, вы ничего не знаете о Великом Сталине и о России в целом.

    Reply

  16. "If the French had marched into the Rhineland in 1936…" But they didn't. Why is that? If Hitler had not blocked his Panzer divisions from taking Dunkirk and 300,000 of Britain's best troops, instead giving them the time they needed to evacuate, he would have taken Britain. But he didn't. Why is that? Many fundamental and unanswered questions remain about both World Wars.

    Reply

  17. Everybody commenting here has done far more research than Kuznick, and has lived through the 30's to the 90's. Fact.

    Reply

  18. USSR was the Best country one can ever imagine,and all propaganda against it is a Bull Shit! I've been raised and lived in USSR,we were happy,no homeless people,great education,free medicine care ets…

    Reply

  19. Fascism was the form of capitalism? Is he drunk? Stoned? Deranged? All of the above?
    Hitler had in place EVERY socialist institution you can possibly name:
    Social security, socialized education, health care, child care, even socialized recreation (Kraft durch Freude), government subsidized "transportation for the people" (VolksWagen), government price control, wage control, rent control, banking system control, major industry control,…. list goes on…..
    How'd hell you can get more socialist than that?

    Reply

  20. Americans (and Canadians) should be very grateful their countries have never faced the exigencies of being a European power.  That was a continent of war from antiquity.  I am very happy my ancestors chose to leave.

    Reply

  21. +Diana Tsorionti
    lol!
    What a DUMB BIMBO!
    Musicians don't work 9 to 5.
    You didn't know EVEN THAT?
    Do you know ANYTHING AT ALL (other than blowjobs)?

    Reply

  22.  +Diana Tsorionti
    lol!
    DUMB BIMBO!
    Who gives a damn what you're reading?
    All the idiocy of your comments still demonstrate incredible stupidity of communist dinosaurs to the world perfectly fine.

    Reply

  23. The only difference between communism and fascism is rhetoric, phraseology, slogans, mantras, etc… they use to brainwash mindless mobs of followers and turn them into cannon fodder.
    Everything else is the SAME.

    Reply

  24. Kuznick missed this thing. National Socialism was branch of Socialism, branch of Marxism. Hitler's invention was to merge nationalism to ideas of Marx and Engels. If you have ever compared the art, buildings, monuments of Nazi Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union similarities are amazingly strong. Both ideologies tried to build "The New Man" who will think and act in a different way than ever before. The idea the Nazism was capitalism is stupid indeed. Nazis and Communists were only revolutionary forces in European policies of that time. Even Mussolini's fascism was pretty lame compared to them.

    Reply

  25. The idea that Soviet Union won the WW2 is controversial. In 1945 it really looked like it has been the greatest winner (with USA). However war will never solve vital problems. The reality, consequences of WW2, came much later. Now we can understand better that WW2 destroyed both dictatorships – Hitler's Third Reich and Stalin's Soviet Union. Actually Soviet Union never really recovered that terrible slaughter German forces performed. 14 241 000 deceased soldiers (latest Russian military study) and about as many deceased civilians (about half of them because policy of Stalin).

    Reply

  26. WW2 didn't really end until December 25th 1991, when the last aggressor of the war finally collapsed under its own filth.

    Reply

  27. So "Socialism was positive for the USSR", huh? All those people starving, dying, being treated like farm animals (at best) was a "positive thing" Mr Kuznick!?

    I've freaking heard it all now. And this man is a professor at America Univ? And some people actually deny that our colleges are not taken over by left wing hacks? Mr Kuznick, I suggest you interview some people who actually lived through the Soviet Union, and you'll hear a much, much different story than the one your telling.

