Russia Rewriting History Textbooks [Archive]

tyovan

08-21-2007, 04:45 PM

In Russia, the ghosts of the past refuse to die. This month, several hundred mourners gathered in the Moscow suburb of Butovo at a mass grave of 20,000 victims of Joseph Stalin's purges. As priests chanted a liturgy for the dead, mourners hauled up a giant pine cross cut from trees on the Solovetsky Islands, a notorious gulag. "Russia must never forget what happened here," says 81-year-old Olga Vasiliyeva, whose engineer father was shot in 1937 as an "enemy of the people." "We cannot gloss over the crimes of Stalin; otherwise we will end up repeating them."

The Kremlin, it seems, doesn't agree. Russian President Vladimir Putin told a group of history teachers last month that though Russia's past had "problematic pages," they are fewer and "not as terrible as those of some others." Regardless, he said, it was the teacher's duty to make schoolchildren "proud of their motherland." To that end, the government has embarked on a campaign to change the way history is taught to Russian schoolchildren. Earlier this year, the Russian Academy of Education commissioned a major review of key history textbooks. But historians complain that new guidelines issued by the academy are designed to whitewash the atrocities committed by Stalin and downplay the Soviet Union's loss of the cold war. "The Kremlin thinks it would be much easier to consolidate the society around pleasant memories of history, rather than around negative facts," complains one of the editors, historian Isaak Rozental. "Their approach is not to study history but to use it." One new state-approved text, "A Book for Teachers: The Modern History of Russia, 1945-2006," describes Stalin as "the most successful leader of the U.S.S.R." Of the estimated 25 million killed in the purges and in collectivization, it notes, with chilling blandness, "political repression was used to mobilize not only rank-and-file citizens but also the ruling elite." The new history is much tougher on Boris Yeltsin—who led Russia's chaotic post-communist transition in the 1990s—denouncing his "weak" and "pro-Western" policies.

This effort to rewrite Russian history comes on the heels of Kremlin attempts to push its views of a great resurgent Russia into every sphere of science and the humanities. Russia's most high-profile scientific venture of recent years used its famous research submarines to plant a Russian flag on the seabed under the North Pole last month as part of an effort to claim the potentially resource-rich area for Russia. And the Kremlin's best-funded humanities program creates a new Russian Institute to promote spoken Russian and Russian culture around the world, and particularly in former Soviet states.

Could this new wave of state-sponsored patriotism lead to a closing of the Russian mind—with intellectual debate going the same way as free speech and opposition politics? Gleb Pavlovsky, director of Moscow's Center for Effective Politics and one of the Kremlin's chief ideologists, scoffs at the idea. He argues that any controversy generated by the new history textbooks shows that "intellectual life in Russia is alive and well." "It is impossible to create a state ideology in an information society," he says. "But what the authorities do want is to define the debate—to shape what is considered politically correct and what is not."

Indeed, authors of the new teachers' handbook appear to have the explicit aim of reversing what one of its editors, Alexander Filippov, calls a "propaganda offensive" directed from both inside Russia and abroad. The old, Yeltsin-era books dwelt too much on the evils of Soviet rule, he argues, which implied "Russia has no place in the company of the so-called civilized nations," and also that Russia, "as a successor of a totalitarian regime, is doomed forever to repent for this regime's real or invented crimes."

For Russians, free historical debate is often a bellwether of freedom itself. When Nikita Khrushchev denounced the crimes of Stalin (in secret) to the 1956 Party Congress, he began a brief thaw that allowed Russians to speak, travel and work more freely. The thaw would end under Khrushchev's successors, and it was not until Mikhail Gorbachev's policy of glasnost in the 1980s that Russian historians were allowed to explore the full horrors of previous Soviet rulers. Today, Russian bookstores are full of books that expose everything from the private life of Catherine the Great to the memoirs of Leonid Brezhnev's interpreter. "Modern Russian society is unbelievably hungry for history," says Eduard Radzinsky, Russia's most popular historian. Now, says Radzinsky, Putin's chief ideologue, Kremlin deputy chief of staff Vladislav Surkov, is "demanding that historians create a new ideology for them, fitting their regime." While some older members of the Russian intelligentsia have resisted such calls, Soviet nostalgia has taken root in a younger generation that has been encouraged to believe efforts to promote Western-style democracy in Russian are Trojan-horse attempts to weaken the country.

In short, the Kremlin campaign is working. According to a poll last month by the Moscow-based Levada Center, 54 percent of Russians between 16 and 19 believe Stalin was "a wise leader," and a similar number thought the collapse of the Soviet Union was "a tragedy." (Two thirds also thought that America was a "rival and enemy" and 62 percent believed that the government should "deport most immigrants.") "Many of my classmates believe that some kind of Soviet golden era existed before the West came in and destroyed everything," says Fillip Kuznetsov, an international-relations student at Moscow University. "They also believe the state is justified in doing anything it likes to its citizens in the name of some great cause."

Putin himself has begun to rehabilitate Soviet history. He told a conference of history teachers earlier this year that Russia "has nothing to be ashamed of" and that it was time to "stop apologizing." He added it was America that dropped an atom bomb on Hiroshima and napalmed Vietnamese jungles. Lyudmila Alexeyeva of the Moscow Helsinki Group sees the new glorification of the Soviet past as both a danger and a missed opportunity. "The Kremlin has a perfect example in Germany of how a nation actually grew powerful by thinking through its mistakes," she says. "Instead, they are going to stuff kids' minds with lies again." If that means steeping a new generation of children in the great-power myths of the Soviet world, where dissent was equated with "treachery" and political repression with "strength," then the ghosts of Russia will continue to lie uneasy.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20226567/site/newsweek/

While its one thing to focus solely on the bad things a nation has done and feel shame for the past, its another thing entirely to just whitewash the shameful parts of history out of the picture.
I really don't get it - the Russian people suffered the most from Stalin, he was denounced by the succeeding government and his cult of personality was disassembled and now 'democratic' Russia is reviving the image of its nations most bloodthirsty, paranoid, dictatorial leader..

Dima-RussianArms

08-21-2007, 04:51 PM

Lazy Lob

08-21-2007, 05:21 PM

Checks and balances?

Switek

08-21-2007, 05:27 PM

The article is very biased and twists facts and meanings.

Which ones exactly?

kalkun

08-21-2007, 05:29 PM

Which ones exactly?

He can't answer anymore.

Breakfast in Vegas

08-21-2007, 05:31 PM

The key phrase is "I really don't get it"...

The article is very biased and twists facts and meanings.
As for government having input into what is written in school textbooks - it happens worldwide: from USA to Japan, so what makes situation in Russia different?

Dima R-A,

I know a lot of Russians, Americans, English, Germans and whatever... when it comes to having a "selective memory" about their own nation's past, the Japanese and the Russians are the worst culprits for ignoring their nations lesser moments IMHO. Call it patriotism if you will, and I certainly agree that the Russians have every reason to be proud and patriotic of their country's past achievements and bright future... but dismissing the errors of the past or choosing to ignore them is ultimately not healthy.

I think the Russians I've met, even if still somewhat shackled by occasional bouts of post-Soviet inferiority complexes, display some serious lack of global perspective in their world view. Russian Strong is alive and well. Hell, they even put it up on bilboards.

I just hope that reshaping or reinterpreting the past doesn't become Russian policy as it was in Soviet times. Or maybe it never changed?

Did you go to a Russian school? I'd be curious to know what the textbooks taught. Every nation's textbooks are going to focus on their own nation's history to a large extent, but it would be interesting to know how the outside world is viewed and world history interpreted.

For example in US schools, a lot is made of the atrocities commited against the American Indians or the Vietnamese.

In German schools the kids drown in Nazi history and guilt.

ahryst

08-21-2007, 05:40 PM

First post, but I've been here for a while.

Figures of purges (in Russian):

eins: http://www.oper.ru/torture/print.php?t=1045689095
zwei: http://oper.ru/torture/read.php?t=1045689096

cheers

Flamming_Python

08-21-2007, 05:52 PM

While its one thing to focus solely on the bad things a nation has done and feel shame for the past, its another thing entirely to just whitewash the shameful parts of history out of the picture.
I really don't get it - the Russian people suffered the most from Stalin, he was denounced by the succeeding government and his cult of personality was disassembled and now 'democratic' Russia is reviving the image of its nations most bloodthirsty, paranoid, dictatorial leader..

No he isn't...

I'm pretty sure this article contains a lot of twists and half-truths. Usually i'm quite reasonable about news stories, etc... about Russia. But under no circumstances is some piece of trash written by some hack going to convince me that the Russian government wishes to revive the cult of Stalin.

It's quite possible that somethings aloof here that warrants further discussion, indeed it's quite possible that the Russian government is interfering perhaps a little too much into the education system and reviving some unhealthyness in the name of boosting pride and patriotism. However, we need some more information about this issue that doesn't come from an article overloaded and packed to the brim with bias and agendas. There has been very little quality reporting on Russia by Western news agencies, a proccess which continues even now; looking at the latest stories we have:

"Russia Forces BBC World Service Off FM Radio" (bull**** title and bull**** content)

In short, Tvoyan, stop being so naive and paying attention to every editorial by people who have never even been to Russia, and start reading Russian sources, you will find they are a lot more informative, intelligent and will show you things from a new angle. And don't worry they are often very critical of the government, country, etc... in fact Russian newspapers/websites where most Western stories such as this spring up from in the first place. Get your girlfriend to translate, or even machine translation will still give you a much clearer picture than you'll get from reading the Washington Post or New York Times when it comes to Russia.

Liptow

08-21-2007, 06:25 PM

lightfire

08-21-2007, 06:25 PM

I read the article in my own language, and a modified version I must say, so it differs, but not in general ideas.

No doubts russia strong crew would and are calling it "rusophobic as ussual", no surprise.An example, they don't even bother to read the article carefully or at all:

But under no circumstances is some piece of trash written by some hack going to convince me that the Russian government wishes to revive the cult of Stalin.

first, please check who wrote the article, then read it. You will see, that that it's not that straight as you say - "to revive the cult of Stalin". It's more about reborn of leader cult in general and rewritting history. There's no need to interpretate everything straightforward, what was said, as ussually russians do (" you don't agree with our possition, don't love us, you're fashist!")

the key is this:

Now, says Radzinsky, Putin's chief ideologue, Kremlin deputy chief of staff Vladislav Surkov, is "demanding that historians create a new ideology for them, fitting their regime."

shadowsrider

08-21-2007, 06:37 PM

KGB Strong

Kilgor

08-21-2007, 07:15 PM

The Kremlin, it seems, doesn't agree. Russian President Vladimir Putin told a group of history teachers last month that though Russia's past had "problematic pages," they are fewer and "not as terrible as those of some others."

Euphemisms such as "problematic, mistakes and excesses"

Of course when the nazi's filled up cattle cars, worked people to death, ethnic cleansed and executed millions because of who they are, its pure unadulterated evil.

Flamming_Python

08-21-2007, 07:42 PM

No wonder, few months ago Putin told that the dissolution of USSR was the biggest mistake of the 20th century. Imagine that German chancellor says that about the Third Reich. Oh wait, maybe if he was ex-NSDAP and ex-SD man..
There will never be good life for average man in a country where 60% of its citizens think that socialistic times were better. In my country it is close to 40% as well :oops:

No. He. Didn't.

First off it wasn't a few months ago, actually quite a while ago, secoundly, he called it the greatest geo-political catastrophy of the 20th centuary. Regardless of whether you think the USSR was a Socialist Paradise or a Stalinist Monstrosity, the collapse of the USSR was indeed a geo-political catastrophy.

Putin also mentioned that it was a catastrophy for the population of the USSR that it broke up so suddenly. Indeed it was, and I don't think I need to go into detail on that one. Seperately from that however, Putin has continously critisised and attacked the USSR, not long ago Solzhetsin the notable dissident was honoured by Putin. That's about the only event that was mentioned in the Western media in reference to Putin's denouncation of the Soviet Union.

