Was the Holodomor Genocide?

[brad5959]

And yet, over 4.1 million "Untermenschen" were taken by the Nazis as slave labourers to Germany, and those generals did nothing to stop it.  

those generals tried to collectively present their opinions and were dismissed, fired or killed by the ss.

[Boethius]

There were a lot of communists who reallly believed they'd be building a greater, better society as well.  My point is, the Nazis would not have been any better for Soviet citizens than the Bolsheviks.

[Shadow]

no doubt that Ukraine and her people have suffered greatly, more than any other nation in the FSU before, during and after WWII.

Which is why the person who followed Stalin and punished those who committed crimes was Ukrainian.

[Boethius]

Khrushchev was not an ethnic Ukrainian.  Though not born in Ukraine, he was assigned to Ukraine by the party.

[Shadow]

Khrushchev was not an ethnic Ukrainian.  Though not born in Ukraine, he was assigned to Ukraine by the party.

He was not born in Ukraine, however did originate from an Ukrainian family, though being ethnic Russians. It would not fit in to the victim role of Ukrainians that they would have someone from their country leading the Soviet Union of course.

[tim 360]

those generals tried to collectively present their opinions and were dismissed, fired or killed by the ss.

Exactly who are these "collective" Nazi Generals you are speaking of?  I doubt there were many.

[Boethius]

He was not born in Ukraine, however did originate from an Ukrainian family, though being ethnic Russians. It would not fit in to the victim role of Ukrainians that they would have someone from their country leading the Soviet Union of course.

I don't think Ukrainians have a victimization complex.  However, being from Ukraine does not make one "Ukrainian".  Khrushchev was born a subject of the Russian Empire, and was a Soviet leader.

[SFandEE]

I believe the Holodomor was genocide.  I also believe that power writes current event history.

[Daveman]

I don't think Ukrainians have a victimization complex.  However, being from Ukraine does not make one "Ukrainian".  Khrushchev was born a subject of the Russian Empire, and was a Soviet leader.

Bingo... Ukraine is extremely diverse in its population.  Ukrainian by name/birth does not equate to Ukrainian mindset or culture.

My opinion is still out on the Holomodor.. not as in "did it occur", but rather in was it targeted at "Ukrainians", or was it to quash a rebellion in the "Soviet" manner and the victims just happened to be Ukrainian (as well as other groups around the Soviet empire at various times)

[Boethius]

I think it was targeted at Ukrainians.  However, I believe it had to do with collectivization and the consolidation of Bolshevik power, rather than the ethnic origin of victims.  The distinction is sort of splitting hairs, though.

The first historian to call the famine a genocide (though he did not coin the term "Holodomor"), and the leading researcher in the area was James Mace.  Dr. Mace was not an ethnic Ukrainian.  He was an Oklahoman, predominantly of Cherokee ancestry, and viewed the famine as a twentieth century Trail of Tears.

While a PhD candidate, Dr. Mace was a researcher to Robert Conquest, who was then writing Harvest of Sorrow.  Dr. Mace wrote his PhD thesis on the Ukrainian famine.  He was also the staff director of Congress' US Commission on the Ukraine Famine.  Dr. Mace became obsessed with the subject, turning down more lucrative areas of historical study to focus on the famine.  His obsession had a deleterious effect on his academic career.

In 1993, Dr. Mace move to Kyiv to continue his study, as Soviet archives were beginning to open up.  He also wished to interview Ukrainian victims (he had interviewed thousands of survivors in the West) .  Most Ukrainian "historians" (and I used that term very loosely) were not interested in the Ukrainian famine at that time.  A journalist who met him fell in love with him, and they married, and Dr. Mace continued his research.  He was instrumental in establishing the most important institute for Holodomor studies in Ukraine.  He died in Kyiv in 2004.

[BC]

Genocide is a pretty big word.  That a lot of people died is undisputed, but in my mind intent to eradicate a populace based on their ethnicity or hate thereof is questionable.

If it was a matter of not enough food in the region and decisions were made by those in power to deny a portion of the population access in order to feed others then I would not call that genocide.  If intent was to take away food in order to specifically starve out an ethnic group and the food was not needed elsewhere I might tend to agree.

Holodomor is also a pretty big word.. can't it just stand alone for itself?  What benefit does appending Genocide serve?

[Boethius]

BC, there was no shortage of grain at the time.  The famine was man made, so that the peasantry would submit to collectivization.

Every piece of food was removed from villages and from homes.  Livestock was removed.  People were not allowed to leave.  They survived by eating the leaves off trees, sticks, dogs, cats, and even dead bodies.  My husband knew a man who survived because his mother made a "soup" from horse glue.  Everyday, the head of the kolkhosp (collective farm) would come in and, more to himself than anyone, say "Why aren't you dead yet?"

There has been, for over half a century, an active disinformation campaign to discredit the famine.  There have, through the years, been journalists and historians who have denied it occurred at all.  Was it politicized by the former Ukrainian government?  Absolutely.  However, that doesn't negate the historical truth of what occurred.

There are campaigns currently, both in Russia and Ukraine, glorifying Stalin.  The historical truth of the Holodomor, and what the communists really were - a bunch of ruthless killers - should be emphasized time and again, if for no other reason, than as a counterweight to revisionist Bolshevik history.

