@zaliasvelniass retard the first man in space, first satellite, first woman,first space station and a larger nuclear arsenals of the world was build all with soviet money. DUMB I KNOW SO MUCH OF YOU STUDY YOU. NOOB
@GravityPowerful I'm gonna tell you short. In ca.50 years of SSRS existance planned economy proved to be inneficient. In late 80's it went into stagnation. SSRS achievements were made only in military and few other spheres, but all other - social, civil economy,-all was crap. SSRS achievements were based on huge natural resourses and stolen technologies. I lived in SSRS and iI know, it was TOTAL SHIT THERE IN ALL MEANS! And if youre russian, youre slave, russians always were just slaves.
Funny, tributes to the supposed "Proletariat" built off the backs of tens of thousands of "free" workers in a "utopia" for the people. Man the communists were simply contradictions, they fight for the people by starving and killing off tens of millions of innocents. Is there any crime the Soviet system hasn't committed in the name of the People? I am proud to be an American and live in this great republic! To the individual, may the fruits of every mans labors be his own, go Individualism!
@davedavedaveannoy1 LOL first off stalin did that and stalin was not a marxist, he was a communist but not a marxist, he invented his own form of communism. and TRUE individualism wont take us anywhere, without some of the socialist policies applied during the 20th century the US would be gone.
@davedavedaveannoy1 Roosevelt implemented the New Deal which was filled with socialist policies like fixing prices and redistributing wealth through taxes, saving the country from The Great Depression. Kennedy and Johnson themselves implemented socialist measures, and improved civil rights, something the conservatives and right-wingers in general were against, even though they never admitted it, for obvious reasons. this saved the US from other crysis.
@FIFA07Addicted In doing so it spawned another, US companies wanting more profit and less expenses have outsourced and moved operations overseas to places where workers will work for lesser paychecks, effectively causing the circulation of dollars to be in Asia and rather then here in the United States. In doing so many tens of thousands of jobs have been lost, and businessmen are forced to pay massive sums of money for small if not insignificant tasks. Minimum wage kills industry.
@FIFA07Addicted In also doing so people have been burdened with higher taxes, because that money has to come from somewhere, progressive politicians don't just magically blow it out of their ass. And it has corrupted the government and justified and rationalized even more socialist programs that are slowly bankrupting the government and depriving the private sector of needed jobs, resources, and room for expansion in markets.
@FIFA07Addicted Its also increased the laziness of people and their dependence on government aide with leads to two bad things: #1. The State has more control of them and more leverage since they are indebted to it, which is leading to more and more authoritarian legislation and lack of public power. #2. Decrease in productivity, since you can now sit on your ass for 3 years without the need to look for a job and receive unemployment benefits.
@FIFA07Addicted Then there is yet another problem, our government is now in debt and severely limited because it is essentially owned by other governments. Which means OUR nation has ceased to be OUR nation, we now belong to the Chinese and Arabs. And with the said justification and rationalization of your precious "Social Welfare" programs the government will slowly regulate, oversee, then takeover and nationalize private industries. Eventually...we will have all State controlled enterprise.
@FIFA07Addicted Then, by focusing more or entirely on being a nanny state that provides for all the quality of industries heavily regulated, controlled, or maintained by the State will decrease because of a lack of private competition that drives advancement. This will cause us to slide into collective poverty, the "Redistribution of Wealth" originally meant to enrich the poor and down trodden will force everyone to the same level, rather then equality you get conformity.
@FIFA07Addicted And all of this comes at a price, the more Welfare you provide the people the more you have to tax them. Gee, seems kind of counter productive that in order to provide the public with everything they desire you have to tax and extract from them everything needed for it. That doesn't seem like an enriching experience, or welfare, or even support to me. It sounds like unnecessary government processing and bureaucracy that gives me a bit of what I gave them but for the most part
@davedavedaveannoy1 simply gives it to others. All of this just to support the poor? And lets not forget, once you have devoted all of this to Social Welfare there is little to none left for what the government, the Republic, was meant for. The defense and protection of the people from foreign and domestic tyrants. This leads to a weakened military, a broken police force, and the lack of the State's ability to enforce law and justice.
@FIFA07Addicted Why....look at France, it is so heavily indebted that it cant afford to keep the law in certain areas. Why, they have "No Go" zones completely out of their control. Small areas or regions simply walled off and separated from the rest of the nation, left to fester because the government lacks the force necessary to ensure peace is kept, areas where criminals rule unchallenged and unchecked.