BTW, so you can make the distinction. The communist party became genuinely unpopular in the late 80's and many wanted it to go and for free elections to take root. That doesn't mean they wanted the Soviet Union itself to collapse, it was after all their country.

I am really so sick and tired of all this propaganda. Every week a new one comes along. You can reproduce this article for hundreds of countries across the world, with only a few twists neccessery to get the gullible masses to believe it. We'll probably get one about another Journalist getting food poisoning from Polonium next or whatever. Meanwhile in neighbouring Georgia quite a few notable opposition high-ups have been chucked in prison over the last year, and many suspicious deaths have been noted. Won't hear a peep about it in the Western media though.

I mean it, I am fed up with all this. Want an example? Here, compare the 2 articles:

Hungary: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2021271,00.html

Politicians who want to improve life for young people should look to the Hungarian example

Zsuzsanna Clark
Monday February 26, 2007
The Guardian

Twenty million Scouts around the world last week marked Founder's Day, and with it the 100th anniversary of the Scout movement. Their celebrations offer a powerful reminder of the ability of youth movements to bring young people together in a spirit of friendship and solidarity - qualities that have become all too rare in modern Britain. "Isn't there more we can do to enable young people to come together and give service to their country?" asks David Cameron. Well yes, David, there is, and we did it in "backward" socialist Hungary more than 30 years ago.

Unlike those brought up in Margaret Thatcher's devil-take-the-hindmost Britain, I was fortunate to be raised in a society where solidarity and togetherness were officially encouraged from an early age. The Pioneer movement, of which I was a member, was not about indoctrinating young people with the tenets of Marxist-Leninism, as many believe, but engendering a sense of community among the nation's youth.
Many of the Pioneers' activities were similar to the Scouts', but the values were more collective and they involved all children and teenagers in the country, not just a minority. Pioneer membership was an integral part of school life, not just in Hungary, but throughout the socialist bloc.

Our motto as Pioneers was Together for Each Other. It was not an empty slogan: it was how we were encouraged to think. Being a Pioneer meant taking special care of the weak and vulnerable. We helped the elderly with their shopping and cleaning; we chopped up firewood for them and carried their coal in and out from the cellar. There were competitions, too: for collecting waste paper and waste metal, for sports activities and for other acts of good citizenship. But, reflecting the collective ethos of the movement, the prizes were nearly always for groups, not for individuals.

Each class had different duties which were rotated week by week. When we were on cleaning duty we had to go to school half an hour earlier and sweep the pavement outside the school. But no one ever seemed to mind: we carried out our tasks willingly.

The highlight of our year as Pioneers was our annual excursion. Every class went to the country for two or three days. When I was 13 I spent two weeks at Csilleberc, a camp near Budapest, with other Pioneers from all over Hungary. We travelled there on the famous Pioneer railway in Budapest. Opened in 1948, the railway was, with the exception of the drivers, staffed entirely by children and connected the previously inaccessible Buda Hills. The children worked the signals, changed the points and sold tickets. At Pioneer camp, we shared both tents and duties - just as it was at home, except we didn't know each other as well. But by working and socialising together we soon made friends. Rabid anti-communists and adherents of the view that "there is no such thing as society" will no doubt sneer at what I have just described, but the Pioneer movement did create a real feeling of togetherness. Hungarians of my generation almost all look back at their Pioneer days with great affection, regardless of their views on other aspects of the socialist system.

"If we are unable to ensure young people the opportunities for positive, creative deeds, then in some cases a gang will serve this purpose instead." So warned Gyorgy Aczel, Hungary's minister of culture in the 1970s. When I compare my childhood to the atomised lives of so many young people in Britain today, one in which violent and antisocial gang culture seems ever more to predominate, I believe Aczel's words to be as relevant as ever.

· Zsuzsanna Clark is writing a book on her experiences of growing up under communism in Hungary

Now evil soviet commie Russia: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/05/21/wrussia21.xml

Kremlin uses Young Pioneers as streetfighters

Adrian Blomfield in Spasatel
Last Updated: 1:22am BST 22/05/2007

Filling the air with the bittersweet strains so familiar to generations of Soviet schoolchildren, a bugle sounded the morning roll-call.

Young Pioneers celebrate the 85th anniversary of the Leninist movement at a ceremony in Red Square, Moscow

Dutifully heeding its peremptory summons, dozens of young teenagers spilled out of their dormitories and straggled towards the parade ground, adjusting their red neckties as they went.

A new day had begun at the Young Pioneer summer camp on the outskirts of Moscow.

Most of the recruits would spend the next hours as their parents once had: learning to goose-step as they raised the movement's red flag, singing patriotic songs and hearing stories of pioneer heroes of yore.

Founded in 1922, the Lenin All-Union Pioneer Organisation was a rite of passage for virtually every Soviet child.

From the moment they joined, usually at the age of about nine, every recruit promised "to live as great Lenin bade us" and pledged "to fight for the cause of the Communist Party".

Over the five years or so before they graduated to the Komsomol, the party's youth wing, Young Pioneers were indoctrinated in Marxist ideology and encouraged to inform on their families.

advertisement

To the relief of many, the Pioneer movement disintegrated as the Soviet Union imploded. Yet, 17 years later, it seems to be on the verge of a remarkable renaissance.

Over the weekend hundreds of new recruits were inducted at a high-profile 85th anniversary ceremony in Red Square.

Officials from Communist Party dominated the guest list, watching with pride as the children waved their red flags and then trooped solemnly into Lenin's mausoleum to pay their respects.

But others are starting to take an interest in the Pioneers. In the past two years the Kremlin has been busy creating youth movements to counter the spread of democracy.

Organisations such as the Nashi movement are used to give muscle to President Vladimir Putin's increasingly nationalist policies - harassing the British ambassador, for example, and besieging the Estonian Embassy.

Some fear the Kremlin now wants control of a reinvigorated movement that would fill Nashi's ranks with malleable youngsters once they reach fighting age. "All the authorities want from young people is obedience or participation in Nashi," said Anatoly Yermolin, president of the Russian Scout association.

The beliefs espoused by the movement are not so far removed from those of Nashi. Recruits are encouraged to reject Western values and embrace patriotism.

"There are too many foreign influences these days," said Katya Domova, a 19-year-old Pioneer instructor. "It's important for the children to learn their roots."

Such sentiments are worthy in many countries but potentially dangerous, critics say, in a nation where the line between patriotism and nationalism is so fine and so easily manipulated by central government.

The movement has rebuilt itself in the provinces - in some regions it has hundreds of thousands of members - but will shortly be centralised, making it easier to suborn. But the Kremlin, like its Soviet predecessors, might find that indoctrination is not as easy as it might suppose.

Pioneers of yesteryear often remember their early teenage years at summer camp with affection. Few cared about the lessons in communist dogma, which were greeted with stifled yawns. Summer camps, they said, were all about secret romances and illicit drinking; priorities far more important than devotion to the cause.

Granted the articles are from 2 different newspapers with different political views (Guardian: Liberal Left, Daily Telegraph: Conservative Right), but when it comes to Russia both are equally unfair, so you can take this as a valid comparison.

tyovan

08-21-2007, 07:42 PM

nahimov

08-21-2007, 07:49 PM

Flamming_Python

08-21-2007, 07:52 PM

I do read Russian sources - I enjoy reading Kommersant and I check RIA Novosti too. Any other good sources that have English translations (not a smart-assed comment, but I'm genuinely interested in other good Russian news sources).

I did post an article from a Russian source about good news in Russia: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=118670

I don't always defend the country and I don't always attack the country. Some stuff is good - fighting the oligarchs (if I was in charge I think they'd be shot in Red Square), helping the people with income redistribution, etc.
Some stuff is not good - the extreme nationalism and xenophobic racism that is a by-product of the whole 'Russia StRoNg' movement.

The Russia STRONG Russians and the Xenophobic hater Russians are 2 different types altogether, although I do agree they both share a common nationalist atmosphere. I am not at all a Nationalist, but I do find myself defending Russia the majority of the time, because the hypocracy of Western accusations often amazes me.

But for any nation that has been brought to its knees, nationalism often takes root as a means of reviving the nation. Undesirable, but inevitable. Most important thing is to not let it slide out of control.

Here is a good article on Western reporting on Russia:

Western media coverage of three recent incidents-- the state's demand that the Union of Russian Journalists vacate part of its premises, the resignation of journalists from the Russian News Service, and the detention of Garry Kasparov and others as they were on their way to the city of Samara to join a protest rally--illustrates the need for some serious changes in Western reporting about Russia.

All three took place over a short period of time, so Western press accounts have tended to lump them together, as the latest in series of efforts by Russian president Vladimir Putin to suppress democracy and muzzle the press. This interpretation rests on the omission of several key facts that, curiously, the Russian media has done a much better job of reporting.

For example, in the first incident, Russian news sources reported that the journalist's union was subletting office space that it had been given rent free by President Yeltsin. Since the commercial use of space given pro bono publico has in the past been deemed contrary to the intent of the donation, and a possible violation of the tax code, the state property agency exercised its right to unilaterally change the terms of the lease, albeit in a very lenient manner. Instead of revoking the lease entirely, it merely insisted that the territory currently used in commercial use, 929 square meters, be returned to the state.

Western accounts, by and large, described the conflict as an act of journalistic defiance, but scarcely mentioned the commercial issue at its heart. Since the territory at issue, one-third of what the union leases, is not being used for anything related to journalism, however, it is hard to see how its loss can be deemed an imposition on any of its journalistic activities.

The second incident concerns a rift between journalists and the general management at the Russian News Service (RNS), one of the nation's largest news providers. It too received widespread media coverage, both inside and outside Russia, but whereas western media focused almost entirely on the disgruntled journalists, the Russian media also reported management's side of the story.

Thus, Russian readers learned not only that Alexander Shkolnik, RNS's general director, categorically denies imposing any estrictions on the coverage of opposition politicians, but that during the past three weeks his news service interviewed leaders from the Communist Party, the Liberal Democratic Party, and the Union of Right Forces--literally the entire political spectrum!

To be fair, many western media accounts did mention, in passing, Shkolnik's claim that his decisions have been purely commercial. But since no evidence was provided to back up his claim, it was made to appear flimsy and implausible, particularly in contrast to the extensive coverage given to the journalists who had resigned.

Since it has not been mentioned in any Western press account, Shkolnik's explanation for his new policies deserves to be quoted in full:

"The problem was also that, when I came to RNS, we had very low ratings. We were in 33rd place. Looking into the matter, we found that our audience is a specific category of people who listen [to us] while in their cars on errands. That is to say, [they are] more-or-less successful and well-to-do people, who are positive and socially active. Putting some sort of dreary pessimism ["chernukha"] on the air for this audience would be the same as putting an article about homeless people into a glitzy magazine. We, the leadership of RNS, asked that our correspondents think, first and foremost, not about their own personal political interests, views, or attitude toward what is happening in our the country, but about the interests of our audience." [source]

The final, and most notorious, incident concerns the detention of Garry Kasparov and more than two dozen others as they were on their way to Samara to join a protest march there on May 18, 2007. Although their accounts differ slightly, all those detained regard their delay as nothing but a pretext to sequester their tickets until it was too late to get a flight to Samara that day. This view has been dutifully seconded by all mainstream Western media outlets.

This version of events, however, is hotly disputed by the transportation police, which says that the group was detained because at least one of their tickets could not be processed by the airport computer, since it had been purchased under a different name. Security considerations, they say, then required that the entire party's travel documents be checked. Most importantly, they insist that these were returned to the group by noon, at which point there were still two flights they could have taken to Samara, one at 1:30 P.M. from Sheremetyevo airport, the other at 3:25 P.M. from Domodedovo airport.

Russian media accounts thus reveal what most western accounts obscure, namely that the essential facts are in dispute. Rather than getting to the bottom of this discrepancy, however, most western reports of the incident chose to simply accept Kasparov's version of events, and use it as a platform from which to decry Putin's ostensible pattern of political repression.

