Thread: Pro or Anti Stalin

Originally Posted by LXNDR

и голодомор на Украине тоже наглая ложь

очень аккуратный способ уничтожения, никого не расстреляли, все умерли сами

та ну, это даже не предмет для дискуссии, не будешь же доказывать человеку, что Земля круглая, если у него она плоская, тот, кто до сих пор не понял, что Земля круглая, безнадёжен

Голодомор никто не отрицает. Ложь - называть его геноцидом.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

Голодомор никто не отрицает. Ложь - называть его геноцидом.

So, the authorities take away people's food supplies and the people shortly die of starvation, and this is not genocide? Give me a break.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

So, the authorities take away people's food supplies and the people shortly die of starvation, and this is not genocide? Give me a break.

Oh, don't start again.

Genocide is "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group", and nothing of said above applies to "golodomor". Modern nationalistic Ukrainian politics prefer to label it genocide to strengthen the opinion, that "Russians" (or rather Stalin regime) deliberately tried to annihilate all Ukrainians.

Still, peasants starved to death not because Ukrainians were specifically targeted, but because peasantry in general faced unbearable demands of the state. The same starvation scenario happened to Russian peasants in Volga region in 1921-1922. Was it Russian genocide against Russians, then? Well, no. It was cruel economical policy, which hurt agricultural regions indiscriminately regardless of ethnic (or any other) groups living there. You can call it genocide against peasants, figuratively speaking... but that's it.

There's also a well-known fact that photographs which are used routinely to demonstrate the terrible consequences of Ukrainian "golodomor" to Western public in books and media (starving children, skeletal-looking corpses, etc.) are in fact photos of Russian peasants, starved to death near Volga. That does not make what happened to Ukrainians any better, but it gives a (deliberately?) wrong impression of what was going on during that period.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

Oh, don't start again.

Genocide is "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group", and nothing of said above applies to "golodomor". Modern nationalistic Ukrainian politics prefer to label it genocide to strengthen the opinion, that "Russians" (or rather Stalin regime) deliberately tried to annihilate all Ukrainians.

Still, peasants starved to death not because Ukrainians were specifically targeted, but because peasantry in general faced unbearable demands of the state. The same starvation scenario happened to Russian peasants in Volga region in 1921-1922. Was it Russian genocide against Russians, then? Well, no. It was cruel economical policy, which hurt agricultural regions indiscriminately regardless of ethnic (or any other) groups living there. You can call it genocide against peasants, figuratively speaking... but that's it.

There's also a well-known fact that photographs which are used routinely to demonstrate the terrible consequences of Ukrainian "golodomor" to Western public in books and media (starving children, skeletal-looking corpses, etc.) are in fact photos of Russian peasants, starved to death near Volga. That does not make what happened to Ukrainians any better, but it gives a (deliberately?) wrong impression of what was going on during that period.

Ok, if it makes you feel better, you can call it "deliberate mass killings". And I would still insist that it was genocide, maybe not ethnic genocide but "class genocide" - the bolsheviks just wanted the people that were more successful than them to die, and of course, to rob their houses and grab what they had managed to produce so that the bolsheviks wouldn't have to make it on their own.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

Ok, if it makes you feel better, you can call it "deliberate mass killings". And I would still insist that it was genocide, maybe not ethnic genocide but "class genocide" - the bolsheviks just wanted the people that were more successful than them to die, and of course, to rob their houses and grab what they had managed to produce so that they wouldn't have to make it on their own.

I can agree with you naming it "class genocide", even if massive death toll among peasants was not a goal, but mostly a byproduct of policy at that time. What I don't like is people calling it genocide, implying it was ethnic, i.e. turning it into Russians vs. Ukrainians affair (with current Ukrainian official policy actively supporting this point of view).

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

(with current Ukrainian official policy actively supporting this point of view).

are you sure Yanukovich's regime upholds this nonesense? i don't think so
this rhetoric has been considerably toned down
not sure what they teach in schools though

Originally Posted by Eric C.

Ok, if it makes you feel better, you can call it "deliberate mass killings". And I would still insist that it was genocide, maybe not ethnic genocide but "class genocide" - the bolsheviks just wanted the people that were more successful than them to die, and of course, to rob their houses and grab what they had managed to produce so that the bolsheviks wouldn't have to make it on their own.

i can't speak for the bolsheviks and can't know what was on their mind but i too disagree with the genocide statement
the peasantry in its mass wasn't wealthy by far especially with the collectivization going on so their assumed 'success' envied by the bolsheviks was non-existent
by the beginning of the 30's i believe the majority of peasants had joined collective farms, forced upon them by the very bolsheviks, so it would be inaccurate to set them against each other, the peasantry had already been playing by the bolsheviks rules

Originally Posted by Eric C.

Ok, if it makes you feel better, you can call it "deliberate mass killings". And I would still insist that it was genocide, maybe not ethnic genocide but "class genocide" - the bolsheviks just wanted the people that were more successful than them to die, and of course, to rob their houses and grab what they had managed to produce so that the bolsheviks wouldn't have to make it on their own.

Is there any evidence that the "mass killings" were deliberate? As you know around that time gained popularity a pseudoscientist Lysenko with his promises to increase the wheat production by multiple times. Although his theory turned out to be incorrect, his skyrocketing carrier can only be attributed to the government's desire to put an end to the famines.

I also wonder whether would you call famines in Bengali in 1943 and in Bihar in 1966 "deliberate mass killings", as it is known that there was enough food in India at the time, just the established policy disallowed people to get food as they had no money. Note that British administration exported from Bengali 80000 tonnes of wheat that year, when 1.5 to 4 million people died. Possibly this was also a class genocide so that the British wanted people less successful than them to die.