@FIFA07Addicted And all of this....ALL OF THIS HURT, PAIN, UNLAWFULNESS, ABSENCE OF JUSTICE, BURDENING, CORRUPTION, DEBT, ENSLAVEMENT....all of this so a whore can legally kill the child she bares so she can shirk responsibility or some unproductive imbecile not willing to work for his pay can all of these benefits good hardworking citizens slave over to provide. All of this hell, hardship, and widespread public deprivation of money just for Social Welfare? You disgust me.
@Buzzz46; The famine of 1932-1933 was no orchestration of the USSR, unless you prefer to believe fascist news publications like Hearst.
Regardless, an analysis of the USSR's achievements should not limited to 1932-1933, as there were many great accomplishments before and after the famine.
@Buzz46; You know for a fact that it was intentional? What would be gained by eliminating the population of the USSR's leading agricultural sector?
The famine is used by reactionaries to stir up hatred for modern Communists, like myself. What do I have to do with decisions made by Soviet leadership in the 1930s?
The Dust Bowl in the US created a limited famine during that time period as well—limited to the poorest in the US, of course. Estimates are that 5.5 million died as a result.
"What would be gained by eliminating the population of the USSR's leading agricultural sector"
The land is still there but the removal of those peasants was the goal and they had them producing at the same time they were eliminating them. Why? They were self sufficent and didn't need Stalin's regime and so they were a threat. Communist, Land Thief, Criminal, are just different names for the same thing, Socialism with a dictator.
@Buzzz46; You have evidence that it was intentional? You must be quite the prodigal scholar, as this has never been proven.
Many countries cosider the famine to be a tragedy, but only a small number of countries consider it to have been genocidal in nature.
Consider, if Soviet industrialization and collectivization hadn't occured that Nazi Germany might well have conquered Europe. The situation is never as black and white as it might appear.
It has been proven. Look it up. Plus it doesn't take rocket scientist to know if a country produces more than it did the year before and produces more than it's own people need, there is no reason there should have been mass starvation and murder. So go ahead and believe your fantasy world just like the Nazis don't believe they murdered 13 million in their camps. But believing it isn't true doesn't make it so.
The famine was largely a result of wealthier peasants resisting collectivization. Without this dissent it is unlikely that there would have been a famine.
So, indirectly, Soviet policy may deserve some blame, but it certainly wasn't a directed campaign of genocide.
You'll note that I am not denying a famine, or deaths in Ukraine due to famine.
It's interesting that you mention the Holocaust though; the Israeli government does not consider the famine to be genocide.
@Buzzz46 i agree, from a architectural point of view this building is epic, but with knowing the million dying because of land reform policies, well it makes this building seem like pure evil. Lenin intended to break down the spirit of the people, to mold them all into having the same mindset, and killing a few million was not going to be a problem. People in modern europe are so fixated on seeing the nazis as the bad guys that they overlook how evil the communists really were.
@timberwulfzero communism was tried in enough nations, and cultures in many different forms to see that it does not work, lets just leave it in the only place it should be, on paper and not in human societies.
@timberwulfzero is it? Not really, especially in western societies where people are living comftable lives with plenty of disposable income, it would take a serious decline in peoples living standards for revolution to even be contemplated. Thats the trick with consumerism, it keeps people under control by keeping them happy, they wont revolt against that.
Capitalism functions on an contradictory basis; in its drive towards the accumulation of profit, Capitalism tends to ignore everything except accumulation; working people are attacked daily through union busting as well as regressive laws and taxes.
This means a consistantly deminishing - or in the best case, stagnant - living standard for working people. The only way to reverse this trend is to organize and fight back.
@trigga1uk lol tell that to the working class. the problem is that the working class is too ignorant to make a revolution in most capitalist countries.
Architects today think the Palace wouldn't have worked. You're placing a heavy concrete tower and statue on top of a domed space inside where a great museum and a national archive was suppose to go. It would have been too top heavy and collapsed under its own weight.
I do agree with your statement that people should be given necessary resources before anything else.
However, if this was built, how many people would be missing out on resources that could have potentionally gone to construct their homes? Those materials would instead go to a building only to serve the most powerful people.
And, of course, this building is highly uneccessary, as great as it looks.
@SovietHighDruid im sure the proletariats would of preferred a tribute in the form of food and a decent standard of living, rather than being starved to death by absurd land reform policies.