The omission in all three incidents of relevant information is very troubling, for it suggests the erosion of the crucial distinction between objective reporting and advocacy when it comes to Putin's Russia. The editorial sympathies of leading Western news outlets like the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and the Economist are quite transparent--they regard their hostility toward Russia's president as a badge of honor, and that is their prerogative. But the assumption that, regardless of a paper's editorial stance, its day-to-day reporting strives for greater detachment, no longer appears warranted.

Paradoxically, those looking for more balanced reporting would do well to consider some of the Russian press outlets that now have good English language web sites. Among the most interesting are the RIA Novosti and Interfax news services, newspapers like Kommersant and the Moscow Times, and Russia Profile which, although it receives partial funding from the state run RIA Novosti, is editorially independent.

Not only do they offer a richer and more interesting variety of sources and commentary, but increasingly they provide information that one simply cannot find in the Western media.

Nicolai N. Petro is professor of political science at the University of Rhode Island. He has served as special assistant for policy in the U.S. State Department, and as civic affairs advisor to the mayor of the Russian city of Novgorod the Great. His books include: The Rebirth of Russian Democracy (Harvard,1995), Russian Foreign Policy (Longman, 1997), and Crafting Democracy (Cornell, 2004).

Ngati Tumatauenga

08-21-2007, 08:03 PM

Well this would not be much different from US history books. I think it is terrible to adjust school books to political views but everyone does it. I was very surprised myself when i saw what is being taught at US schools.

Intersting stance you've taken.

Usually you'll preach how much better Russia is compared to the US. But with that comment you've insinuated that it's okay as long as other countries do it. Basically saying you're quite happy for Russia to lower itself to the standards of the US.

Facinating.

California Joe

08-21-2007, 08:20 PM

Well this would not be much different from US history books. I think it is terrible to adjust school books to political views but everyone does it. I was very surprised myself when i saw what is being taught at US schools.

You really are a strange character. How is saying Stalin was a monster comparable to somehow defaming the Russian people? From what I've seen on this board you couldn't beat the nationalistic fervor out of any Russian, no matter what country they live in if you tried. So give it a rest. And anyone that doesn't accept Stalin was a psychopath is either blindly ignorant or f*cking retarded. In the US we could teach that the Indians were decimated because they were green and came from Mars and it still wouldn't be nearly as bizarre as some of the bullsh*t you seem to believe.

Mamont

08-21-2007, 08:38 PM

anyone that doesn't accept Stalin was a psychopath is either blindly ignorant or f*cking retarded. Or simply knew about history of Russia way more than anyone stating such bullsh*t as yours, simple as that.

CPL Trevoga

08-21-2007, 08:45 PM

I think it's a great think that "whited out" pieces of Russian history are being restored in history books. I've finished school in Soviet Union and Stalin and his rule was barely mentioned, like the CPSU was trying erase him from history. Western propaganda paints him as a psychotic murderer who drank babies blood.
Very distorted history of that leader. Any objective info is definitely welcome.

California Joe

08-21-2007, 08:45 PM

Look, I admire the Russian people and their ability to always put the motherland first. Historically they are a strong people. But are you telling me you actually want to defend what Joseph Stalin did to your country?

On second thought, forget I said anything at all. Just continue as you are. If you even live in Russia at all. Seems some of the most voiciferous defenders live somewhere else and remind me of the drunken Irish "patriots" and "Fenians" that show up in bars around Boston on St Paddys Day.

Igor01

08-21-2007, 08:46 PM

... estimated 25 million killed in the purges and in collectivization ...

From the 1953 top secret Soviet report to Khruschev regarding the political repressions in USSR during Stalin's era:

http://rusarchives.ru/pik/events/stalin_exb/298kat.jpg

"...According to the Ministry of Interior data, in USSR during the period between 1921 and present time were convicted for counter-revolutionary activities... 3.777.380 individuals.

Among those:
Death penalty: 642.980
Detention of up to 25 years: 2.369.220
Exile and residency restricitons: 761.180"

So suddnely it's not 25 million killed, but 3.7 million convicted. Mind you, most of those who were in labour camps survived and returned after 1953.

EDIT: Before our resident russophobes check in with their invariably charming insights I'd like to add that the numbers quoted in the above report are verified in modern research, for example that of Zemskov, a Russian historian without a political agenda that worked with the actual NKVD/MGB/KGB archives.
He looks at every aspect of the statistical analysis, from the inmates' nationality and age groups to their education backround (NKVD was very thourough with their data gathering), gender, age and down to exact breakdown of the types of crimes or "counter-revolutionary" activities that they were convicted for.

Look here for example (in Russian): http://history.tuad.nsk.ru/Author/Ru...es/ZEMSKOV.HTM (http://history.tuad.nsk.ru/Author/Russ/Z/Zemskov/Articles/ZEMSKOV.HTM)

It's amazing that contrary to popular myths and horror stories, there were only 2.5 million inmates in the USSR at the time of Stalin's death (which is comparable to the per capita level of inmates in modern countries). Consider also that roughly half of them were convicted for common crimes (nothing to do with political repressions) so all this hateful vomit about "up to 100 million innocents killed by the ruthless NKVD butchers" is completely unsubstantiated by the facts and is politically motivated. The main purpose of this myth is to delegitimize the Soviet state and make sure that Russia at a minimum never becomes a global player again and at a maximum ceases to exist as a single unified state that posesses 1/6 of the world's territory at a key geostrategical location and a huge chunk of the worlds resources.

Mamont

08-21-2007, 08:58 PM

Look, I admire the Russian people and their ability to always put the motherland first. Historically they are a strong people. But are you telling me you actually want to defend what Joseph Stalin did to your country? Would you defend Hitler also?
You want to judge them from modern grounds? That is wrong. Stalin was a product of his own time and to measure him without taking into consideration the previous history of Russia, his comrades and legacy he aquired is a wrong way. Just one look at his history of rising to power clearly shows that he's no psycho and he was probably very far from becoming one. As fo the Hitler, he deserves at least a closer look at his other deeds besides WW2, death camps and racial theories. Actually i find it strange how Hitler is immediatly mentioned while judging Stalin. One brought destruction upon his country, while other created a superpower.

PS - Nobody's talking about "defending" anyone. Just evaluation and results.

tyovan

08-21-2007, 09:03 PM

So are you saying the ends justify the means?
Sure, the Soviet Union became an industrialized superpower under Stalin - but at what human cost?

California Joe

08-21-2007, 09:05 PM

I edited the Hitler part because lets face it, it's not constructive. Godwins Law and all that. I'm just curious how, even in historical context this guy can be given a positive spin. What about the purges within the officers corps in the military that nearly crippled their leadership going into the war? Would they or their families agree with you? What about the internal strife and suffering predicated by his policies? I'd be interested in Lokos opinion because if anyone has done his homework on the matter it'd be him. Hitler is usually mentioned in the same breath because of the staggering bodycounts attributed to both of them. Hitler did create a superpower, it just lasted a very short time.

Frankly, I get irritated when someone brings up history textbooks being innacurate in Russia some members intantaneous response is. "Oh yeah, well it's no better in the US." It's simply not true.

Indiana Jones

08-21-2007, 09:16 PM

Mamont

08-21-2007, 09:17 PM

I'm just curious how, even in historical context this guy can be given a positive spin. As i said - actually learn russian history, not just repeat some scary stories. About support of poor families, education, healthcare, science et cetera.

What about the purges within the officers corps in the military that nearly crippled their leadership going into the war? Would they or their families agree with you? What about the internal strife and suffering predicated by his policies? You're again demonstrating you limitations. What's the point in discussing russian history with you, when you just don't want to step out of the borders, that are so common and familiar?

Hitler did create a superpower, it just lasted a very short time.What's the point of this comment? Aren't we discussing russian history?

Frankly, I get irritated when someone brings up history textbooks being innacurate in Russia some members intantaneous response is. "Oh yeah, well it's no better in the US." It's simply not true. Than what is actually written in russian books about history must not concearn you.

Teme

08-21-2007, 09:19 PM

Turks never massacred Armenians.
Japs never forced anyone to be comfort women and Nanjing massacre never happened.
Stalin is cool.

...

Political history whitewashing as usual. Nothing new as long as politicians/leaders are allowed to use the history writing they direct to achieve their own political/nationalist goals.

Lokos

08-21-2007, 09:24 PM

Imagine that German chancellor says that about the Third Reich. Oh wait, maybe if he was ex-NSDAP and ex-SD man..

Why, in the name of Djibouti, do people say 'Soviet Union' when they actually mean 'Stalin'? Was the dissolution of the Soviet Union a tragedy? You bet your butt. For the vast majority of the Soviet populace, who are now poorer, less well cared for and face greater violence and societal fracture than during the Soviet era, it was a tragedy.

Is this such a controversial thing to say? Is Putin's often stated goal of a multipolar world such an ominous thing? Only if one equates the Soviet Union to Stalin - which is something that's quite bewildering. For one sad, tragic phase of history, the Soviet Union was bent to Stalin's whim. But, please, do not again attempt to equate the Soviet Union of 1953-1991 (a 38-year period of history) to the Third Reich. Please. Especially since the crusade against Stalin was begun by none other than his successor...

I'd be interested in Lokos opinion because if anyone has done his homework on the matter it'd be him.

Stalin was not psychotic, Joe. That gives him the benefit of the doubt. An escape clause, if you will. He was a megalomaniac. A paranoid, cold and calculating man whose mindset did not include a moral compass of any sort. The first portion of his rule was post-Civil War consolidation. His repression, though nearly unparalleled in scale (Mao Ze Dong could probably have given him a run for his money - the Romans and the Mongols, too, and perhaps a few others), can find an analogue in Revolutionary France.

Socio-political fracture, on a territory as vast and as varied (geographically, materially, ethnographically and culturally) as the Soviet Union's, is extremely dangerous to a political leadership. Repression was inevitable. Stalin's particular brand of repression was extreme. Can I understand his mindset? Of course. One has to, to properly understand the contemporary situation. Do I think he was an evil man? Without a doubt.

He created a Soviet superpower.

He was an evil man.

His successors were not evil men.

The Soviet Union, as a state, was as much an Evil Empire as the American Republic has become. As a whole, it should not be compared to the Third Reich.

None of the four are contradictory.

Lokos

California Joe

08-21-2007, 09:31 PM

Thanks pal. :)

(And yes, I know the term "psychotic" was a gross generalization.)

Kilgor

08-21-2007, 09:36 PM

Among those:
Death penalty: 642.980
Detention of up to 25 years: 2.369.220
Exile and residency restricitons: 761.180"

It widely accepted that at the hight of the great purge, 600,000+ people were executed in 1937/1938 period alone. The figures are not correct

The figures for mass deportation ie "exile" seem very low.

Lokos

08-21-2007, 09:42 PM

No worries, mate.

I think the difficulty Russians here have, in particular, with the legacy of Stalin is bringing together the power (military, industrial, scientific) that he left them through the Soviet Union, with the scars of his rule - and coming out with a coherent picture of their ultimate 'Terrible Tsar'. He had the qualities Russians, as a people ****e to fracture on a vast territory (the effect of a vast territorial expanse with limited infrastructure on a political culture in the modern context is something worth writing a book or two on, but I doubt I'll be the one to do it), can admire; strength, resilience and a hardnosed approach.

But this has to be set against a sinister backdrop: the paranoia partly derived from his political environment, and partly inherent, spawned a regime that saw political survival as only being a possible consequence of the 'cowing' of the often imagined opposition - and often through disproportionate and brutal means.

Mamont:

CJ was not saying that there were no positive consequences for the Soviet Union that can be traced to Stalin's brand of leadership. He was saying that there were definitely massive, systemic abuses of power and often horrifying political repression. Which is true. Regardless of Stalin's achievements, their cost was terrible, as was the arbitrary nature of his rule.

I do not see how you can defend him, as a person. I can see how you defend him as a statesman, but that is certainly not a state I would want to live in...

Lokos

Lokos

08-21-2007, 09:45 PM

Kilgor:

I don't specialize in the Great Terror, but that document specifies the time period in question as being 'From 1921 until the present time' - the present time being Khruschev's rule, going by the document again.

