On Stalinisation and the transition from State Capitalism to necessary collectivism:
It is important to ensure that the State apparatus does not transition to the point where it must turn its suppressive powers towards the Proletariat; that the State power never form authority that requires active physical censoring of the Proletariat.
Though I respect Stalin as a man who did much for the Union, the surrounding actions also caused irreparable harm to the populace and the people within the State circle. His later unavoidable paranoia drove much death and repression. One of the issues I see through personal analysis of the scenario is the hindrance of Lenin’s New Economic Plan, and the transition to centralised collectivisation that had happened arguably too soon when compared to the time-line process that the economic legislation and policy should have gone through.
Had the scenario permitted that the NEP lasted long enough to produce the industrial, agricultural, and national working power and foundations through the proper process, might the Union still be standing today due it not fall to inevitable revision? Might the hundreds of thousands to potentially millions of people that were repressed, persecution, or executed not have need experienced what they did? It would likely not have been necessary for purging and elimination to ensue if there had not been the unavoidable resistance to the immediate collectivisation and seperate unnecessary removal of Proletariat freedoms and autonomy. Should this not have happened, Bourgeoisie revision may not have been as somewhat inevitable as it was. (C. Below)