Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Jianwen
| Reward Points: | 1 |
| Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 100% |
| Arguments: | 1 |
| Debates: | 0 |
I disagree to a great extent.
To the USSR as a whole, Stalin's economic policies were crucial - after 400 years of Tsarist rule, Russia was primitive and out-of-date.
Stalin's economic policies changed that by industrializing at a breakneck pace. They managed to catch up with the rest of the world technologically in a mere 10 years, something that took the rest of Europe ~30-40 years.
This was crucial as WW2 was imminent. With its neighbour, Nazi Germany, it is quite possible that Russia would not have been able to defend itself against other European powers, had Stalin not implemented these Economic Policies.
Of course, those workers are not going to feed themselves. Collectivisation was the necessary evil to ensure that Russia could sustain itself in times of war and struggle.
Therefore, Stalin's economic policies were far from detrimental for the USSR. Although the lives that Russia had lost are not to be understated, they helped to pave the way for more future people to live in a safe Russia. Additionally, more lives might have lost more during Nazi Germany's invasion, had there not been such economic policies in place.
|
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |
