Was the Holodomor Genocide?

[Ronnie]

Thanks OlgaH,

Let me see if I understand this.  Someone was too lazy to find real photos so they used fake ones in a display so that means the Holodomor never happened.  Sure, I follow that....kind of.

[OlgaH]

Thanks OlgaH,

Let me see if I understand this.  Someone was too lazy to find real photos so they used fake ones in a display so that means the Holodomor never happened.  Sure, I follow that....kind of.

Ronnie, I'm sorry that you have such poor understanding 

Holodomor took place not only in Ukraine, but also in Kazakhstan, Northern Caucasus, Nizhnee and Srednee Povolzhie, a greater part of Central Chernozemic region, Western Siberia, Southern Ural.
Holodomor is recognized as a fact, a crime against humanity committed by totalitarian regime. Russian Duma condemned the force collectivization of totalitarian regime that leaded to the death of millions in USSR.  As you noticed EU parliament, UNESCO, OSCE doesn't use the word "genocide" because they understand that it is not politically correct, they recognized it as a crime against humanity. 

 Yuschenko was  playing his own political games using the word "genocide" and  false materials, forcing Russia to recognize Ukraine holodomor as genocide and of course demanding compensation, finally (after official documents of the EU parliament, UNESCO, OSCE)  he officially admitted  that Russia is not to blame for Stalin regime, he said "the totalitarian Communist regime" was to blame for the Holodomor.

[JR]

Jollyrats and Sculpto, I think you need to do some more reading about the Holodomor before you offer an opinion.  Much information has come out recently that was hidden before.

Let me see, 3.5 to 10 million people were systematically murdered by their government thru the deliberate withholding of food and other such measures and I call it an atrocity and mass murder. I think I got it.

[Sculpto]

Olga,
I am not sure what your intent was in posting the RT youtube link.  I watch RT almost every day and have come to realize that the station is so deeply embedded in its propogandistic agenda there is very little of any kind of truth ever presented there, especially if it relates to anything to do with the USA or former Soviet countries that are not in lock step with the Kremlin.  What is presented as official journalism on that station makes Foxnews look positively benign.

That said.. Scott.. I have read quite a bit about Soviet history along with the early period of Zionism that evolved in Odessa since my great grandparents emigrated during that period and fought in the Czars army against the Bolshevics.  I am by no means an expert but I think I have a fairly complete understanding of what took place.

Europe may have condemned the events of 32-33 as a crime against humanity leaving out the word genocide so as not to antagonize the BEAR. 

I don't know if I have ever mentioned this before.. but there is a facet of Russian patriotism/nationalism that offends me the same way the same concepts as applied in the USA offend me.  People from both countries are often ignorant of the impact and affect that each countries IMPERIALISTIC motives have on people from neighboring and even far away countries. 

For example.. in the US we see the use of the BOMB on Japan as a patriotic act that ended the war sooner than later, but, in many other places that same act is seen as the worst single war crime perpetrated on a single day in the history of humanity.  In some places where there is great distrust of the USA this single incident is often cited as why the USA can not be trusted. 

In my perspective about Russia it is the denial of culpability in regards to Ukraine, and real and deep condemnation coupled with reparations of the acts and excesses of Stalin overall that unfortunately undermine the foreign policy positions of contemporary Russia.  When you use that background in the context of analysis of the Chechen conflict and the brutality with which it was waged there seems to be little reason to believe that Russia has altruistic intent on the international stage.  Their actions verge on those of a rogue nation yet their power is too great to simply isolate like a Libia or Syria or Iran or North Korea. 

[Shadow]

In my perspective about Russia it is the denial of culpability in regards to Ukraine, and real and deep condemnation coupled with reparations of the acts and excesses of Stalin overall that unfortunately undermine the foreign policy positions of contemporary Russia.  When you use that background in the context of analysis of the Chechen conflict and the brutality with which it was waged there seems to be little reason to believe that Russia has altruistic intent on the international stage.  Their actions verge on those of a rogue nation yet their power is too great to simply isolate like a Libia or Syria or Iran or North Korea. 

Why should current day Russia repair acts of Stalin ? If you have read up on history, you will know that the Stalin regime was already condemned inside the USSR, and while the modern day habit of sending some truckloads of cash to buy off the feeling of guilt was not in use at the time, Ukraine was never treated as a second-hand nation within the USSR.