The Soviet Union was officially formed at the first Congress of Soviets in December, 1922. Sergey Kirov, speaking at the Congress, proposed building the congress palace "on the sites of palaces once owned by bankers, landlords, and czars." The palace of the Soviets "will be just another push for the European proletariat, still dormant...to realize that we came for good and forever, that the ideas...of communism are as deeply rooted here as the wells drilled by Baku oilers."
too bad it was never built duo fuckin German invasion in 1941
BaltijosTigras 3 months ago
which anthem is playing? I'm not familiar with this one
redeemer61190 5 months ago
i like the palace of soviets from le corbusieur
taparero 5 months ago
haha this is what my house will look like
ElocTheComrade 5 months ago in playlist cccp
Nice to see the commies being modest eh.
bazzatheblue 1 year ago
Stalin was going to climb to the top and he could see from there all the way to Sarah Palin's bedroom window :)
Even over the big fence she's building.
dutzan1 1 year ago
this will never happen because soviet union economy was crap.
zaliasvelniass 1 year ago
@zaliasvelniass lol ? you're joke? USSR economy was second economy in the world after USA.....
GravityPowerful 9 months ago
@GravityPowerful and you based it on completely nothing? how do you compare?do you have data? red some books dumbass.
zaliasvelniass 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GravityPowerful and you based it on completely nothing? how do you compare?do you have data? read some books dumbass.
zaliasvelniass 9 months ago
@zaliasvelniass retard the first man in space, first satellite, first woman,first space station and a larger nuclear arsenals of the world was build all with soviet money. DUMB I KNOW SO MUCH OF YOU STUDY YOU. NOOB
GravityPowerful 9 months ago
@GravityPowerful I'm gonna tell you short. In ca.50 years of SSRS existance planned economy proved to be inneficient. In late 80's it went into stagnation. SSRS achievements were made only in military and few other spheres, but all other - social, civil economy,-all was crap. SSRS achievements were based on huge natural resourses and stolen technologies. I lived in SSRS and iI know, it was TOTAL SHIT THERE IN ALL MEANS! And if youre russian, youre slave, russians always were just slaves.
zaliasvelniass 9 months ago
tower of babel ...
coolstuffplus 1 year ago
Funny, tributes to the supposed "Proletariat" built off the backs of tens of thousands of "free" workers in a "utopia" for the people. Man the communists were simply contradictions, they fight for the people by starving and killing off tens of millions of innocents. Is there any crime the Soviet system hasn't committed in the name of the People? I am proud to be an American and live in this great republic! To the individual, may the fruits of every mans labors be his own, go Individualism!
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
@davedavedaveannoy1 LOL first off stalin did that and stalin was not a marxist, he was a communist but not a marxist, he invented his own form of communism. and TRUE individualism wont take us anywhere, without some of the socialist policies applied during the 20th century the US would be gone.
FIFA07Addicted 1 year ago
@FIFA07Addicted Which ones and how would it dissolve the US?
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
@davedavedaveannoy1 Roosevelt implemented the New Deal which was filled with socialist policies like fixing prices and redistributing wealth through taxes, saving the country from The Great Depression. Kennedy and Johnson themselves implemented socialist measures, and improved civil rights, something the conservatives and right-wingers in general were against, even though they never admitted it, for obvious reasons. this saved the US from other crysis.
FIFA07Addicted 1 year ago
@FIFA07Addicted In doing so it spawned another, US companies wanting more profit and less expenses have outsourced and moved operations overseas to places where workers will work for lesser paychecks, effectively causing the circulation of dollars to be in Asia and rather then here in the United States. In doing so many tens of thousands of jobs have been lost, and businessmen are forced to pay massive sums of money for small if not insignificant tasks. Minimum wage kills industry.
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
@FIFA07Addicted In also doing so people have been burdened with higher taxes, because that money has to come from somewhere, progressive politicians don't just magically blow it out of their ass. And it has corrupted the government and justified and rationalized even more socialist programs that are slowly bankrupting the government and depriving the private sector of needed jobs, resources, and room for expansion in markets.
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
@FIFA07Addicted Its also increased the laziness of people and their dependence on government aide with leads to two bad things: #1. The State has more control of them and more leverage since they are indebted to it, which is leading to more and more authoritarian legislation and lack of public power. #2. Decrease in productivity, since you can now sit on your ass for 3 years without the need to look for a job and receive unemployment benefits.
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
@FIFA07Addicted Then there is yet another problem, our government is now in debt and severely limited because it is essentially owned by other governments. Which means OUR nation has ceased to be OUR nation, we now belong to the Chinese and Arabs. And with the said justification and rationalization of your precious "Social Welfare" programs the government will slowly regulate, oversee, then takeover and nationalize private industries. Eventually...we will have all State controlled enterprise.
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
@FIFA07Addicted Then, by focusing more or entirely on being a nanny state that provides for all the quality of industries heavily regulated, controlled, or maintained by the State will decrease because of a lack of private competition that drives advancement. This will cause us to slide into collective poverty, the "Redistribution of Wealth" originally meant to enrich the poor and down trodden will force everyone to the same level, rather then equality you get conformity.