[SANDRO43]

I think it was targeted at Ukrainians.  However, I believe it had to do with collectivization and the consolidation of Bolshevik power, rather than the ethnic origin of victims. The distinction is sort of splitting hairs, though.

Possibly. However, since most of the USSR's agriculture - and Russia's before it - was in Ukraine IINM, it sort of follows logically that the worst hit would be there and not elsewhere, doesn't it ?

[Boethius]

I'm not certain most of Russia's agriculture was in Ukraine.  Parts of Siberia and the Urals, the North Caucasus, Kuban, and the Middle Volga were all agricultural regions as well.  

[BC]

BC, there was no shortage of grain at the time.  The famine was man made, so that the peasantry would submit to collectivization.

Bothius,

really not trying to defend, but to understand better..  If intent was to push peasantry into submission, would even that qualify as genocide?

It seems peasantry over a wide area was affected, but was the motive per se against a specific ethnic group or just 'peasants'..  If the latter I would agree that it was an abuse of power, but does genocide really fit the glove?

[Boethius]

I don't think I have ever argued about the genocide label, one way or the other.

ETA - I will add, though, that this was larger than collectivization, per my post #185.

[BC]

I don't think I have ever argued about the genocide label, one way or the other.

ETA - I will add, though, that this was larger than collectivization, per my post #185.

Then maybe Holodomor can be compared to the Great Famine in Ireland?  As a politically motivated famine?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)

[Boethius]

But there was blight in Ireland.  Ukraine had good crops in those years.

[BC]

But there was blight in Ireland.  Ukraine had good crops in those years.

Russia and the USSR
Main article: Famines in Russia and USSR
Droughts and famines in Imperial Russia are known to have happened every 10 to 13 years, with average droughts happening every 5 to 7 years. Famines continued in the Soviet era, the most notorious being the Holodomor in various parts of the country, especially the Volga, and the Ukrainian and northern Kazakh SSR's during the winter of 1932–1933. The last major famine in the USSR happened in 1947 due to the severe drought and the mismanagement of grain reserves by the Soviet government.[64]
The 872 days of the Siege of Leningrad (1941–1944) caused unparalleled famine in the Leningrad region through disruption of utilities, water, energy and food supplies. This resulted in the deaths of about one million people.[65]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine

It seems it was a quite tough life back then regardless whether or not origins were natural or man made.  Such was quite common throughout Europe, for a variety of reasons, justifiable or not.

In today's world, a child dies of starvation every 3 seconds.. and an iPad is also sold every three seconds at an average 600 bucks a pop.. - yes.. I bought an iPad and did not feed a starving child, or rather did not feed a hundred starving children.  Does make me think though..  In 50 years will Apple be accused of genocide?

[Boethius]

But there was no drought in Ukraine.  Grain was confiscated from villages.  Livestock was taken away.  Every morsel of food visible in every house was removed.  That is not a "drought famine".  It was using food as a weapon.

[BC]

It was using food as a weapon.

Boethius,

I can even agree with you.. but does that make it genocide?

[Faux Pas]

Boethius,

I can even agree with you.. but does that make it genocide?

BC..by definition it certainly qualifies

[tim 360]

BC, there was no shortage of grain at the time.  The famine was man made, so that the peasantry would submit to collectivization.

Every piece of food was removed from villages and from homes.  Livestock was removed.  People were not allowed to leave.  They survived by eating the leaves off trees, sticks, dogs, cats, and even dead bodies.  My husband knew a man who survived because his mother made a "soup" from horse glue.  Everyday, the head of the kolkhosp (collective farm) would come in and, more to himself than anyone, say "Why aren't you dead yet?"

There has been, for over half a century, an active disinformation campaign to discredit the famine.  There have, through the years, been journalists and historians who have denied it occurred at all.  Was it politicized by the former Ukrainian government?  Absolutely.  However, that doesn't negate the historical truth of what occurred.

There are campaigns currently, both in Russia and Ukraine, glorifying Stalin.  The historical truth of the Holodomor, and what the communists really were - a bunch of ruthless killers - should be emphasized time and again, if for no other reason, than as a counterweight to revisionist Bolshevik history.

One will find that most credible historians would agree with this Boethius and find that it was Stalin's and Beria's method to crush any and all resistence to the precious collectivization program.  Ukraine was to be an example for any others in the Soviet Sphere of just how brutal the Kremlin would react to any dissension when it came to the collectivization plan.  At the time, Ukraine was the prime producing region for agriculture but Stalin, being  very paranoid guy saw enemies everywhere.  Even a tiny threat or difference of opinion or just the very mere perception of it--was enough to get anyone killed.  This was not so much about ethnic extermination but an annihilation of perceived enemies to Stalin and his power.  Of course,  the first step in doing this on such a vast scale one must dehumanize those who are to be killed and Ukrainians were vilified to make starving them to death more palatable for the troops and Beria's agents.  I would have to term this genocide.

Stalin's psychological makeup allowed him to do what most men would find reprehensible or impossible, but he found "enemies" everywhere and many never were or not to the degree he imagined.  The guy had no conscience at all.  

[BC]

BC..by definition it certainly qualifies

Faux, help me understand..

[Faux Pas]

Faux, help me understand..

BC, the term genocide didn't even exist before 1944. Wikipedia states "Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group". Which I take to read as it doesn't really matter how the death is inflicted, as long as the intent is death and destruction. In my opinion Holodomor is squarely within those parameters