[Sculpto]

Why should current day Russia repair acts of Stalin ? If you have read up on history, you will know that the Stalin regime was already condemned inside the USSR, and while the modern day habit of sending some truckloads of cash to buy off the feeling of guilt was not in use at the time, Ukraine was never treated as a second-hand nation within the USSR.

From that line of thinking why should have post war Germany paid reparations to the Jewish community?  That is like saying the drunk driver is not responsible for the family he killed. 

I am well aware that during the Krushev period there was some form of recognition of Stalin's crimes, yet, during Brezhnev they covered it up again.  The Kremlin's current policy is denial.  Do you really think there has been accounting for everything Stalin did against ALL the people he hurt?  The only way to reconcile is to open the archives and pay the price.  If they do not they perpetrate a continuation of the crime.

[Shadow]

From that line of thinking why should have post war Germany paid reparations to the Jewish community?  That is like saying the drunk driver is not responsible for the family he killed. 

I am well aware that during the Krushev period there was some form of recognition of Stalin's crimes, yet, during Brezhnev they covered it up again.  The Kremlin's current policy is denial.  Do you really think there has been accounting for everything Stalin did against ALL the people he hurt?  The only way to reconcile is to open the archives and pay the price.  If they do not they perpetrate a continuation of the crime.

What you are suggesting is like the son of a drunk driver being held responsible for the disability of his sister who already moved out.

Can you give specific examples of the cover up during Brezhnev and the current denial policy by the Kremlin ? Links please.

[Sculpto]

Shadow.. I think I have mentioned that Germany and Germans are not my fav people in the world.  But, there is something I greatly admire about Germany and Germans.  They have made amends for their past crimes and today Germany is often the voice of reason in questions of war, ie. opposition to the Iraq invasion.

Nothing of the sort in terms of moral obligation has ever come from Russia.

the wiki has enough for me..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin#Falsifiers_of_History

[OlgaH]

Olga,
I am not sure what your intent was in posting the RT youtube link. 

The same information you can find on the Ukrainian websites.
False photos on the Yuschenko's website
http://www.segodnya.ua/news/14041269.html

Europe may have condemned the events of 32-33 as a crime against humanity leaving out the word genocide so as not to antagonize the BEAR. 

Please Sculpto,  Europe is not so stupid as you think 

Why should current day Russia repair acts of Stalin ? If you have read up on history, you will know that the Stalin regime was already condemned inside the USSR, and while the modern day habit of sending some truckloads of cash to buy off the feeling of guilt was not in use at the time, Ukraine was never treated as a second-hand nation within the USSR.

The victim of Stalin's political repression were rehabilitated after Stalin's death and you are right, Shadow, that the Stalin regime was already condemned inside the USSR. Stalin's policies and Stalin's cult of personality was condemned first time at the Twentieth Party Congress in 1956

[OlgaH]

Nothing of the sort in terms of moral obligation has ever come from Russia.

the wiki has enough for me..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin#Falsifiers_of_History

Sculpto, millions of Russians, as millions people of other nationalities of USSR were victims of the totalitarian regime. Parents of my grandmother were victims of Stalin's repressions.

[Sculpto]

Sculpto, millions of Russians, as millions people of other nationalities of USSR were victims of the totalitarian regime. Parents of my grandmother were victims of Stalin's repressions.

Olga I am well aware that Stalin killed millions from all over the SU.  I never said he didn't.  But, the point I am trying to make is here in the west we see Stalin for what he was.. a brutal dictator who killed without discrimination.  But, for some reason, even if people inside Russia are vaguely aware of what he did, there seems to be no disgust or disgrace shown or felt. 

The current hostile foreign and domestic policies of the Russian Federation demonstrate this very clearly as the conflict with Georgia, the war in Chechnya demonstrated and the ongoing possible conflict in Ingushetia continue to demonstrate.  As opposed to Germany where there is a an ingrained sense of fairness and an attempt to neautrality, Russia continues to flex muscles and try to be a player, for its own percieved benefit, onthe international scene. 