    Reply

  28. The Soviet Union is gone long time ago…or maybe not…considering the fact that haters still fighting against it…………

    Reply

  29. The invasion of Europe by the west, was not to defeat Hitler,( he was already beaten by the USSR) But to stop the expansion of soviet domination across all of Europe,

    Reply

  30. Were large numbers of Soviet soldiers captured by the Nazis early on?  
       The Soviets used their state's two great strategic pluses – its sheer size (& 'General Winter').  Hitler's armies (& even more so, those of his jackal allies, the Romanians, Hungarians, Finns…) were not clothed or armed for Winter conditions.  
       The Soviets also had problems trying to work out what the 'plan' was – three columns headed for Leningrad (the Bolsheviks 'Banner City'), Moscow & Stalingrad.  The latter could have been ignored while they seized the oil fields in Azerbaijan.  Sending a large force to take Leningrad / St. Petersburg would have been a bitter blow to Soviet (& Russian) morale.  Concentrating on Moscow might have worked, but as they discovered in the course of the fighting it stretched their line to breaking point.  
       (And partizans gave their forces a very hard time in the 'conquered' territory).
      If the USSR was Hell on Earth how come most of it's citizens fought Fascism with a will?  
       And how come it recovered so quickly after 1945 to become a superpower?

    Reply

  31. Yeah, untold history. I would say, big shit history. The Sovjet-Union was controlled by Zionists and without help from the US in the form of the "Land-Lease-Act" Germany had won against them. The Sovjet-Union planned the invasion of Europe before Hitler interceded. This is long since proven and a fact.

    Reply

  32. Fabulous – finally, a brilliant account on 1930s, lost in the ocean of right-winged fairy tales about "totalitarianism".

    Reply

  33. what threat was hitler to france, britian, and the US? hitler wanted an alliance with britian and offered them and france many great deals during the 30s. did he not not? and during the first two years of the war hitler offered dozens of peace offers to britian to end the war between them offering to withdraw from western europe. also up to when FDR occupied iceland, hitler did everything he could to avoid war with the US. again, what threat was germany to the west?

    Reply

  34. The only way the USSR was able to defeat Hitler's blitzkrieg tactics was because they had tens of thousands of 2-ton Studebaker trucks to mobilize troops and artilery that would otherwise have had to depend on horses.
    They also imposed political enforcement on science. Trofim Lysenko rejected genetics and insisted tkat his own techniques of hybridizing plants failed miserably and resulted in millions starving due to crop failure. This disaster was then exported to China with the same disastrous results.
    The main problem with communism is that free speech is the first casualty. Socialism with free speech and democratic elections has worked remarkably well in most of Europe.

    Reply

  35. today there is only one innovator- Wall Street- that puts a material price on every aspect of life possible. Innovations that can be consumed in seconds increase the leverage of the economies of scale, further increasing profits. The idea of profiting in some form or another ruled all human life until the arts discovered the use of perspective in paintings. Soon perspective became the engine producing paradigms of change about all aspects of the world. The revolution in Russia was far from perfect but as necessary as the revolutions in the US and France and GB for providing another example that democracies must be republican in character- representative to bring about change. The governments of the world in the last 50 years have undergone changes for the better in so many ways- the entire world now insists that every keyboard or mic have an individual voice. This state of the world was inconceivable as an element of progress even 50 years ago. All the political actors did horrible things during the great wars because that's whats being asked of them by their governments. When we left the garden of Eden no spirit said; 'hey, life's a lot easier outside the garden'…after all that's where the snake went back to. At least we are not getting bit so much anymore as awful the Donald tells us. "Your all losers" Trump Says, "you gotta start worker harder" say Jeb- at least here in the USA we have a government that allows me to say that as bad as the last century was, as good as the next one can become- by working together for a higher purpose of humanity- the full scale hardware building of the exploration of our solar system. Someone gave us the raw materials to do it scattered all over the planet. Putting it together- with every nation given the educational opportunities to participate in humanity's greatest adventure should be the political goal of this century.

    Reply

  36. A sanitised version if not an apology of the most brutal dictator in history. Why wouldn't capitalist be wary of communists. Could they  see what forced collectivisation did to ordinary peasants. The barbarity of the Red Army racing to Berlin demonstrated what Europe could expect from the victors. The distilled evil of Communism was destroyed by its own barbarism. And Russians have learnt nothing

    Reply

  37. ww2 was a war fought by empires for controll of other territories/peoples.  usa, soviet union, gb, france, germany, japan, italy all wanted to dominate.

