I’m once again nitpicking on this because it prodigiously bothers me: the CIA collected and compiled comments from an informant. This is the nature of the document you have linked, not their opinion on the matter, not a statement from them, nothing of the sort.
Please, you have a bunch of books from reputable historians to mention and take quotes from, stop using this “unevaluated” information report as the CIA thinking this or that.
People don’t generally read books even if I link them unless they are already interested in what I have to say. I could link Losurdo’s Stalin: The History and Critique of a Black Legend if I wanted to share an objective critique of the man that neither glorifies nor demonizes him, or I could link sources on how the USSR was run so the term “dictator” doesn’t make sense, but barely anyone would read them.
The CIA’s later report seems to more be the “official line” rather than genuine analysis IMO.
I’m once again nitpicking on this because it prodigiously bothers me: the CIA collected and compiled comments from an informant. This is the nature of the document you have linked, not their opinion on the matter, not a statement from them, nothing of the sort.
Please, you have a bunch of books from reputable historians to mention and take quotes from, stop using this “unevaluated” information report as the CIA thinking this or that.
People don’t generally read books even if I link them unless they are already interested in what I have to say. I could link Losurdo’s Stalin: The History and Critique of a Black Legend if I wanted to share an objective critique of the man that neither glorifies nor demonizes him, or I could link sources on how the USSR was run so the term “dictator” doesn’t make sense, but barely anyone would read them.
The CIA’s later report seems to more be the “official line” rather than genuine analysis IMO.