Perhaps it's still only data for 1937-1938. I don't know.

Lokos

IvanIII

08-21-2007, 09:51 PM

Take a look at US history books do they teach the Armerican children what US did in Vieatnam how they bomed they killed hundred of thousends of civilians or what they did in hiroshima/nagasaki?

Indiana Jones

08-21-2007, 09:52 PM

[...]
He created a Soviet superpower.
His successors were not evil men.
The Soviet Union, as a state, was as much an Evil Empire as the American Republic has become. As a whole, it should not be compared to the Third Reich.
[...]

Lokos
May I inquire why the third Reich in particular should not be compared to the Soviet Union ? As you are certainly aware, political science from Friedrich to the late Hannah Arendt has identified numerous parallels and fundamental similarities between the two systems, and from a historical perspective I tend very much to support these assertions.

RomanS

08-21-2007, 09:56 PM

Im proud to be Russian, but Im not proud of Stalin.

Im proud of a Soviet Soldier, but Im not proud of those who were in charge of them. Look at the number of people we lost in WW2.

Should we appoligize for what Stalin did? Hell no, I didnt do anything. Neither did my friends.

Should the younger generation learn about what Stalin did to his own people? Thats definately not up to me to decide. Im more of a person that cares about our future. What can we do to make it better? Stop pointing fingers, waiting for appologies, and love one another!
My country went through a hell of time in the history. Russia deserves a vacation.

California Joe

08-21-2007, 10:04 PM

Take a look at US history books do they teach the Armerican children what US did in Vieatnam how they bomed they killed hundred of thousends of civilians or what they did in hiroshima/nagasaki?

Of course they do, although the hundreds of thousands part is a little over the top... Vietnam is considered an extremely devisive part of our history in this country. The question of how much of it actually sinks in, is another matter. Once again, I have great respect for the Russian people, but I have no love of blind ethnocentrism no matter what the nationality.

Kilgor

08-21-2007, 10:17 PM

May I inquire why the third Reich in particular should not be compared to the Soviet Union ? As you are certainly aware, political science from Friedrich to the late Hannah Arendt has identified numerous parallels and fundamental similarities between the two systems, and from a historical perspective I tend very much to support these assertions.

You need to read this book, which I have mentioned a few times.

THE DICTATORS: HITLER'S GERMANY AND STALIN'S RUSSIA
By Richard Overy

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/06/23/1087845001781.html

Overall, Overy identifies strong consistencies in the ruling practices, techniques of terror and violence, cultural objectives, strategies of economic management, utopian social aspirations and moral language of the two regimes.

He argues that neither Hitler nor Stalin was interested in power for its own sake or as a means of self-aggrandisement.

Both were, in Overy's estimation, "exceptional rulers, exerting a form of direct, customary authority based on widespread popular acclamation that was unique in the history of both countries, before or since; and the two dictators saw themselves as exceptional, called to perform an historic task in times of crisis".

Flamming_Python

08-21-2007, 10:22 PM

Of course they do, although the hundreds of thousands part is a little over the top... Vietnam is considered an extremely devisive part of our history in this country. The question of how much of it actually sinks in, is another matter. Once again, I have great respect for the Russian people, but I have no love of blind ethnocentrism no matter what the nationality.

Yes I agree. Russians should recognize the dark periods in our history, so that we could have something to look back and learn from. Nationalism is an unfortunate side effect, but due to the circumstances in our country over the past 15 years, you will have to excuse many for being so defensive. Of course, it should also be remembered that mp.net tends to represent many patriotic people, Russians, Americans or otherwise.

Unfortunetly, the thing with Stalin is... He plunged Russia and the rest of the USSR into a frenzied bloodbath, a regime of terror where everybody who disagreed with the state even in the most minor way were afraid to speak up, constantly in fear of being imprisoned or executed. This isn't to mention the mass indoctrination, huge paranoia and hostility towards the outside world that the man built up. I don't think the figures are too important. It's more the atmosphere that the man created and the long-term impact it had on the population.

But... aside from crashing Russia into it's one of its most terrifying periods of its history, he also led it through it's greatest victory by leading it through its most desperate times and battles for survival. Arguably, much of his cult of personality, propaganda, NKVD and rapid & massive industrialisation at the cost of so many lives, were neccessery for the survival of the Soviet people a few years down the line when Hitler invaded.

For this reason, I don't think Russians really know what to make of him. His legacy should be handled delicately, to say the least. Would be interesting to see what the new textbooks make of him. Hopefully Respect for his leadership, and Disdain for his atrocities.

Flamming_Python

08-21-2007, 10:34 PM

You need to read this book, which I have mentioned a few times.

THE DICTATORS: HITLER'S GERMANY AND STALIN'S RUSSIA
By Richard Overy

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/06/23/1087845001781.html

Overall, Overy identifies strong consistencies in the ruling practices, techniques of terror and violence, cultural objectives, strategies of economic management, utopian social aspirations and moral language of the two regimes.

He argues that neither Hitler nor Stalin was interested in power for its own sake or as a means of self-aggrandisement.

Both were, in Overy's estimation, "exceptional rulers, exerting a form of direct, customary authority based on widespread popular acclamation that was unique in the history of both countries, before or since; and the two dictators saw themselves as exceptional, called to perform an historic task in times of crisis".

No doubt the 2 governments had plenty in common. Along with many governments in the world at that time.

I wonder how Britain and France behaved in regards to their colonies? Free candy and Free elections as usual? Or brutality and dictatorship?

California Joe

08-21-2007, 10:34 PM

nahimov

08-21-2007, 10:38 PM

You really are a strange character. How is saying Stalin was a monster comparable to somehow defaming the Russian people? From what I've seen on this board you couldn't beat the nationalistic fervor out of any Russian, no matter what country they live in if you tried. So give it a rest. And anyone that doesn't accept Stalin was a psychopath is either blindly ignorant or f*cking retarded. In the US we could teach that the Indians were decimated because they were green and came from Mars and it still wouldn't be nearly as bizarre as some of the bullsh*t you seem to believe.

Relax man. Changing school books to accommodate your current politics is a fact of life. I'm sad that it finally happened in Russia but not surprised. You have the same nationalistic fervor towards US. I knew that you would pissed as soon as I stated that US teaches bull**** in their schools. Is that nationalistic or what (or you actually believe that schools books in US don't reflect current political situation in US)? Sorry that it came off as a flame. Russia right now is changing, some changes are good, some bad, a lot of the changes reflect what already happed in US (nationalism, strong military and so on).

nahimov

08-21-2007, 10:50 PM

Slightly off topic but how much of any countries history actually sinks in to most of the population? Even if it's taught completely objectively. The average person doesn't hang around on forums like this actually trying to learn things about their own countris history, let alone anyone elses. The US in general has horrible statistics for it's students knowing about history and geography.

Good question. I'm always surprised what people remember from school books. Usually they don't remember facts but do remember general ideas. For example if you ask average US student (at least the ones I asked) about WWII all they would be able to tell you is that Jews died and that's about it. Russia would be evil and US was always a savior of the world except when they killed all Indians. For Russians it would depend if they were high school students in USSR or in US. Usually USSR alone won WWII, not many Jews died. I don't think anyone thinks that West is evil. At least this is my personal observation.

jetsetter

08-21-2007, 10:52 PM

You have the same nationalistic fervor towards US. I knew that you would pissed as soon as I stated that US teaches bull**** in their schools. Is that nationalistic or what (or you actually believe that schools books in US don't reflect current political situation in US)? Sorry that it came off as a flame. Russia right now is changing, some changes are good, some bad, a lot of the changes reflect what already happed in US (nationalism, strong military and so on).

Could you point out an example please? We learned about the horrors of slavery, Vietnam, decimation of the Native Americans, etc. You have to realize that many teachers are "liberal".

California Joe

08-21-2007, 10:56 PM

It's been a long time since I was in school and I've always read a great deal about American history and in recent years more about world history...Napoleonic Wars etc... but that was because it was always one of my favorite subjects. All kids don't feel that way. I don't think I was taught a sugar coated version of history. It may not have been all encompassing but certain very unpleasant parts of our history were stressed.

nahimov

08-21-2007, 11:04 PM

Could you point out an example please? We learned about the horrors of slavery, Vietnam, decimation of the Native Americans, etc. You have to realize that many teachers are "liberal".

Sure. At least in the books I had about 3/4 or WWII chapter was about Jews. Stalingrad was just a small sideline. US won WWII almost singlehandedly (just a general feeling you were left with after reading the book + listening to teacher). Horrors of slavery and Native Americans reflect perfectly what current US politics are. It's just very politically correct. I think it is bull**** since decimation of Native Americans is a very small part of US history and decimation of each other during civil war was much more important. Almost every country has a history of displacing other people from their current land. The very disproportional focus on Native Americans tells you that politics are involved and not just history.

Xaito

08-21-2007, 11:14 PM

somebody has to decide what and in which amounts we teach the children - its not like there is one true version of it or it can be taught completely.
Who is supposed to decide it for Russia - the author of the article in the first post who's only Russia's well-being on mind maybe?
Its the same for western schoolbooks - somebody has decided that kids need to learn about the Soviet Union but apparently had only enough space to list all its negative sides as I don't remember hearing anything good from german historybooks.

Should we appoligize for what Stalin did? Hell no, I didnt do anything. Neither did my friends.
x2 - there are some people who never got an apology from me for my own actions who probably would deserve one - obviously apologizing for somebody who died before even my parents were born especially to people who don't have a legitimate claim to an apology is very very low on my "to do" list ;)

As for the people who like to point out what kind of beast Stalin was etc... well seriously I think there are people around here who'd be worse then him if they'd ever get hold of that much power ;)
People show everyday everywhere what kind of cruel and disgusting personalities humans can have - though not everybody gets the chance to be a leader.
Who knows, if Hitler's political career wouldn't have been successful and he'd be still alive today maybe he'd be just another Russia hater here on MP.net ;)

shocker1

08-21-2007, 11:17 PM

When I was in school some text books were older than me so I do not know how much politics at the time played into the content of the books. I am a book reader and I have an attic stacked with books I have read. Including 16 sets of World Book encyclopedias and year books.

One issue I found not discussed in primary school was the plight of the vast majority of poor in the South after the Civil War. Of course the victors write the history and left out the carpetbaggers mostly, thieves and evil Yankees that basically raped the land. My ancestors farm in middle Tennessee was taken while he was fighting the last battles for the CSA. Put his family on the street and offered him a share cropping bit of land. He owned no slaves and fought to keep the Feds out of his home county/State. This is what it was about for thousands of CSA soldiers not slavery. Slavery was a major part of the war due to economics but I can tell you a lot counties in the South had no slave owners. Slave owners usually owned and worked a whole county by themselves. This is another vast topic so I will stop.

I also noted in my later years the absence of any good studies into Russian culture in a positive light. Things must be different now. In high school the evil USSR was gonna destroy my home. It is interesting as you get older and wiser that you see the whole situation a little different. I must admit though I was not part of your average high school class.

Igor01

08-21-2007, 11:44 PM

Holy Sigmund Freud !!!
Edit: Igor01, may I inquire if you have actually read *****/Zemskov/Ritterspom ? Because, with all due respect, you are grossly misrepresenting their findings by insinuating that "only" 3,7 million individuals were GULag inmates from 1921 till Stalins death for "political" reasons.

Unless I am missing something, I am under a distinct impression that Zemskov relies on the numbers from the aforementioned report given to Khruschev in 1954. For example, in his article titled "Gulag - Historical and Sociological Aspect" he mentions the document (with other MVD reports prepared for Khruschev) without doubting the numbers provided in the report and even goes as far as stating the Kruschev in his memoirs knowingly contributed to the confusions surrounding Gulag statistics despite having been fully informed by MVD. The article (in Russian) can be found here: http://history.tuad.nsk.ru/Author/Russ/Z/Zemskov/Articles/ZEMSKOV.HTM There are a number of tables in it that sum up Zemskov's findings on varios aspects of Gulag such as inmate population dynamics over the years, the proportion of "politically repressed", ethnic composition etc. Zemskov's research is very thorough and unbiased (he wasn't even a Party member during the Soviet period of his scientific career which was a very rare thing to say the least).