    Reply

  38. Workaholic maniac and the avenger
    Lenin discovered a terror as a means of state power. He called it "proletarian terror" against anyone who is not for him
    His successor Stalin and later modern Kremlin – Falling oil prices has proved to be destructive for the Russia – from 6th place in the GDP went to 10, the ruble devalued permanently, social spending in the budget are reduced from 15 to 6%, military rising, the economy is degraded, aggressive foreign policy
    I have lived most of my life under the sign of Lenin and Stalin and I know what freedom he has given – the freedom of slave labor and the

    Reply

  39. The incredible thing about this video is that it is made years after it was demonstrated by V. Suvorov, M. Solonin, V. Beshanov and others that Stalin planned to attack Germany in 1941 and even more years since Rummel substantiated in Death by Government that USSR killed about 3 times more people than Nazi Germany: 60 million against 20 million. The last thing Stalin wanted was to buy time as he was armed much better than Hitler. These idiots basically repeat the Soviet propaganda!

    Reply

  40. So Stalin wasnt really a bad guy . He just killed 20 million people. Anybody can have a bad 50 years

    Reply

  41. You think you know so much. You right what you wish to write, but in Russia, it will remain unchanged. It is something you will never be able to infect with your vile ideals and criticism. You know only disrespect. You are fit only for the earth beneath your feet.

    Reply

  42. Stalin and the Soviet Union were betrayed by their Allies : France, Great Britain and the United States.

    Reply

  43. The United States wages war on and invades Iraq Afghanistan with the "coalition of the willing this is deemed as exceptable because it is American Imperialism. Putin "invades" the Crimea which was part of the Tsarist Russia and then part of USSR the Crimea was given to the Ukraine in 1954 by Khrushchev for administrative purposes only.

    Reply

  44. Wow…..this is the first time I've heard that Stalin wanted to form an alliance with the Western powers. Interesting….

    Reply

  45. http://www.historynet.com/russias-life-saver-lend-lease-aid-to-the-ussr-in-world-war-ii-book-review.htm

    Reply

  46. To my opinion Stalin killed less than a million people and most of those were fascists.

    Reply

  47. The series lost credibility for me with the celebration of Stalin, and the assumptions of Hitler. Hitler made very clear, his intention to restore pre German alliances. Danzig was German, the Sudetenland were German. And the Poles had taken up pogroms against Germans in Poland, and the former lands that became Czechloslovakia. He could either watch his people be slaughtered, or attack Poland, with America and Britain against him. And possibly Russia. So he agreed with Stalin to break up Poland, to save his people. And only attacked Russia, when realizing they were arming for an invasion of Europe. Germans were Christian, Communist were Atheist. Hitler wanted an alliance with Britain and England, to the point that he refused to bomb civilian targets, until months after the Brits and Americans had been bombing civilian targets in Germany, day and night.

    Reply

  48. These pseudo-intellectual cowards must have felt stupid about their fundamental arguments being proved wrong after the broadcast when "RUSSIA MARCHED INTO UKRAINE WITHOUT USING THE WORD DEFENSIVE POSTURING ONCE" ……,,also I forgot about Afghanistan, that was a brilliant strategic country to control to protect them from a likely india or Pakistan attack.. No wonder it's called "real news"

    Reply

  49. Blah blah blah …! Due to Stalin west couldn`t colonize Russia and Russia is still strong and powerful.This is the only reason Stalin is still a bad guy!

    Reply

  50. It is because of Stalin and the Soviet Union that France, Great Britain exist today as free nations – possibly the US too.

    Reply

  51. Say what you will but Comunisim was far worse than National Socialism , it was the Russians that needed to be curtailed first.

    Reply

  52. What a disgusting, shameful piece of revisionist bullshit this is. Kuznick and Stone routinely cover up, de-emphasize, or ignore the despicable crimes against humanity committed by Stalin and other communist regimes. You make Stalin seem like some kind of misunderstood hero, while the West is demonized for standing up to his terror. Soviet and Nazi military cooperation, the violent bifurcation of Poland, the Soviet invasions of Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia—are ignored, while many excesses of communist terror are characterized as logical responses to "capitalist provocation." The brutal 40-year Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe is seen as a necessary move to avoid another invasion, while the Cold War (which the Soviets helped initiate by blockading Berlin and creating puppet states across Eastern Europe) is blamed on the US and "irrational" fear of communism. The authors of this despicable book and propaganda documentary series should be ashamed of their lives.