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
@FIFA07Addicted And all of this comes at a price, the more Welfare you provide the people the more you have to tax them. Gee, seems kind of counter productive that in order to provide the public with everything they desire you have to tax and extract from them everything needed for it. That doesn't seem like an enriching experience, or welfare, or even support to me. It sounds like unnecessary government processing and bureaucracy that gives me a bit of what I gave them but for the most part
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
@davedavedaveannoy1 simply gives it to others. All of this just to support the poor? And lets not forget, once you have devoted all of this to Social Welfare there is little to none left for what the government, the Republic, was meant for. The defense and protection of the people from foreign and domestic tyrants. This leads to a weakened military, a broken police force, and the lack of the State's ability to enforce law and justice.
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
@FIFA07Addicted Why....look at France, it is so heavily indebted that it cant afford to keep the law in certain areas. Why, they have "No Go" zones completely out of their control. Small areas or regions simply walled off and separated from the rest of the nation, left to fester because the government lacks the force necessary to ensure peace is kept, areas where criminals rule unchallenged and unchecked.
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
@FIFA07Addicted And all of this....ALL OF THIS HURT, PAIN, UNLAWFULNESS, ABSENCE OF JUSTICE, BURDENING, CORRUPTION, DEBT, ENSLAVEMENT....all of this so a whore can legally kill the child she bares so she can shirk responsibility or some unproductive imbecile not willing to work for his pay can all of these benefits good hardworking citizens slave over to provide. All of this hell, hardship, and widespread public deprivation of money just for Social Welfare? You disgust me.
davedavedaveannoy1 1 year ago
@davedavedaveannoy1 You are almost incalculably wrong.
charlottesetsu 1 month ago
O.O love it
GravityPowerful 1 year ago
GLORIOUS!
JoshuaH688 1 year ago
BUT THIS WERE JUST DREAMS!!!!!
hophoplord 2 years ago
People need dreams.
SovietHighDruid 2 years ago 3
@hophoplord this wasnt dream. It was real project but was closed because of WW2.
Psamiad1986 1 year ago
@hophoplord not for long.............hehe
dimnik10309 1 year ago
I wish they could have built this, it would have been one of the great wonders of the world and a great monument to the soviet achievement
ZoDiAcZ34 2 years ago 3
Death of millions especially by starvation is not an achievement but a tradegy.
Buzzz46 2 years ago
@Buzzz46; The famine of 1932-1933 was no orchestration of the USSR, unless you prefer to believe fascist news publications like Hearst.
Regardless, an analysis of the USSR's achievements should not limited to 1932-1933, as there were many great accomplishments before and after the famine.
timberwulfzero 2 years ago
I happen to know for a fact it was intentional. Those poor people were murdered cause they had a difference of opinion. Communism is brutal.
Buzzz46 2 years ago
@Buzz46; You know for a fact that it was intentional? What would be gained by eliminating the population of the USSR's leading agricultural sector?
The famine is used by reactionaries to stir up hatred for modern Communists, like myself. What do I have to do with decisions made by Soviet leadership in the 1930s?
The Dust Bowl in the US created a limited famine during that time period as well—limited to the poorest in the US, of course. Estimates are that 5.5 million died as a result.
timberwulfzero 2 years ago
Yes I KNOW for a fact it was intentional.
"What would be gained by eliminating the population of the USSR's leading agricultural sector"
The land is still there but the removal of those peasants was the goal and they had them producing at the same time they were eliminating them. Why? They were self sufficent and didn't need Stalin's regime and so they were a threat. Communist, Land Thief, Criminal, are just different names for the same thing, Socialism with a dictator.
Buzzz46 2 years ago
@Buzzz46; You have evidence that it was intentional? You must be quite the prodigal scholar, as this has never been proven.
Many countries cosider the famine to be a tragedy, but only a small number of countries consider it to have been genocidal in nature.
Consider, if Soviet industrialization and collectivization hadn't occured that Nazi Germany might well have conquered Europe. The situation is never as black and white as it might appear.
timberwulfzero 2 years ago
It has been proven. Look it up. Plus it doesn't take rocket scientist to know if a country produces more than it did the year before and produces more than it's own people need, there is no reason there should have been mass starvation and murder. So go ahead and believe your fantasy world just like the Nazis don't believe they murdered 13 million in their camps. But believing it isn't true doesn't make it so.
Buzzz46 2 years ago
The famine was largely a result of wealthier peasants resisting collectivization. Without this dissent it is unlikely that there would have been a famine.
So, indirectly, Soviet policy may deserve some blame, but it certainly wasn't a directed campaign of genocide.