I haven't read Rittenspom, but I'll look for his works on the net.

Igor01

08-22-2007, 12:01 AM

It widely accepted that at the hight of the great purge, 600,000+ people were executed in 1937/1938 period alone. The figures are not correct

The figures for mass deportation ie "exile" seem very low.

I would like to see some credible research supporting these "widely accepted" numbers. Preferrably from a source that bases his findings on studies of the actual NKVD/MGB/MVD archives and not estimates taken from other unsubstantiated sources.

Since when subjective opinions like "seem very low" become any kind of an argument? So far the likes of Solzhenitsyn and Roy Medvedev have not based their wild claims of "up to 40 million victims" on any tangible documented evidence. NKVD archives contain about 9.5 million personal files of Gulag inmates while the ratio of those prosecuted under the "political" Article 58 usually ranged from one quarter to one third of the entire Gulag population (for the most part).

Alan

08-22-2007, 12:38 AM

Stalin was a brutal dictator. No doubt about that. Of course he was, and yes, he was a horrible person.

Okay, now please tell me... world leader at the time was a good guy?

Name me one nice leader in Europe or Asia at the time of world war two.

Here's what a few people seem to realise. Up until about 1945, everyone and their dog was a brutal fascist, no exception.

THERE WERE NO NICE LEADERS.

None. Political correcness did not exist.

Stalin was just better at being evil because he had a large industrial base and the world's biggest army to work with.

MEGR

08-22-2007, 01:37 AM

Take a look at US history books do they teach the Armerican children what US did in Vieatnam how they bomed they killed hundred of thousends of civilians or what they did in hiroshima/nagasaki?

Absolutely. I was taught about My Lai, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, how people were redlisted by Mcarthy in the 50's, slavery, atrocities against the Indians and Japanese, Abu Ghraib, riots galore, lynchings, the KKK, crime in the early 20th century, etc., etc.

I don't know much about Russian textbooks, and I won't pretend that I do. However, in the US, we are well aware of the bad things we've done. Doesn't mean I don't love my country.

WKD

08-22-2007, 02:13 AM

No doubt the 2 governments had plenty in common. Along with many governments in the world at that time.

I wonder how Britain and France behaved in regards to their colonies? Free candy and Free elections as usual? Or brutality and dictatorship?

Well, India was granted independance in 1948, Australia, New Zealand and Canada became dominions peacefully. There was a lot of bloodshed and famine in India but it worked out peacefully enough in the end (although there was a lot of internal violence after independance). The Boers had a bad time of it but then South Africa became a republic after a while. Most of the bad stuff happened in the 19th century, during which time Russia was an exceptionally autocratic empire and somewhat brutal empire under the Romanovs. The thing is though, why are you comparing how they treated their colonies and how the Soviet Union treated it's own populace? Because the French, the British and the Americans weren't purging their own populations at any time throughout the 20th century.

Kap2406

08-22-2007, 02:29 AM

I went to Russian school in mid-late 90's. The second world war was covered based on specific battles (Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk, etc), with minor mention of allied envolvement (Sicily in particular, I might have missed a class when/if they mentioned the D-Day). We also had a pretty thorough discussion about 20th conference of CPSU and Stalin's cult reported by Kruschev.
I also came across a few American textbooks - very minor mention of Eastern front and SU envolvement in the war. Main topics were discussed: Extermination of Jews, Diary of Anne Frank, and D-day being described as the most important battle of WW2.

P.S. Besides, if you want to compare Stalin's influence before and after 1956 (Kruschev's report), you can look no further than military parades or other significant celebrations of Soviet era - before 1956 the were plenty of posters of Stalin and Lenin, after the were posters of Lenin, Engels, and Marx... And I believe Stalin's body was removed from mausolium shortly after 20th conference of CPSU.

Teme

08-22-2007, 02:51 AM

I would like to see some credible research supporting these "widely accepted" numbers. Preferrably from a source that bases his findings on studies of the actual NKVD/MGB/MVD archives and not estimates taken from other unsubstantiated sources.

From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge

During 1937-1938 according to the soviet archives
NKVD arrested 1,548,366 people in 2 year period
Executed 681,692 people in 2 year period
Deaths ~ 950,000...1,200,000

Source:
http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/ELM-Rep...Statistics.pdf (http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/ELM-Repression_Statistics.pdf)

Breakfast in Vegas

08-22-2007, 03:15 AM

Take a look at US history books do they teach the Armerican children what US did in Vieatnam how they bomed they killed hundred of thousends of civilians or what they did in hiroshima/nagasaki?

Actually, yes they did cover such subjects... not to mention slavery, genocide against Indians and many other unpretty parts of American history. Some historical aspects were completely misrepresented, for example little is mentioned of Russia's massive part in fighting WWII, but our studying of history is quite self-critical.

Digimon

08-22-2007, 03:39 AM

My two cents...

I guess it was inevitable that the scandal about the history books would come up, and I am glad that it did. I think that this time, Western media is not that far off, although, it did leave out that Putin stated that there should be no imposition of a state version of history on students or teachers, and that he primarily had a problem with the disparity of history books and perspectives and lack of a clear and common methodology and standards in writing history textbooks. Many of these claims, however, seem to be in conflict with what was being discussed during this meeting with the scholars and teachers when this issue came up. (Source: http://www.kommersant.ru/doc.aspx?DocsID=776927)

I also think that everyone, Russians and not, should be aware that it was a scandal - not only many of the history scholars, but most of the intellectual elite had met the invasion of their turf with hostility (Source:http://www.ng.ru/politics/2007-07-05/3_pozor.html). The reaction in the news media (not the TV broadcasters) was also very divided.

The problem that is being discussed here – whether Stalin can be viewed in positive light - is quite besides the real issues. There are two such issues. First is the issue of the right of the government to dictate history, or framework for a normative evaluation of events, to scholars, and therefore, to civil society. No democratic government can interfere in such manner with the civil society, because it is another case of the tail, i.e. elected government, wagging the dog, the electorate. Depending on how thorough-going and successful such attempts are, a given elected government might perpetually remain in power by framing the evaluation of the events of the majority..

Indeed, when the current administration of Ukraine managed to change the history textbooks to reflect the events of the “Orange Revolution” as a victory for democracy, something with which half of Ukraine’s population would strongly disagree, the same TV stations that endorsed Putin’s initiative, mocked Ukraine. They were, however, right only the first time – history cannot be a hostage to electoral cycles. Moreover, the state in the face of presidentail administration, has neither the competency, nor the moral authority to make such decisions. History and evaluations are the result of a certain consensus among scholars and within the academia, and it cannot be shaped to serve the interests of any group without becoming a tool of control.

The second issue is that history is not about evaluations, it is only about facts and the theoretical explanations of events. Evaluations belong to normative rather than descriptive disciplines – ethics not history. History answers to the questions “what was?”, or “what happened?” not “what is good?”, or “what is right?”. Unfortunately, in Russia, history traditionally played the role of carrying and propagating the ideology. Philosophically Russians had never distinguished between facts and norms, history and ethics – hence this insane search for a new National Idea, new, all absorbing metaphysics. If the administration wants to influence or stimulate normative behavior, they should introduce ethic classes and leave history alone.

lightfire

08-22-2007, 04:10 AM

Here's what a few people seem to realise. Up until about 1945, everyone and their dog was a brutal fascist, no exception.

wow..
That pretty much sums up the general oppinion - if you're not supporting our possition, you must be a fashist.. Just like I said before..

pointless

Snoshi

08-22-2007, 04:24 AM

Kilgor

08-22-2007, 06:13 AM

From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge

During 1937-1938 according to the soviet archives
NKVD arrested 1,548,366 people in 2 year period
Executed 681,692 people in 2 year period
Deaths ~ 950,000...1,200,000

Source:
http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/ELM-Rep...Statistics.pdf (http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/ELM-Repression_Statistics.pdf)

Richard Overy and Simon Sebag Montefiore both quote the 680-700k mark for the great terror.

Doublethinker

08-22-2007, 06:55 AM

When I studied at school (early 90s), I loved history lessons the most. I still remember our textbooks - some were outdated (from the Soviet times), so the teacher just told us to skip some parts and ignore some notions - understanding of critical approach to sources came in our youth ;) .

WWII was presented as a chain of most important battles on the Eastern front, with some mentioning of the Allies.Discussions also involved such topics as why Allies invaded Western Europe so late ( I remember, I f*cked up big time when I said that Allies invaded Normandy in Norway) , were they just trying to prevent Stalin from winning total victory, etc. Stalin himself was critisized sharply for his politics, as well as Soviet activities and leaders. But there was no fanaticism, no self-flagellation which many German and american books covering Nazi and Indian/American history respectively suffer from.

But then again, that was under Yeltsin, - last time I picked a Russian textbook on history (a year ago or so), I almost threw up how full of cheapest propagands and cliche it was.

Lokos

08-22-2007, 07:44 AM

As you are certainly aware, political science from Friedrich to the late Hannah Arendt has identified numerous parallels and fundamental similarities between the two systems, and from a historical perspective I tend very much to support these assertions.

Okay. I, too, can derive parallels between the modern United States and the Third Reich. Parallels are great things. But therein lies the difference between equating the Soviet Union with the Third Reich and drawing parallels. Especially since it's, essentially, a chronologically farcical idea - i.e. equating the Soviet Union (1921-1991) to the Third Reich (1933-1945), when, in fact, you are only taking into account Soviet history until 1953. Equate Stalin to Hitler. That's fine. But let's not equate the Soviet state with that of the Nazi state, as a whole.

You need to read this book, which I have mentioned a few times.

THE DICTATORS: HITLER'S GERMANY AND STALIN'S RUSSIA
By Richard Overy

To support Indiana's point and to negate mine - which was that one should not compare the Soviet Union as a whole (that is to say, its entire historical lifespan) to the Third Reich - Kilgor pulls 'Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia' out? Congratulations.

Constructive discussion is most difficult when one party retains this infantile notion that Stalin = the Soviet Union. The Soviets got over the cult of Stalin long before you gentlemen ever will.

Lokos

California Joe

08-22-2007, 11:10 AM

As far as teaching history goes, WWII could take 4 years of high school all by itself to do it justice and cover everything. No matter what country was teaching it.

Lokos, I think I've asked you before but weren't there new figures released on all Soviet casualties in WWII, including civilians, in the last few years when they were declassified that amounted to nearly double what was previously thought? I remember reading that the rationale for downplaying the numbers right after the war was to not appear weak in case the former allies decided to go after the Soviets themselves...

Lokos

08-22-2007, 11:34 AM

Lokos, I think I've asked you before but weren't there new figures released on all Soviet casualties in WWII, including civilians, in the last few years when they were declassified that amounted to nearly double what was previously thought? I remember reading that the rationale for downplaying the numbers right after the war was to not appear weak in case the former allies decided to go after the Soviets themselves...

CJ, all up, such figures would amount to something like 54 million dead. It's... not likely. But who knows? Where did you find the figures? Military casualties - alone - were 7 million KIA (other categories added up to a further 5 million military dead - mostly POWs). Krivosheev collated them from Front reports, which were pretty accurate.

Civilian... No one will ever have an exact number. But the most cogent studies have been demographic.

Lokos

California Joe

08-22-2007, 11:39 AM

I can't remember where I read the reports, for all I know it was in one of the threads on here. The gist of the reports were more about western historians having access to more files than ever before and their shock that the Soviet people had sustained far higher casualties than were previously known outside of the Soviet Union.

Lokos

08-22-2007, 11:45 AM

It's something worth looking into!

:)

Thanks for pointing it out.

Lokos

Kilgor

08-22-2007, 10:46 PM

Okay. I, too, can derive parallels between the modern United States and the Third Reich. Parallels are great things. But therein lies the difference between equating the Soviet Union with the Third Reich and drawing parallels. Especially since it's, essentially, a chronologically farcical idea - i.e. equating the Soviet Union (1921-1991) to the Third Reich (1933-1945), when, in fact, you are only taking into account Soviet history until 1953. Equate Stalin to Hitler. That's fine. But let's not equate the Soviet state with that of the Nazi state, as a whole.