    Reply

  53. This guy is a turd. Too many fraud arguments are made. The history books are filled with false narratives. So is this guy. The Russians were just about to invade Germany. That is why they got caught by surprise. They were not in a defensive position. They had 1,000,000 paratroopers on the German / Polish front . Stalin had every intention of conquering Europe. This clown is a communist apologist……

    Reply

  54. Staline didn't form an alliance with Hiter, it was rather a non-agression treaty. Staline knew Hitler was going to attack USSR, so he made the treaty in order to gain time to preapare his defense…

    Reply

  55. The Russians fought with a brutal, yet passionate ferocity because they knew that if they failed…Hitler was prepared to give them all the "Injun treatment!!!"

    Hitler was a fool. He shouldve cut deals with Soviet POW's.'to allow then to return to Soviet soil, secretly form Anti-Stalin partisan groups, and undermine Stalin as a leader, and bam…Nazi victory!!!

    After all, its what Stalin did. One a side note. I am glad history did NOT take a turn like i described. Im absolutely grateful for the Soviet Union and her brave sacrifice. I wouldnt be here right now, if not for the Soviet Union. They liberated my Grandfather's POW camp!! 🙂

    Reply

  56. American rightists- "Stalin's SO terrible!!!!! He killed people!!!" "What about the native Americans or Mexicans that were countlessly killed in america's expansion? Or All of Western imperialism and colonialism combined?"

    Reply

  57. Wow! So many USA presidents lied to the world about World War II and Soviet Union. More importantly, so many morons believed in those lies.

    Reply

  58. "In late 1932 . . . that the only country that was immune to the depression was the Soviet Union."

    Never mind that there was a famine in the Ukraine in the winter if 1932-1933 that killed a few million Soviet citizens.

    The Ukraine endured a terrible famine, but thank God Stalin was able to avert an economic depression.

    Remarkable.

    Reply

  59. "russian nationalist" he was a georgian proletarian internationalist you trot fuck

    Reply

  60. The Soviet Union was the greatest nation on earth and in history. The first socialist state ever created by millions of workers and peasants. It was the greatest political event in history because it opened a new alternative of development to the rest of the world other than western capitalist. The USSR made it possible to show that a socialist, planned economy was far superior than private profit economy by providing not just the basic humane living standards but scientific and technical achievements. Then, some of you might ask, why the USSR collapsed in 1991?Many factors led to its demised some internal and external. Internal because after the massive industrialization, thanks to Stalin, the government did not immediately shifted it's economy to consumer goods, thereby competing with the West. But you need to realized that after WW2, the USSR was devastated by the Nazi occupation: it's infrastructure was burned to the ground, it's bridges, railroads, electric grids, schools, hospitals, etc were bombed and destroyed by the Nazis as a military tactic to bring her down to its knees. The Western banks and capitalists secretly financed Hitler's war machine such as the Warburgs, Rothschilds and Bushes because the ruling western elite saw in the USSR it's mortal enemy. So, why bother invading the USSR directly when you can manipulate Hitler?? The global oligarchy mobilized countless financial resources to destroy the Soviet State. This is well documented by historians.. The capitalist powers only intervened in WW2, when they realized Hitler was losing the war with the USSR. In fact, they thought that Hitler would take care of USSR for them as they cover its vast natural resources and energy reserves.. Also, the western bankers were in deep crisis, and their economies almost bankrupted which led to the Great Depression in 1929. So, what do capitalists do when they are in crisis? They take you to war, which is exactly what they did. This is exactly what they are doing now since 2003 with the invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan, the bombing of Yugoslavia, NATO destruction of Lybia, and now the imperialist war on the Soverign state of Syria, the fascist coup in Ukraine.. The sanctions against Russia, the NATO military drills along Russia's borders, the expansion of NATO to the East. History repeats itself. It seems fascism is now global and kicking. The same satanic bankers that financed Hitler are now financing the new monsters: ISIS, AL Nusra, etc. Again, because this time, the global crisis of capitalism is now SYSTEMIC. As for the USSR, the Cold War era absorbed much of its budget which diverted resources to armaments instead of consumer goods …Even though, the USSR was producing a limited amount of consumer goods, the USSR was surrounded by a sea of hostile capitalism everywhere: US, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, the mayor western powers who had exploited and colonized the Third World. Meanwhile, the USSR had to fight for its own survival against a brutal, well trained and equiped Nazi war machine. So, Stalin had to developed the five year plans, because time was the worst enemy for the Soviet people. On top of that, Stalin had to fight against a nest of traitors within the party who were plotting against the socialist State. Traitors were a reason why the USSR collapsed in 1991. Politicians who became technocrats and privileged bourcrats who wanted to maintain their social status at the expense of the workers. Another reason why the USSR collapsed. If Stalin were alive in times of Gorbachev, the USSR would never had collapsed and the nest of traitors would have been taken care of. Now, Putin has given back the Russian people its dignaty, self respect and hope.