Often we talk about the oligarchs and the endemic corruption in the Russian system, but, who is the richest of them all?

http://accidentalrussophile.blogspot.com/2008/01/pauper-or-oligarch-strange-case-of.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/dec/21/russia.topstories3

and then going back to the story of Stalin.. this is an excellent link.. and the quote I am posting should clearly demonstrate that the Holomodor was in fact genocide targeted specifically at the Ukrainian peasants.

"The Left Opposition continually warned of the kulak danger and demanded a change of course. But all their appeals fell on deaf ears. Then within a few months the whole policy was thrown into reverse. The kulaks had organised a grain strike as the first step in the capitalist counterrevolution against Soviet power. By the end of 1927 the drop of grain supplies to the towns had assumed alarming proportions. In a 180 degrees somersault Stalin announced the "liquidation of the kulaks as a class."

http://www.marxist.com/History/stalin_death1.html

None of this means Russians are bad people.  It simply means there has not been a sufficient accounting for the crimes of Stalin against the Russian people nor a sufficient process of reconciliation.  If such had in fact taken place I am quite sure we would not see Mr. Putin and his cronies in control and eliminating the freedoms that existed not so long ago and for such a sadly short time.

[OlgaH]

Olga I am well aware that Stalin killed millions from all over the SU.  I never said he didn't.  But, the point I am trying to make is here in the west we see Stalin for what he was.. a brutal dictator who killed without discrimination.  But, for some reason, even if people inside Russia are vaguely aware of what he did, there seems to be no disgust or disgrace shown or felt. 

There enough documents published in Russia about Stalin's crimes. Yes, there are some people (not officially) who honor Stalin, there also some people who honor Hitler,  Yuschenko for example honored Stepan Bandera who collaborated with Nazis and who is responsible for the massacre of Poles in Volhynia during the WWI and murdering Jews and Belorussians in Ukraine, as a notional hero, Symon Petlura is responsible for anti-Jewish pogroms during his term as Head of State in 1919-1920 now is also national hero of Ukraine, Roman Shukhevych who is also collaborated with Nazis is also official hero of Ukraine. Why?  For some reason...  as you say. 

[Sculpto]

There enough documents published in Russia about Stalin's crimes. Yes, there are some people (not officially) who honor Stalin, there also some people who honor Hitler,  Yuschenko for example honored Stepan Bandera who collaborated with Nazis and who is responsible for the massacre of Poles in Volhynia during the WWI and murdering Jews and Belorussians in Ukraine, as a notional hero, Symon Petlura is responsible for anti-Jewish pogroms during his term as Head of State in 1919-1920 now is also national hero of Ukraine, Roman Shukhevych who is also collaborated with nazis is also official hero of Ukraine. Why?  For some reason...  as you say. 

Its an interesting point Olga.  I noticed a while back that Yushenko was honoring Steven Bandera and I had previously read about him and reacted with disgust when I saw he was being elevated to national hero status.  I don't know about the others you've mentioned.

Four years ago before I made my first trip I was talking to a business associate who is from Kiev.  He went on and on about how Jews are hated in Ukraine, especially in the west.  I took and unspoken insight from that interaction.. that this man hated Jews. 

Getting back to your point.. there is a process of Nationalist "pride" going on in Russia and Ukraine and Georgia and the Caucauses and who knows in what other republics.  Creating patriotic heros and denial of historical facts to solidify power and national unity, especially in the face of economic crisis, are the oldest political tricks in the books.  I would agree forcibly that Yushenko is using the Holomodor for political gain in a very cynical manner.  General international ignornace on the subject works in the favor of Yushenko in this instance, same as world opinion initially favored Georgia last year.

All that is part of the problem when Russia acts aggresively.  No one has forgotten Stalin, or Afghanistan, or Chechnya.  With good reason the world has a lot to fear from the people who wield power from the Kremlin.  History has shown that Russia is an aggresive imperialistic power that is capable of incredible brutality.  Unfortunately todays Kremlin thugs have not chosen to take a path of reconciliation.  They can not argue with any credibility that they are somehow a moral opposition to the power of the USA because they have not addressed their own filthy history.