You'll note that I am not denying a famine, or deaths in Ukraine due to famine.
It's interesting that you mention the Holocaust though; the Israeli government does not consider the famine to be genocide.
timberwulfzero 2 years ago
@Buzzz46 i agree, from a architectural point of view this building is epic, but with knowing the million dying because of land reform policies, well it makes this building seem like pure evil. Lenin intended to break down the spirit of the people, to mold them all into having the same mindset, and killing a few million was not going to be a problem. People in modern europe are so fixated on seeing the nazis as the bad guys that they overlook how evil the communists really were.
trigga1uk 1 year ago
@timberwulfzero communism was tried in enough nations, and cultures in many different forms to see that it does not work, lets just leave it in the only place it should be, on paper and not in human societies.
trigga1uk 1 year ago
@trigga1uk; Revolution is inevitable.
timberwulfzero 1 year ago
@timberwulfzero is it? Not really, especially in western societies where people are living comftable lives with plenty of disposable income, it would take a serious decline in peoples living standards for revolution to even be contemplated. Thats the trick with consumerism, it keeps people under control by keeping them happy, they wont revolt against that.
trigga1uk 1 year ago
@trigga1uk; You make a good point, however:
Capitalism functions on an contradictory basis; in its drive towards the accumulation of profit, Capitalism tends to ignore everything except accumulation; working people are attacked daily through union busting as well as regressive laws and taxes.
This means a consistantly deminishing - or in the best case, stagnant - living standard for working people. The only way to reverse this trend is to organize and fight back.
timberwulfzero 1 year ago
@trigga1uk lol tell that to the working class. the problem is that the working class is too ignorant to make a revolution in most capitalist countries.
FIFA07Addicted 1 year ago
If only it came true
akumatekkusu666 2 years ago 9
Even the Volkshalle wasn't this insanely huge. Nothing wrong with going for prestige but c'mon, be rational when building.
Lasgun91 2 years ago
the soviets didnt exactly go for rational. Look at their space programme, spening billions while people queued in bread lines.
trigga1uk 2 years ago
to bad for german invasion fucking up the plans
SmoothCriminalAaron 2 years ago 6
Reminds me of Fritz Lang's Metropolis :D
Whats this song by the way?
AsianLegion88 2 years ago
Architects today think the Palace wouldn't have worked. You're placing a heavy concrete tower and statue on top of a domed space inside where a great museum and a national archive was suppose to go. It would have been too top heavy and collapsed under its own weight.
KaiserJames 3 years ago
I do agree with your statement that people should be given necessary resources before anything else.
However, if this was built, how many people would be missing out on resources that could have potentionally gone to construct their homes? Those materials would instead go to a building only to serve the most powerful people.
And, of course, this building is highly uneccessary, as great as it looks.
Mikister 3 years ago
Truly wonderfull, allmost nicer then Hitler's Volkshall.
But i doubt as well how they ever got that 100m statue of Lenin in the right order, but Hitler's Volkshall was possible as well acording to many.
Now it again houses the cathedral, wich is also really nice (both inside and out) and were the old president Jeltsin took his last trip from.
It would be ironic if all Russian president's would do the same, there last trip from the place were the palace of the Soviets should have standed.
Clausewitzz 3 years ago
Wow, never knew about the buildings.
IslamicSamurai 3 years ago 3
Very nice! I'm not familiar with it though. Would it of housed the Supreme Soviet?
StalinLeninMao 3 years ago 4
I think it was originally intended as a tribute to the proletariat.
SovietHighDruid 3 years ago
@SovietHighDruid im sure the proletariats would of preferred a tribute in the form of food and a decent standard of living, rather than being starved to death by absurd land reform policies.
trigga1uk 1 year ago
The Soviet Union was officially formed at the first Congress of Soviets in December, 1922. Sergey Kirov, speaking at the Congress, proposed building the congress palace "on the sites of palaces once owned by bankers, landlords, and czars." The palace of the Soviets "will be just another push for the European proletariat, still dormant...to realize that we came for good and forever, that the ideas...of communism are as deeply rooted here as the wells drilled by Baku oilers."
hokulani78 3 years ago
If this was built, it would create total new dimensions for architecture. How on earth would they be able to stabilize the giant statue on the top?
Stasi78 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i hate socialism but i like soviet archetecture.
tastysalad 4 years ago
i wondered when someone would do a video about this...
good job ;)
paimmon 4 years ago 2
Thanks for collecting these pictures together comrade!
Long live Lenin, the working class rule & Communism!
scotcom 4 years ago 3
Nice video comrade!
ChristianSocialist 4 years ago