    Reply

  61. the german-soviet non aggression pac for hitler to invade poland without the risk of war on 2 fronts as mentioned earlier indeed, but…for stalin he wanted to buy time to prepare his red army but " to stalin's misjudgement he expected a long tiring war for hitler's army with the west (france & britain & their allies). he was shocked to see that hitler's victory on the west came only in less than 6 weeks. also the "barbarossa operation" attack on USSSR was suppose to start in april 1941 not june but stupid mussolini italian attack on greece disasterly failed which forced hitler's intervention to send german troops to properly secure the greek invasion delayed the attack on usssr 2 months. soviet union was capable to defeat the nazi forces due to "united states aids" which were vital. example: u.s oil trucks provided the flow of fuel for usssr's heavy equiptments. unlike the germans who relayed that time on horses to carry supplies. stalin was brutal dictator like hitler & even worse but he got away with it !! he always wanted to be remmbered in history as "the victor who crushed the nazis & their capital berlin". nobody judges the victor only the defeated gets judged like they did in nuremberg trials that hanged most of the remaining nazi leaders goering & the rest of the gang.

    Reply

  62. What kind of economic boom og the 30s? Military build up, yes. USSR started the war as an agressor, attacked Poland & baltic countries.

    Reply

  63. Your guest just showed his weakness in following the establishment rhetoric about Stalin. I will not listen to his jargon anymore because he wears blinders. It's been shown that most of the demonizing of Stalin is based on lies. Your quest has the colors of a social Democrat which only served ,then and are serving now to counter the real social revolution towards Communism. A true people's revolution which eventually will come to the people of the world because it is the best way towards a just and lasting future

    Reply

  64. I don't understand how kuznick can say that "fascim was more like capitalism" when the word Nazi is an abbreviation for nationalist socialism. I think it's correct to say that the Soviet Union was very much as evil as the Nazis when they are so very similar in so many ways. ie secret police, radical violent protesting of members, usurping of power to gain party control.

    Reply

  65. Yes the USSR did work in the 1930s over the bodies of millions of people and brutal dictatorship. These commie apologists are crazy.

    Reply

  66. Russians always talk about how they paid the heaviest price, well that’s their fault. It’s their fault they sucked on the battle field, they lacked supplies, most of their equipment was shit, their generals used outdated tactics. Their officers had total disregard for the lives of their soldiers. Wars cost a great deal, but two main things, man and material. The Russians paid in blood, the U.S. paid in war materials. But the Russians think their blood sacrifice makes them better, not really it just shows how stupid they are. They let the allies “fight to the last Russian” and it worked.

    Reply

  67. The Soviets also cut a deal with Germany at the start of the war. Doesn't that pose a problem :D?

    Reply

  68. Stalin had plans in place to invade Germany before the German counter offensive. Russian/communist domination of Europe was always the intent. Did we forget Lenin's deliberate attack on Poland in 1920? The Poles saved their country and subsequently, Germany from complete takeover. Stalin defeated Germany because the US gave him military and financial support. The communist Roosevelt supported the terrorist in the East and the drunkard in the West. It took a massive effort to wipe out Germany, and then the US spent the next 40 years fighting communism. How pathetically stupid is that! "We defeated the wrong enemy" (General George S. Patton).

    Reply

  69. When people say the soviets lost more soldiers than any other country.
    No shit the USSR was the 4th most populated country in the world before WW2.