To support Indiana's point and to negate mine - which was that one should not compare the Soviet Union as a whole (that is to say, its entire historical lifespan) to the Third Reich - Kilgor pulls 'Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia' out? Congratulations.

Constructive discussion is most difficult when one party retains this infantile notion that Stalin = the Soviet Union. The Soviets got over the cult of Stalin long before you gentlemen ever will.

Lokos

Once you get over IJ's mistake of not mentioning the time-frame of comparison, do tell us why the SU and Germany shouldn't compared when ruled by like minded tyrants.

PS, since your a intelligent fellow.. you'll understand this is not about Russians "getting over" the Cult of Stalin, its about the gradual rehabilitation of his image and the deliberate neglect of his atrocities. When you have leaders like Putin who can't even admit that the Soviet Union annexed the Baltics, its hardly surprising. No one can deny that modern Russia has a serious problem with acknowledging its past.

Kap2406

08-23-2007, 12:37 AM

. When you have leaders like Putin who can't even admit that the Soviet Union annexed the Baltics, its hardly surprising. No one can deny that modern Russia has a serious problem with acknowledging its past.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=DFYfOfowEHk

Sorry, Kilgor, it's in Russian, maybe you could get somebody to translate for you....

Ранее президент РФ Владимир Путин заявил, что вопрос об извинениях России за якобы оккупацию балтийских стран был закрыт еще в 1989 году с постановлением Съезда народных депутатов, осуждающим пакт Молотова-Риббентропа. "Что еще мы можем сказать более точно и ясно по этому вопросу? Или вы хотите, чтобы мы делали это каждый год? Мы считаем, что этот вопрос закрыт", - сказал Путин 10 мая на пресс-конференции после саммита Россия-ЕС в Москве.
Отвечая на вопрос, по каким причинам Россия не хочет извиниться перед странами Балтии, Владимир Путин сказал: "Возьмите, пожалуйста, постановление съезда Народных депутатов 1989 года, где черным по белому написано: "Съезд народных депутатов осуждает пакт Молотова-Риббентропа и считает его юридически несостоятельным. Он не отражал мнения советского народа и является личным делом Сталина и Гитлера".
По словам президента РФ, не стоит постоянно поднимать вопрос об "оккупации" Балтии Советским Союзом. "Не надо позволять мертвым хватать нас за рукава и мешать нам двигаться вперед", - заявил президент России на пресс-конференции 10 мая.

Kilgor

08-23-2007, 01:19 AM

Lokos

08-23-2007, 07:13 AM

do tell us why the SU and Germany shouldn't compared when ruled by like minded tyrants.

Because, for the larger part of its history, the Soviet Union was not ruled by 'like minded tyrants'. Refute this simple proposition, if you can. If not, the issue is closed - wholesale comparisons of two states are impossible. One can only compare individual regimes.

Lokos

Xaito

08-23-2007, 01:37 PM

Interesting read from someone who was there......

... if youre interested in opinions of people who were there... listen to what some of our russian members have to say

Flamming_Python

08-23-2007, 02:55 PM

Google does a good enough job. I think this news article is based on this conference.

"Russia denies accusations that the Soviet Union illegally annexed the three republics, saying the Baltic governments of the time had willingly invited Soviet troops into their countries and agreed to join."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/05/06/news/putin.php

Like I said, he does not few it as a occupation. Denoucing the pact is one thing, but he clearly cannot admit what it was.

Whatever Kilgor.

I remember Putin responded to such a question from an Estonian reporter in a conference a while ago. His answer approached the fact that the Soviet Union had already denounced in the late 80's; the occupation of the Baltic Republics and the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact that caused them as the private deal of Hitler and Stalin. He then berated the reporter for getting her facts wrong, asking her how many times he has to repeat this historical detail in order for it to sink in.

As for other Russian officials, generals, etc... well perhaps they have a different position on it. But it is not the position of the Russian government.

Xaito

08-23-2007, 03:22 PM

roflroflroflroflrofl How can you honestly compare the two......many of the "Russian" members dont even live in Russia including you!

This woman was closer to the ruling class in Russia than all of the posters on this forum, and you just toss her off, that just goes to prove her point.

I said what some of our russian members say - not all of them.
Besides does not living in Russia anymore change the fact that some have lived there for a long time and made own experiences?
Its you who disregards the opinions of people with first hand experience because most of them don't fit in your narrow minded agenda.
Imo its very absurd seeing an American making a remote diagnosis about Russian people without having a clue about Russia or its culture and people - and the most rediculous part: then trying to make clear to Russians how they think, who they like etc etc and not accepting it when you're told that you talk BS.

Igor01

08-23-2007, 03:36 PM

......many of the "Russian" members dont even live in Russia....

Does that mean that you would similarily dismiss an opinion on Britain expressed by a Brit living the US? Or account of Poland by a Pole in the UK? I'd think that listening to them could be more valuable than reading a bunch of Wiki articles on the net or whatever passes for "expertise" these days, wouldn't you?

AlterMega

08-23-2007, 03:57 PM

Does that mean that you would similarily dismiss an opinion on Britain expressed by a Brit living the US? Or account of Poland by a Pole in the UK?
Thats far from a rational comparison.Most of you hardcore soviet fan boy's aren't ex-pats,nor have you stepped foot in Russia.

California Joe

08-23-2007, 04:17 PM

Forget it.

Until you get mad History Professor skills like Lokos, your opinions are based on nothing more than blind emotion.

Xaito

08-23-2007, 04:23 PM

roflroflroflroflrofl...............Stop it your killing me.roflrofl.........I have made no "remote disgnosis" about Russia I posted a Well written article by a women who not only lived in Russia but was part of the Russian elite, something the nashi crowd on this forum cant come close to compare themselves with.
now you're making remote diagnosis of the russian members here too... great.
You must be part of some elite too... im just not sure yet of what but I have my theories...

Thats far from a rational comparison.Most of you hardcore soviet fan boy's aren't ex-pats,nor have you stepped foot in Russia.
you call people who like the country where they were born and grew up in or still living in fanboys? :)
In case you didn't notice - most russians here are just military fans like most other users too who come here to have fun, look at photos etc - how does not agreeing to BS that some people here post about Russia/Soviet Union make them Soviet fanboys?

RomanS

08-23-2007, 04:27 PM

you want something better from a MP.net poster.....you sir should write comedy

that includes you

Mamont

08-23-2007, 04:28 PM

I posted a Well written article by a women who not only lived in Russia but was part of the Russian elite, something the nashi crowd on this forum cant come close to compare themselves with.
This woman haven't wrote a single good word about post-soviet Russia(and SU for that matter) from the time of her emigration to US in 1991. She called Eltsin as "the king of russian democracy", that alone speaks for her very clearly.

Its all in her words RUSSIAN words, from some one who grew up in the shadow of the Kremlin whose grandfather held the world by the short hairs in 1963 and you want something better from a MP.net poster.....you sir should write comedy
You might want to actually learn something about person on whose works you want to relay your opinions on. She grew far from common people and those in power, and just because her grandfather was once a ruler doesn't qualify her as a true and only specialist in russian history.

RomanS

08-23-2007, 04:28 PM

Thats far from a rational comparison.Most of you hardcore soviet fan boy's aren't ex-pats,nor have you stepped foot in Russia.

explain yourself please

Xaito

08-23-2007, 04:39 PM

Forget it.

Until you get mad History Professor skills like Lokos, your opinions are based on nothing more than blind emotion.

unlike the opinion of Khrushcheva right?

My great-grandfather tried to begin the process of freeing Russia from Stalin's bloody past, but the nation has never fully dealt with the crimes of Stalinism
poor great-grandfather.

Xaito

08-23-2007, 04:44 PM

It doesn't take a genius to see who and what the pack of nashi people are on this forum....

please tell me - who are the pack of nashi people here?
you probably meant it doesn't take a genius making stupid claims without backing them up? :D

RomanS

08-23-2007, 04:46 PM

OOOOOOOOOOOH I'm cut......I just love your input its so insightful. Cant attack the article, attack the man.......NICE.....

you should take a serious look at your input in Russia related threads.

So how would you like to see Russia to fit your needs? Let me hear your ideas.

koozya

08-23-2007, 04:48 PM

looks like Trace knows more about Russia then Russians themselves. Good job.
PS. I lived in Russia 3/4 of my life, and then some "not so smart" poster on forum tells me that I cant speak about Russia, because I don't live there anymore, it just makes me laugh at knowing how pathetic he is.

RomanS

08-23-2007, 04:49 PM

WOW Trace,

You just got told by 3 Russians.
I guess all 3 of us must be commie fanboys, since we dont agree with your cold war bull **** attitude

kalkun

08-23-2007, 04:51 PM

you call people who like the country where they were born and grew up in

Sort of OT but why have they left?

RomanS

08-23-2007, 05:02 PM

This is not about me and my needs, its about the article I posted, did you read it? if you did, what dont you agree with tell me what in the article you find wrong ........if you didnt read it then you prove my point that you would rather attack then learn or think about something new.This woman knows more about the Russian people and whats happened to them then all the nashi fanboys on this thread.

UNDERSTAND?

I tried reading it, but when she started speaking for the entire RUSSIAN population, I stoped.

Dr. Nina L. Khrushcheva is a Russian American professor of media

According to most of the Cold War warriors. Russian/Soviet person, who no longer lives in Russia/Soviet Union, should have no word in what is happening in Russia. Your beloved author, is a Russian American. She should be the last person to speak about Russian affairs, and especially saying **** like " WHY RUSSIA LOVES STALIN"

Mamont

08-23-2007, 05:03 PM

This woman knows more about the Russian people and whats happened to them then all the nashi fanboys on this thread. Oh, since when living abroad and supporting Russia is wrong, but living abroad and criticising Russia is good?

Speaking about article - nearly every sentence is wrong. It's useless to fight beliefs. Especially self-constructed.

Speaking about knowledge - how many times she visited Russia and live among common people?

koozya

08-23-2007, 05:05 PM

"nashi fanboys on this thread."

UNDERSTAND?

pathetic.

PS. netrogai gavno , vonyat nebudet.

RomanS

08-23-2007, 05:05 PM

OH MY GOD 3 fanboys told me................."take me to the bank", my cold war? It was an article written by the grand daughter of Nikita K. not my cold war...You cant find fault with the article so you attack the messanger.....what a bunch of nashi snakes.

AGAIN

Dr. Nina L. Khrushcheva is a Russian American professor of media

According to most of the Cold War warriors. Russian/Soviet person, who no longer lives in Russia/Soviet Union, should have no word in what is happening in Russia. Your beloved author, is a Russian American. She should be the last person to speak about Russian affairs, and especially saying **** like " WHY RUSSIA LOVES STALIN"

Xaito

08-23-2007, 05:07 PM

Sort of OT but why have they left?

I'd think there are different reasons for everybody don't you think?

I can tell you why my family moved to germany though:
1993 they didn't know what will happen in the country - everything including civil war was possible. My father's family were ethnic germans who lived for generations in Russia but did get the chance by germany to go and live there - thats what some of my fathers brothers did and our family followed their lead because my parents thought we (their children) would have it better growing up in stability (my parents sure didn't have it better by moving) - if my parents knew beforehand how things would turn out we probably wouldn't have moved.

RomanS

08-23-2007, 05:07 PM

pathetic.

PS. netrogai gavno , vonyat nebudet.

Can someone explain to me what is Nashi?
I havent kept up with the special interest and hobby groups of Russian Federation lately. Seriously speaking. Who are they?

I was in Russia in 2003, didnt have time to go and research. Going to Russia this year soon, probably wont have time again. But who are they?

Mamont

08-23-2007, 05:15 PM

Please enlighten me on your take that nearly EVERY sentence is wrong? Were you right next to her when this all happened? What exactly happened?

