Getting skinned alive by the men who ran these scumbag exploiter families. I love how even when presented with actual research proving how full of shit you are, you keep digging. I guess runs in the family.
I really doubt that Moscow deported women and children out of either collective punishment or misidentification. It’s more reasonable that it was simply Soviet policy to keep families together as much as possible.
Of course, if Moscow did separate the relatives, then antisocialists would go from griping about ‘collective punishment’ to griping about ‘separating loved ones’ instead. In any case, antisocialists rarely attempt to understand their opponents’ motives, especially in detail. All that you need to know is that the Soviets committed atrocities against innocents and that’s it. They did it just ’cause.
Showing a paragraph with a nasty description does not really prove anything, I could find you endless paragraphs that say nasty things about communists.
Do you fathom, how little land 5ha actually is for farming? Especially considering, that even the Western Soviet Union is generally not densely populated.
Again, these were the people who exploited others in brutal conditions. Hence why they were called fists. The minimal size of the property these fucks had isn’t really the counter point you seem to think it is. Keep digging buddy.
Notice the weight-bearing words “at first” in your own cited research? Etymology is not a valid argument when the definition of a term drastically changes, in this case becoming much broader. My point is, most “kulaks” deported by Stalin from the Baltics were new landowners with not a lot of land and at most a few paid workers. At least in the case of Latvia, these workers were commonly seasonal labourers from Poland (that came here willingly).
Getting skinned alive by the men who ran these scumbag exploiter families. I love how even when presented with actual research proving how full of shit you are, you keep digging. I guess runs in the family.
I really doubt that Moscow deported women and children out of either collective punishment or misidentification. It’s more reasonable that it was simply Soviet policy to keep families together as much as possible.
Of course, if Moscow did separate the relatives, then antisocialists would go from griping about ‘collective punishment’ to griping about ‘separating loved ones’ instead. In any case, antisocialists rarely attempt to understand their opponents’ motives, especially in detail. All that you need to know is that the Soviets committed atrocities against innocents and that’s it. They did it just ’cause.
Also a very good point.
Showing a paragraph with a nasty description does not really prove anything, I could find you endless paragraphs that say nasty things about communists.
Here’s some other research:
Available here, page 126
Do you fathom, how little land 5ha actually is for farming? Especially considering, that even the Western Soviet Union is generally not densely populated.
Do you even know how people farmed during that time? 😂 A 5ha operation needed dozens of people, they farmed by hand and horse.
Again, these were the people who exploited others in brutal conditions. Hence why they were called fists. The minimal size of the property these fucks had isn’t really the counter point you seem to think it is. Keep digging buddy.
Notice the weight-bearing words “at first” in your own cited research? Etymology is not a valid argument when the definition of a term drastically changes, in this case becoming much broader. My point is, most “kulaks” deported by Stalin from the Baltics were new landowners with not a lot of land and at most a few paid workers. At least in the case of Latvia, these workers were commonly seasonal labourers from Poland (that came here willingly).
you keep on digging there buddy
And you keep on rehabilitating genocidal maniacs 👍
I’m not the one trying to rehabilitate the fucking kulaks here.