I also remember when the Orange Revolution started.  At the time I knew literally nothing about Ukraine except that the capital was Kiev and that a lot of Jews came from Odessa.  But, I cheered as I watched the goings on, on the news every night.  I thought, wow, freedom against tyranny and dictactorship.. new democracy.. how cool is that.  Not long afterwards I found myself in Donetsk.. the hometown of Yanukovich, a place where Yushenko is hated.  I kept my mouth shut as I listened to people tell me how the Orange Revolution was terrible and so on.  Seeing Yushenko elevate Bandera and use the Holomodor for politcal gain gave some credence to the complaints I heard in Donetsk.  Although, Yanukovich certainly doesn't have clean hands and I am sure he enjoys getting plowed in the rear by Akemtov.  (sorry for the vulgarity)

The biggest worry I have as an outside observer is that a repeat of the Balkan situation seems to be more and more possible.  How many ethnicities have legitimate complaints that have not been addressed?  Crimean Tatars come to mind as the easiest and perhaps most volatile example outside the Caucausus, but, I am sure there are many many others.  Just the fact that there exists in Moscow and Piter such outright hatred and open hostility towards central Asian ethnicities clearly indicates to me that something is wrong on a systemic level. 

Think about it... Russia needs to make amends with itself and the rest of the world.

[ScottinCrimea]

Shadow.. I think I have mentioned that Germany and Germans are not my fav people in the world.  But, there is something I greatly admire about Germany and Germans.  They have made amends for their past crimes and today Germany is often the voice of reason in questions of war, ie. opposition to the Iraq invasion.

So you think that the under the table sweetheart deals that Germany and particularly Jacues Chirac had with Sadam Hussein for arms, oil and olther financial favors had nothing to do with their opposition?

[Mir]

I agree with Olga

If Stalin was committing genocide it was against all types of real or imagined threat to him.
And millions others died due to stupid policies (that were not specifically designed against Ukraine).
The Czarist regime was more anti-Ukrainian and antisemitic then Stalin.
Stalin just killed everyone regardless of where he/she came from.

[Sculpto]

So you think that the under the table sweetheart deals that Germany and particularly Jacues Chirac had with Sadam Hussein for arms, oil and olther financial favors had nothing to do with their opposition?

I am not sure how you made that conclusion from what I posted.. but.. France has a lot of reasons besides the ones you mentioned.. not the least of which are the 5 million + Muslims living in that country.  Whether there was a moral position on their part is definitely debatable, though, I suspect they would state morality was the main reason for their opposition.  I don't buy it though.

And for the record Scott... we made Saddam.. we used him as we wished until it was both no longer convenient and he could no longer be controlled.  

The moral consequences of the Irak war are yet to be defined.  Most Americans tend to look at it as something that started after 9/11, but, don't forget the gulf war, no fly zone for how many years and the economic destruction we created starting in '91.  I am not sure history will be kind to the USA once things are finally sorted out.  All that said I am certainly not advocating for Saddam.. but, if you are going to talk about the USA in any way relative to Irak it is unfair and biased to have any discussion without recognizing that he was in our pocket for a long time and served loyaly in the proxy war against Iran.

[Sculpto]

I agree with Olga

If Stalin was committing genocide it was against all types of real or imagined threat to him.
And millions others died due to stupid policies (that were not specifically designed against Ukraine).
The Czarist regime was more anti-Ukrainian and antisemitic then Stalin.
Stalin just killed everyone regardless of where he/she came from.

I am not disputing that Mir.  All I am saying, as I showed in the quote, is there was a specific antagonism to the ukrainian peasants that led to the policies implemented there.

Also, in regards to Czarist anti semitism.. if you look at the early stages of the Bolshevics it appears that the Jews were very much in support of the revolution.  Lenin set up the Jewish Autonomous Republic to give Yiddish culture a place to exist without threat..I read somewhere that when Marx originally wrote the manifesto it was actually more of a Yiddish liberation plan that somehow was expanded into the "workers liberation".  I don't know if that is really true, but, I do know there was great hope that the revolution would bring an end to the pograms.

[OlgaH]

I am not disputing that Mir.  All I am saying, as I showed in the quote, is there was a specific antagonism to the ukrainian peasants that led to the policies implemented there.

Peasantry was a threat to Bolshevism all over USSR. The peasantry revolt against collectivization in Ukraine was more active than in other regions. Stalin ordered to "tighten screws" about grain procurement in Ukraine. Executors of the Stalin's order did their "best" in "tightening screws"...

Here is a photo taken in 1933 I found on a Ukrainian website.