Were you in the room when Nikita K made his Stalin speech? Erm, i don't actually understand where are you pointing, but she was born in 1963. Nikita, her gandfather, was removed from command in 1964 and died in 1971 when she was 8. So i take it, that you think that a young girl spoked with her grandfather about stalin's legacy?

Xaito

08-23-2007, 05:17 PM

This woman knows more about the Russian people and whats happened to them then all the nashi fanboys on this thread.

UNDERSTAND?

you sound like a broken record with your nashi, nashi, nashi ;)

I can't speak for everybody on this thread but my family has still good ties to family and friends in russia - we visit them, they visit us, we talk - and most of us from experience (unlike you).
I have uncles living in russia in different social classes ranging from poor to very rich (the latter was poor when we left and now very rich - I think he's one of the people who knows best what happened to Russia and its people btw ;) )

RomanS

08-23-2007, 05:18 PM

Gee couldnt come up with anything about the article? I guess you find it easier to attack to hide your laziness about not reading it, or does the truth in the article make you uneasy? If it did I doubt you would admit it, that wouldnt be RussiaStRoNG111**.

what the fuk are you talking about

I told you above, shes a Russian American. She doesnt live in Russia. Its her opinion vs mine. I dont care if shes related to Krushev, or Tsar Ivan the Seventh. I dont love Stalin, and never did. I dont know him, and never did.

Once again, through your thick wall, Im gonna tell you that I dont support Stalin and what he did. Don't paint all Russians here with some bull**** paint of yours, and call us "Nashi".

I asked to explain to me what Nashi are. I seriously dont know who they are. ANd what do you asnwer me with??????

Gee couldnt come up with anything about the article? I guess you find it easier to attack to hide your laziness about not reading it, or does the truth in the article make you uneasy? If it did I doubt you would admit it, that wouldnt be RussiaStRoNG111**

IM done with you man. And I suggest to other Russians, dont waste your time.

Igor01

08-23-2007, 05:19 PM

This is not about me and my needs, its about the article I posted......This woman knows more about the Russian people and whats happened to them then all the nashi fanboys on this thread

Trace, the article you posted is an interesting read, but if people disagree with it there is no need to take it personally. It's just that anybody who grew up in USSR knows that Kruschev was a complex character who lived in very complex times. It is true that his reforms were absolutely vital and allowed the Soviet people breathe with more freedom than any other time since 1928.

But we also know that Kruschev's own involvement with purges in Moscow in 1937 and Ukraine in 1938 and the fact that his signature can be found on thousands of execution sentences are often ignored by historians. He often acted on a simple agenda - distance himself from Stalin and attribute all the crimes of the state-run terror system to Uncle Joe personally and a few of those who were not on Kruschev's team, just remember how quickly Beriya was apprehended, accused of being a "British spy", found guilty and executed immediately on such a ridiculous charge. Despite having full access to the repression statistics he later exaggerated the victim toll greatly in his memoirs to give additional importance to his achievement in destroying Stalin's personality cult and again reinforce the point that he apparently had nothing to do with the reign of terror in the late 30's.

My point is - an account from his great-granddaughter cannot be impartial and thus has to be taken with a very generous serving of salt, especially if you know of the man a bit more than just the fact that he ended Stalinism. I would be, for example, just as weary reading an apology of El'tsin's legacy by one of his relatives having lived through El'tsin's reforms and seeing my country go down the toilet.

Hilbert

08-23-2007, 05:38 PM

Gee couldnt come up with anything about the article? I guess you find it easier to attack to hide your laziness about not reading it, or does the truth in the article make you uneasy? If it did I doubt you would admit it, that wouldnt be RussiaStRoNG111**.

Trace, instead of blatantly attacking Roman for asking a legitimate question, why not go ahead and explain "Nashi" for the rest of us who aren't blessed with your insight on how Russians feel about their past.

Also, please explain to me how that writer in the article speaks for millions upon millions of people.

If your going to say that Roman and the other Russian members here love Stalin because they are Russian, I guess I must admire Andrew Jacksons genocide and cleansing of the native americans because I am American; Heck, by your logic Soviet Infantryman during World War Two must have loved and respected their Commissars. :roll:

I'm an American and even I'm getting tired of listening to these constant attacks and accusations at Russia by people who still live in the fog of the Cold War.

Does this make me some sort of "Fan Boy" too?

Kilgor

08-23-2007, 05:44 PM

Because, for the larger part of its history, the Soviet Union was not ruled by 'like minded tyrants'. Refute this simple proposition, if you can. If not, the issue is closed - wholesale comparisons of two states are impossible. One can only compare individual regimes.

Lokos

That is what we are talking about, comparison of both regimes and leaders.

And as you'd be aware, Stalin was general secretary for over 30 years. No other man enjoyed such power and had such a direct impact of the history of the Soviet Union.

Madlad

08-23-2007, 05:47 PM

It all comes down to a matter of perspectives. Some people, thinks Stalin was great. In their eyes, he saved soviet people from Nazis, he improved economy, education system, etc... Anyone born or growing up in SU during 40-60s, its rather natural for their generation to think that way of Stalin.

On the other hand you ask a person of a Hebrew heritage who grew up 40-60s and they will tell you Stalin is the spawn of the devil. Very likely they will have someone in their immediate or extended family who suffered first hand during "Stalinist Era".

Xaito

08-23-2007, 05:49 PM

I guss your English isnt as good as your Russian, She lived in Russia until 1991, is educated and again was closer to the throne than your collection of buds will ever be....you gotta give credit for being there, seeing it, living it, and how cool Nikita's grand daughter, that fat little bastard had my ass scared as PFC in the USMC in 1963.

And what are you Russian American? if so according to you I shouldnt believe what you say. Russian? are you going back to stay? American? if so why in hell do you buy into this RussiaStRoNG1111 line, isnt the US good enough for you?

I never said you supported Stalin I JUST LOVE THE WAY YOU GUYS LOVE TO PUT WORDS IN PEOPLES MOUTH. I just asked you to read the article and tell me what you disagree with which you havent...Oh well your loss....

I quote your own words:

How can you honestly compare the two......many of the "Russian" members dont even live in Russia including you!
including Khrustcheva - what RomanS did was using your own words against you and you didn't even notice... or maybe you change your opinion to whatever suits you best at the moment?

Igor01

08-23-2007, 05:51 PM

Just to add a bit to my post above -

The woman's opinion on Putin is also hardly representative, the majority of Russians don't give a rat's ass who the President is as long as the slide into the abyss we've seen in the 90's doesn't resume (or accelerate, it's hard to tell these days with all the smoke and mirrors). There is not much reverence for Putin, nor there is much hate for him, most people simply feel that he lucked out by being the President at a time when Russia's economy became more or less solvent, besides the man clearly knows how to exploit the feeling of frustration and disillusion so wide-spread after the catastrophe of the 90's.

Oh, and to address the post that started this thread - Putin's Russia does not have an official ideology or a clear set of goals and for a very good reason - the current regime doesn't need them, it's much easier to use strong rethoric and periodically pull out a piece of old Soviet heritage (which wasn't all bad) to give people a sense of hope that things will get better and that their children will live in a normal country. So all alarmist stories of Putin sliding into authoritarianism have nothing in common with reality (they sell well to Western news agencies though), the real threat comes from ordinary Russians who were marginalized and discarded by "new democratic Russia", ethnic Russians who had to flee from persecution or unrest in non-Russian regions and newly created states and those radicals who feel that the leadership sold out Russia's interests and only "direct action" can stop the pompous and cynical circus.

DRA

08-23-2007, 05:52 PM

I posted a Well written article by a women who not only lived in Russia but was part of the Russian elite, something the nashi crowd on this forum cant come close to compare themselves with.

Michael Moore also lives in the US and is also a very capable writer, so I guess everything what he says about US people around the world should accept as holly truth?
In every country, society or even in any place of business there are those (employees, citizens, members, etc) who are unhappy with the current leadership and on outside there always will be a fertile soil for their preachings. Most of people in the West are historicaly negatively predespositioned towards Russia and Russians so naturaly they are going to be very receptive to things that fit their traditional views.
Despite articles like the one above, Putin have been bathing in the 70% approval rating for the most of his presidency, what other leaders can brag about the same?

Writers and journalists are just like us - they simply express their opinions and views in their articles and books. And from what I discovered a lot of times their opinions change with the ones of their employers.

In the end you would be foolish to disregard opinions of many just because you don't like what they are saying. You not listening to what they are saying is not going to change the facts. And the facts are that good things are happening to Russia now and Putins presidency will be remembered in positive terms unlike others...

Besides you should be appreciative to the fact that Russian speaking members here are trying to set the facts straight and make you understand, although most, if not all, of their efforts seem to be in vain.
The reason why most of the Russians that post here don't live in Russia itself is rather obvious - believe it or not, very few Russians who permanently live in Russia speak english or familiar how deeply rooted western misconceptions about Russia are.

MZKT

08-23-2007, 05:53 PM

Dont know you, dont care to know you, good by. Another one who didnt read the article and is just making a noise like a fart in the bath tub.

That's all you get? An article from a woman who earns her money by signing her anti-russian articles with the famous name of her grandfather?
USA also don't look well from Michael Moore's or Hanoi Jane's books/articles/speeches.

Mamont

08-23-2007, 06:00 PM

Maybe it's a troll or an "attention whore"(is this right term?)?.. Topic already revolves only around him with nothing good appearing.

Kippari

08-23-2007, 06:09 PM

Laworkerbee

08-23-2007, 06:13 PM

nashi snakes.

rofl I need to remember that one

RomanS

08-23-2007, 06:18 PM

rofl I need to remember that one

Snakes on MpNet

http://overthetop.beloblog.com/archives/snakes

Xaito

08-23-2007, 06:32 PM

Good post! Putin should get rid of the Nashi youth and other extreme Russia Strong Crews tho. Too much of that attitude will get you alienated from the western world, which isn't necessarily good for Russia, economy wise.

I know what you mean but the idea of expecting Putin to get rid of his supporters is like asking of him to get rid of himself because western media doesn't like him ;)

Why do most of the Russians who post here dont live in Russia? Its not obvious to me spell it out....
I bet you have your theories - please share them with us and when you're at it please tell me too why its so popular for lots of german people to move to foreign countries at the moment? Its becoming a real problem and you seem to be really good with remote diagnosis so maybe you can find the (one and only) reason that our government can't find and help us out?

Flamming_Python

08-23-2007, 06:33 PM

Bloody Hell this topic is a warzone. Guys i'd like to make a suggestion; how about we argue about this nuclear bo... I mean article posted bit by bit by the individual points it makes, rather than make simple sweeping generalisations such as "IT'S ALL CORRECT, AS RUSSIA STRONG CREW DISAGREES WITH IT!" or even "BIGGEST PIECE OF TRASH EVER WRITTEN BY A TRAITOR!"

Personally, I can see some good points in it. But the author makes too many sweeping generalisations, and some plain old misinterpretations. She seems to have an intimate knowledge of many aspects of Russia and it's people, but at the same time makes clumsy mistakes in her analyis that usually one only expects of Westerners p-)

I'd also challenge the whole basis of the arguement, that of the "fact" that Russians really do seem to be warming up to Stalin. I never trust opinion polls too much, especially in the former USSR. All too often they shown one trend/conclusion one week, and the opposite one the next. I'm sure I could find one that says half of Russian youth admire Hitler. Does that mean half of Russians admire Stalin, and the other half admire Hitler? Damn, we're in trouble :)

Above all though, the article keeps refering to "Russians think this", "Russians are like that". Which Russians? Americans all support Bush. Americans all oppose the Iraq war... :cantbeli:

Despite popular misconceptions, Russians are like any other people; they have a plularity of views, although with a much higher than average Political Consiousness (and in some cases Militancy), a legacy of both the high standards of education and the terrible shock of economic and political instability not so long ago. Then again, I saw an opinion poll not too long ago about how half of Russian youth is politically apathetic :D

As such, it must be asked again, which Russians? The opinion poll, if it can be trusted, refers to the young generation. Hardly representitive of all Russians as the article is sometimes phrased to imply. It's more unlikely someone of the Perestroika generation has positive words to say about Stalin, than it is for some of the younger guys & gals. Secound of all, the opinion poll to which the article is refering to, I believe references only about 40-50% of the young population of Russia as having at least 1 good word to say about Stalin, although I don't remember the figures too well, so I could be off on this. I myself say that Stalin led to some positive development for Russia. But that doesn't mean I like or admire him as such. Read my post earlier on this topic.

