Women and technocrats would have had their expanding and fulfilling roles under the Czar, without Stalin. Saddam Hussein, IMO, with oil revenue, should/could have been "doomed" to some success in modernising Iraq.

At worst, I don't see much overall qualitative difference between the serfs (not owning land) of the autocratic Czar, and the slaves (not owning land) of Stalin's one-party dictatorial worker's paradise rule.

Stalin did wipe out the existing Soviet military officer class/"privileged elite" at exactly the wrong time, just before WWII.

The mothers of 30 million WWII casualties, (Absurdity: would be even greater under a Czar?) even though still serfs, might pause to question Stalin's resolute cavalier recklessness with his non Georgian (Caucasian) loyal and brave unselfish citizens.

Actually, the international communist doctrinal push was one of the fuels/propellants/threats to German "society", and fuels/propellants of the Nazi cause and it's erstwhile emergence as dominant.

Extreme measures (1917 Russian revolution) trigger extreme reactions?

Angus:"So now let's get back to Homer's post, shall we? "