Delegates of 5th session of All-Ukraine Central Executive Committee from Dnepropetrovsk region give the bread of new harvest to the "All-Ukranian starosta" (the chairman of the All-Ukraine Central Executive Committee)  Grigory Petrovsky (with beard). A bold man in the photo is Stanislav Kosior, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Ukrainian SSR, according to some historians he considered to be one of the main committers of Holodomor in Ukraine.

[Sculpto]

ok so we agree then that there was as specific policy directed at the Ukrainian peasants irregardless of whatever other attrocities were being committed elsewhere?

[OlgaH]

ok so we agree then that there was as specific policy directed at the Ukrainian peasants irregardless of whatever other attrocities were being committed elsewhere?

to suppress revolt among peasantry in Ukraine, but the specific policies (its degree) also depended on the zeal of executors of Stalin's order.  In other region of USSR peasantry already was scared and was not able to resist collectivization. People were executed by shooting for a few ears of rye cut from field.
The Russian famine of 1921  killed an estimated 5 million, affected mostly the Volga-Ural region.

[Sculpto]

it is actually staggering to comprehend.  I also can imagine how great a country Russia realy would be if so many brilliant people had not been killed.. imagine the creative minds that were wasted.. an incredible pity and loss.

When I was discussing this with "A" she made what I thought was a strange comment in regard to my comment above.  She said..

"Stalin really terrible, but it not bad for Russia because it made Russian people very strong"

Darwin?

[Wienerin]

I wonder if the article has taken in to consideration that the famine was not limited to Ukraine, but was actually equally or more worse in Russia. Without having admiration for Stalin and his actions, one has to remember that he did not request the grain from the Ukrainian farmers to burn, but trying to divide the present sources of food between the full population. As such it was a redistributing of wealth (in this case food) which was one of the principles of communism.
Like the earlier years where those who had wealth such as the aristocracy were forced to give it up at gunpoint or be killed, the same tactic was used with respect to the farmers, and farmers in Russia were equally targetted.
As such it is doubtful that the acts were directed with the intent of destroying a group any more than that the Revolution was.

This is the Russian point of view, do not kill the messenger. 

I'm sorry, this is not "Russian" point of view. It's a point of view of somebody who is a) uninformed, b) feels the need to absolve (completely needlessly, in my opinion) Russians from a "collective guilt" of Golodomor.

Some factual errors:
Russian famine in Volga region was indeed a recurrent disaster, especially bad in 21-23 - what with the WW I, revolution, civil war AND failure of crops due to dry and hot weather. Sure, there was persecution of more opulent farmers - "kulaks" and grain was also requisitioned by the State for starving cities, but these were secondary factors to the recurrent causes of crop failure and ensuing famine in that region.

People were not restricted to the stricken regions, and even foreign relief was accepted - thouhg not immediately and with reluctance.

Compare with quite different picture in Ukraine - 10 years later, in 32-33. No failure of crops, no dry weather, the crops were great in fact. No starvation in the cities. 10 years and more have passed since wars, etc. Armed brigades were sent to take ALL grain - including seed grain stores. Those who tried to save something were shot on the spot. Then the robbed areas were surrounded by armed patrols - and nobody was allowed to leave. Those who tried to flee starvation were... well, I'm sure you get the picture.

No foreign aid was allowed, - in fact no foreigners were allowed into the stricken regions, and the State flatly denied that anything was the matter. BTW that is why there's almost no photographis data from Golodomor and why the data from the Volga famine, 10 years before, is mostly used (if one observes dress styles, one can sort ones from the others, unfortunately, there're very few of the dresses to compare) - not to falsify the record, but to show the horror.

I do not have any doubt that the action was deliberate, that the aim was to break and destroy Ukrainian peasant - whether ethnically Ukrainian, Russian or whatever. As a class enemy. No doubt at all.

This said I don't know whether the circumstances and events quite satisfy the academic definition of genocide. Rather yes than no, but...

BTW There's no doubt that as in the Russian Empire so in Stalin's Soviet Union there was an active trend to erase national identities of different people of the Empire - language, customs, history, culture, etc. So it's not outside the realm of reasonable probability that this aim contributed to the organization of Golodomor.