    Reply

  70. Reading a good biography of General Zhukov does a lot to plugs gaps in knowledge – it conveys the respectable idealism, the immense work and suffering, and the betrayal of these by Stalin.
    I don’t think any allied general managed more than one front in the conflict where Zhukov managed four or five!

    Reply

  71. I understand that Stalin really scared you out. He crushed Nazis and he was very popular in 1940s and 50s. % 30 of the world's population was under socialist rule after WW2. Imperialism almost lost the game. The counter attack of imperialist propaganda started with demonization of Stalin. After 60 years all the lies are exposed but imperialism still holds on the same Cold War lies. Stalin was a hero of humankind and one of the greatest communists. USSR was the most democratic and wealthy society of its time under Stalin rule. Some day USSR will be established again.

    Reply

  72. Leftist revisionists. Should America cower and apologize to you, too? President Donald J. Trump is leading the United States, not Vladimir Lenin or Joseph Stalin. You said Stalin wanted to remain our ally. He might have wanted more of our Lend-Lease give-aways; however, he certainly didn't want our capitalist ideals that helped him escape Nazi destruction. You two are absolute fools. You could have been in the Gulag Archipelago working in frozen snow until you dropped. You two are really intellectually over-cooked. You're the type of men who spend all your time lighting the cigarettes of your leftist professors and avoiding the fistfights of truly principled men with integrity.

    Reply

  73. What a load of crap. In the 1920s 1930 Stalin hired American and other western firms to industrialize the USSR, also there were famines and millions put in forced labor. The USSR hardly was "immune" from the depression. Can you imagine of some criten like this defended Nazi Germany like he defends the USSR by saying, Germany had universal healthcare, animal rights laws, and anti-smoking campaigns and so fort.

    Reply

  74. This is beyond absurd. Fascism is based on total state control of the economy, which is identical to Marxism. Nazis are socialists, they preached socialism and they achieved a very efficient form of socialism which is very similar to the "Nordic Model" often admired by Lefties in this country. The only difference is that Fascists did not go with collectivization, a murderous idea applied by the Communists, but they both hated capitalism, internationalism, and the Bourgeois (viewed as Jewish plots in all Nazi propaganda and books; read "Those Damned Nazis" by Joseph Goebbels). The Soviets had designs on Europe and the world, to be achieved mainly by military means and "revolution", and that's a core doctrine for them. People ignore that Stalin was Lenin's right-hand man. Lenin began the terror in Russia and banned all other parties (especially after his Bolshevists lost the elections of 1917). After WWI, the Communists were spreading into Germany and Italy, a fact that the Nazis never failed to mention. Orwell, who fought in Spain, learned later that the USSR wanted to take over that country. Stalin supplied Hitler with oil, material and even factories inside the USSR to rebuild the German army. He wanted to split Poland with Germany and their soldiers met at the border and greeted each other. The photos and secret protocols and correspondence between the two are public domain. According to Molotov's biography, Stalin even went after the Jews in his party to appease Hitler in 1939. ETC ETC ETC!

    Reply

  75. Stalin never killed millions of people and the Purges we're about the party and removing corrupted people from Power

    Reply

  76. There was no concrete intelligence on Stalin's table to confirm any German invasion into Soviet Union. This is another propaganda by Western Historians.

    Reply

  77. The Americans didn't win the war, and now they're still jealous. Imperialist swines. Stalin was the winner and you just can't digest that, can you?

    Reply

  78. Stalin wasn’t that bad. The “millions of victims” are as real as iraqi WMDs. Ceding this to the right undermines the entire left, no matter how anti-Stalinist you are.

    So quit it. Quit accepting fascist propaganda about communism as fact, even if the State Department filed off the anti Semitic serial numbers

    Reply

  79. What other sources exist about Russia’s great purges beside the books by ….Robert Conquest.

    Reply

  80. Stalin was much worse than Hitler. In 1939 Soviet Union had more tanks and more trained men, this is why Hitler had to deal with Stalin. Stalin was planning to take over the whole entire europe. Stalin let Hitler to soften the europe. BUt, by 1941 germany was leading in war preparations. Hitler had no choice but to attack Soviet Union first.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *