[scp_not_gpt]

Not really. The nature of Holodomor is only disputed by the historians who care to push a specific agenda - be it politically or ideologically motivated. USSR is also did a fine job to whitewash any of its past crimes.

> "that region had regular famines and dry seasons in the past, before USSR too, and it only stopped after 40s, when various actions were taken to improve agricultural stability there" - care to elaborate on this?

[hydrok9]

It's pretty clear that Stalin used the famine to help liquidize non-Russian groups who had strong identites and had resisted collectivization. Ukrainians were #1 on this list. It's a textbook play.

https://www.amazon.ca/Holodomor-Reader-Sourcebook-1932-1933-...

[bilqis]

I think the source you’re linking is very biased, as well as your claims are very wild and require thorough proofs.

[hydrok9]

Have you read it? It's very comprehensive. I would highly recommend you do so if you are at all interested in the subject.

What "non-biased" sources would you recommend?

It's also not very wild, from a historical point of view, for an authoritarian leader to destroy or decimate ethnic groups or communities. In fact, it's extremely common, as it is an effective way of consolidating power.

[medo-bear]

> Stalin used the famine to help liquidize non-Russian groups

Stalin was an ethnic Georgian. Why would he do that?

[hydrok9]

Political stability and in order to gain their assets without compensation.

[lisasays]

The nature of Holodomor is only disputed by the historians who care to push a specific agenda.

You can believe that if you want. Without factual references to back up what you're saying, though - it's just a a flat, sweeping assertion.