And however bad are Ukrainian nationalistic accusations of "Russians" - Russian sneers about Ukrainians having no culture, no history, and even no language but an uncouth dialect seem to me obnoxious. 

[Wienerin]

Wow Shadow I am really suprised.  Maybe I haven't been around here long enough to know your style.. but.. you are WAY off base on this one.

 

In all respect, personal attack on Shadow is unwarranted. He said that this is not his opinion but of some unspecified Russian/s - and to this sad fact I can attest having done battle very recently on two Russian fora.

Because they were a fiercly independent people who had been trying for centuries to seperate from Russian control and therefore could not be counted on to be good "Soviets".

Not true at all. Ukraine was brought (actually asked for this) under Russian rule by its "national hero" Bogdan Khmelnitsky (I wouldn't go into this interesting subject - as to who he was, and why he sought so ardently for Russian protection, but the fact remains). If you're talking of the prevailing peasant population - this never was (in any culture) "fiercely independent". If you're talking about Cossaks - they a) were only tokenly Ukrainians, b) while fiercely indepent were the same contingent that under their Hetman (war chief) Khmelnitsky asked for Russian protection and were loyal supporters and servants of the monarchy afterwards.

No peasant population could be counted to be "good Soviet" - excvept for very poor and shiftless ones. Peasantry/farmers thrive on soil, on ownership of the land they tend and nurture. Bolshevik state depended on the city proletariat. Peasants were, I repeat, class enemies.

Because the Black Sea was and still is Russia's only 365 days a year deep sea port.

The Far Eastern ports are open 365 days a year, and I do not know why the fact that the Black (and Azov) seas had good ports should have all of a sudden decided Stalin - in 32-33, no earlier and no later or ever again, - to try to kill off the population of the Ukraine.

And finally, because Stalin was a meglomaniac paranoid control freak.

Do not see the connection. He had his reasons - however psychopathic they were. And this is 32-33 we are talking about, not 37 and later. He was no more psychopathic at that time than most of the government - and you have to agree that he couldn't have swung this by himself

I actually find it amazing that even after Stalin killed so many of the brightest people of his time that the Soviet Union continued to produce world class science, arts, athletes and so on.

 
Why do you not wonder the same about Germany - which managed in less than 70 years to start three G-d-awful European wars: Franco-Prussian, WW I and WW II? 

[OlgaH]

Ukraine was brought (actually asked for this) under Russian rule by its "national hero" Bogdan Khmelnitsky (I wouldn't go into this interesting subject - as to who he was, and why he sought so ardently for Russian protection, but the fact remains).

eh... for Russian protection from the enslavement by Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and Turkey, and why Yuschenko doesn't remind Poland, Lithuania and Turkey about that time    

[Wienerin]

I am well aware of the cause for the famine. And it does compare to the Irish situation. Production is taken away at gunpoint from those who do not cooperate freely. When taken at gunpoint, what is left is not enough to survive.
What I do not see is that it was an active attempt of genocide targetted at Ukrainians as a group.

I've just rebutted the Irish analogy - twice within the last 3 days. The cases are not at all comparable. No one took by force the Irish crops. The staple food of the4 Irish sharecropper was potatos - on which there was potato blight. The landowners, who raised wheat, harvested their crops and shipped the grain to the markets in England and Europe. They didn't steal this grains from the sharecroppers. It was their grain - free to sell anywhere for profit. It might have been reprehensible on their part, but - they did not steal.

Some of the landowners organized charity like soup kitchens, the English government (namely the Premier Minister Peel) raised funds and sent food to Ireland. Not immediately, and not enough - but no one planned the disaster, it happened very suddenly that potato crop peished.

And nobody stood around irish villages and hamlets with firearms to prevent the starving people from leaving. 1 million emigrated. I million died. So some English and Irish landowners and English public in general can be blamed by omission

Golodomor is different - Soviet state was to blame by organization of the famine and

by commission

, i.e. the state and its agents are murderers on a very large scale - which combined wioth other factors can be judged a genocide of Ukrainian (i.e. "of Ukraine" - never mind Ukrainians, Russians, Jews, Moldovans or whoever) people. They couldn't protect themselves from robbery, they couldn't get anything to eat, they couldn't leave. The Soviets didn't make concentration or extermination camps for them - they turned a fruitful lush land into an extermination camp for its people.