No more silly **** fights like this please. Let's behave and discuss this like Adults.

Xaito

08-23-2007, 06:40 PM

only about 40-50% of the young population of Russia as having at least 1 good word to say about Stalin
Is that something special?
From my experience lots of russians don't see Stalin in black or white - just as they don't do with Hitler and other people.
So naturally lots of people will have 1 good word to say about Stalin.

Flamming_Python

08-23-2007, 06:45 PM

Is that something special?
From my experience lots of russians don't see Stalin in black or white - just as they don't do with Hitler and other people.
So naturally lots of people will have 1 good word to say about Stalin.

I edited my post already, as I forgot to add a bit to the end last time. Yes of course you're right.

Many of my friends see Stalin as someone who was completely unneccessery. Others don't deny he was a brutal person, but argue that his rule was neccessery for the USSR to prevail in WW2.

Igor01

08-23-2007, 06:47 PM

Yes an article from the grand daughter cant be impartial, but you must admit it gives some insight on to the Russian problem that you dont see on this forum. But remember the article was not a white wash of Nikita it was why the Putin is trying to dust off that moldy old corpse Stalin and remount him in Red Square.

I understand your point. In this particular case, however, I think that you accept the article without much critisism because it seems to fit well into the pattern you believe to be true. You are, of course, entitled to such an opinion and if I were to rely on mainly Western accounts of modern Russia I'd probably share the same sentiment.

I'd agree with you if I weren't Russian myself and hadn't had the very educational experience of having lived through all the wonderful phases - "Stability", "Developed Socialism" (later known as "Stagnation"), then "Acceleration" (quickly forgotten in the West) and "Perestroika" (now forgotten too and represented mostly by artefacts like "genuine KGB flasks" and Soviet-era "Socialist Shock Worker" pins on eBay), then the "Putch", "Democratisation", "Market Reforms" (don't ask Russians what they call this one, you'd have to heavily censor the exquisite terminology for this period), "Red-Brown Threat" (when El'tsin took a dump on the Constitution and used tanks and Alfa spetsnaz as his last argument), the infamous "Default" followed by "Economic Rise" and what now is stamped as the "Rebirth".

I've also see how far too many of my countrymen (present or former, no matter) with a very good nose for where the wind blows at any given time and a complete lack of moral guidance participate in very lucrative business of "confirming" the West's worst fears. While these self-proclaimed "pundits" milk their Western audiences who pay well for the refreshingly stimulating horror stories and bad fortune telling, Putin continues to run Russia's engine on the vapours of what used to be in the Soviet fuel tank (figuratively speaking). If he occasionally uses the good old Soviet honk to cheer the passengers up and stop them looking out the window and wondering where the hell the train is headed, that doesn't mean that the man is on his way to declare himself an Emperor a-la Stalin. Russia is not USSR and now is not 1928, not to mention that Putin does not have a handful of determination and character that Stalin had truckloads of. All of Putin's rhetoric is strictly for internal consumption is just as dangerous to the West as a computer generated Godzilla to a bunch of movie goers.

Igor01

08-23-2007, 06:53 PM

I know what you mean but the idea of expecting Putin to get rid of his supporters is like asking of him to get rid of himself because western media doesn't like him ;)

Nashi was the Kremlin's contingency plan to counter a threat of events similar to Ukrainian "orange revolution". The threat has since disappeard so now the Nashi need to justify their existance (translation: funding) and they have began positioning themselves as a "patriotic democrats" with occasional idiotic PR stunts which are inteded to bring them media acknowledgement and popularity. They've failed on both counts so far, most people either never heard of them or ignore them because everybody knows that as soon as the Kremlin pulls the plug, this supposedly "grassroots" movement will vanish into the thin air.

For now the project is kept alive "just in case". Nashi leaders are pretty smart, they quickly sensed the turn that the political life in Russia seems to be taking - away from the discredited "democrats" towards the conservative "patriots". When the time comes, Nashi will want to occupy the comfy niche of the "patriotic" youth organization which will become the Kremlin's loyal alternative to the true patriots as well as various nationalist movements.

I am sure we will see lot of "patriotic" rhethoric from these clowns and some scandalous circus acts, but rest assured that this is an entirely artificial creation that will be just as harmless to its proclaimed "enemies" as it is noisy, and will only be around for as long as it's needed. Once the need disappears, Nashi will be discarded momentarily and without a second thought.

Alan

08-23-2007, 07:08 PM

I read the 'nashi'comments and I seriously had to laugh.

I tried to picture my hachik-face, "black-ass" Ossetian self in the 'nashi'...

and I burst out laughing. Spilled my blatsed Pepsi all over the table.. now I'm going to have to clean it.

DRA

08-23-2007, 07:26 PM

(not my a newsperson as you insinuate but a family member of the elite)
Family member of an elite?
Perhaps it is unknown to you but that family member hasn't lived in Russia in over 16 years. She also was 7 when her grandfather (Krushchev died), I believe it would be reasonable to suggest that she didn't have to too many deep philosophical conversations with him, wouldn't it?
Also in case you are not familiar with the circumstances of her grandfather leaving the office - he was deposed, which in USSR meant that his family and relatives were as close to the elite as an average factory worker.
So what makes you believe the person who hasn't lived in Russia since USSR times more than opinions of those who are frequently traveling to Russia and have family members living there besides your own prejudices?

that went against the gang mentality on this forum.
Not just this forum but against 75+% of Russian voting population that support Mr. Putin

Why do most of the Russians who post here dont live in Russia? Its not obvious to me spell it out....
It is called globalization.
Some of us, like for example Roman, posses very marketable skills and are highly thought of by the global companies.
Some of the Russians here had no choice as their families moved when they still were little.

In case you wonder about me - originally I was invited and paid to come to the US by your government. Later things got a lot more complicated because of the certain attachments but that is my personal business.

.................

Flamming_Python

08-23-2007, 08:12 PM

Hell I remember sitting on my Grandfathers knee well before I was seven and listening to his stories of the Ukraine. Plus my dad had a wealth of stories about my grandpa that he would tell and impress me with including the ones about our relatives in Siberia. So don't feed me that crap she was only seven, her family didn't disappear when her Grandpa died.

And what makes you so special to be able to talk about Russia? You don't live there now same as her, same as most of the other nashi fanboys on this forum. By your own words.........

Also as I told Igor the article was not a white wash of Nikita the fat bastard but a displaced Russian like the majority of the Russia StRoNg 111 crew on this forum who was closer to, more in tune with, the Russian of the day.

Let me ask you a question. If she really represents the majority of opinion in Russia, then why do so many disagree with her? Did Nashi send it's agents to brainwash Russians abroad as well as in Russia? I can certainly see her points but there are some fundamental flaws which I have already pointed out. If you wish to participate in an intellectual discussion with me, Igor, or anyone else who is actually making reasoned arguements, than I at least would welcome you do so.

Continuing as you are now; NASHI FANBOY NASHI FANBOY NASHI FANBOY! Doesn't exactly strengthen your case. If you have some deep intimate knowledge of Russia, perhaps that you got from your Ukrainian grandfather, than please share it with us. Otherwise maintain some respect and stop being so damn rude at the very least, even if you disagree completely. After all, whatever this woman who wrote the article may or may not know, the fact is that you know much less about Russia than the rest of us.

Most Russians on this forum reside in Russia, I think you'll find, but largely they reside in the Photos/Videos forum; in many cases their English is not good enough to participate in this sort of conversation. Furthermore, most of the Russians abroad you'll find on this forum, have left Russia before Nashi was set up, or indeed before you could hear anything on Moscow's streets other than endless Cynisism, Fatalism, and how much the country has gone down the drain (although all that is still very much present, only now there is at least some Pride and Optimism to balance it out).

You could say I represent that Optimism, or at very least the Pride. For me, there are more than enough Family Members, Western Journalists, Russian Journalists, etc... who already represent the Cynisism and Fatalism.

Xaito

08-23-2007, 08:24 PM

rofl"Globalization"......is that what tell call flee for a better life in Russia now.

excuse me but as long as you haven't tried how its like giving up your whole life to start from zero please shut up.

Indiana Jones

08-23-2007, 08:53 PM

Unless I am missing something, I am under a distinct impression that Zemskov relies on the numbers from the aforementioned report given to Khruschev in 1954. For example, in his article titled "Gulag - Historical and Sociological Aspect" he mentions the document (with other MVD reports prepared for Khruschev) without doubting the numbers provided in the report and even goes as far as stating the Kruschev in his memoirs knowingly contributed to the confusions surrounding Gulag statistics despite having been fully informed by MVD. The article (in Russian) can be found here: http://history.tuad.nsk.ru/Author/Russ/Z/Zemskov/Articles/ZEMSKOV.HTM There are a number of tables in it that sum up Zemskov's findings on varios aspects of Gulag such as inmate population dynamics over the years, the proportion of "politically repressed", ethnic composition etc. Zemskov's research is very thorough and unbiased (he wasn't even a Party member during the Soviet period of his scientific career which was a very rare thing to say the least).

I haven't read Rittenspom, but I'll look for his works on the net.
Igor, I referred to the joint article by Ritters****/Zemskov/***** published in the October 1993 edition of the American Historical Review. Unfortunately my Russian is rather underwhelming and not sufficient for scholarly publications, but I suspect heavily that the content of the article you provided will be similar or identical to the one I am referring to; The article in question can be reviewed in its entirety under the following link:http://www.etext.org/Politics/Staljin/Staljin/articles/AHR/AHR.html
I would appreciate if you could match and verify the respective figures. When reviewing the annual averages for the inmate population of the GULag, it must be taken into consideration however that they mask the extremely high fluctuation among the victims- under the Stalinist Aegis, an approximate, conservatively estimated total of 18 million individuals went through the system, if Applebaum is to be believed. These number however does not take into account the veritable score of individuals who died on transport or were sentenced to forced labour outside the GULag, not to speak of the deported Balts, Volga Germans, "Kulaks", etc which further considerably raises the total of forced labourers- which obviously too were victims of political repression just the same. In short, the issue at hand is utterly complex- questions of methodology and scope are of the utmost importance- and the accurate number of victims cannot possibly be established. But what can and must be ascertained is that the number of the victims of the GULag was considerably higher than a superficial glance at Zemskovs figures might suggest.

RomanS

08-23-2007, 09:05 PM

Guys come one seriously, stop replying to him. He wont change our view, and what we think about our birthplace. Enough already. Let him talk to himself here.

What ever, who ever writes about Russia, I dont care much. And DRA is right. Most of the Russians in Russia dont care either. Lets get out of this thread.
Do it for mother Russia !!!!!!111

Indiana Jones

08-23-2007, 09:05 PM

Okay. I, too, can derive parallels between the modern United States and the Third Reich. Parallels are great things. But therein lies the difference between equating the Soviet Union with the Third Reich and drawing parallels. Especially since it's, essentially, a chronologically farcical idea - i.e. equating the Soviet Union (1921-1991) to the Third Reich (1933-1945), when, in fact, you are only taking into account Soviet history until 1953. Equate Stalin to Hitler. That's fine. But let's not equate the Soviet state with that of the Nazi state, as a whole.[...]
Constructive discussion is most difficult when one party retains this infantile notion that Stalin = the Soviet Union. The Soviets got over the cult of Stalin long before you gentlemen ever will.

Lokos
Lokos, at no point did I equate the SU with the Third Reich. Still, I daresay that there is nothing farcical at all about a comparison between the two systems- as you are certainly aware this is merely a matter of whatever tertium comparationis is chosen and I for one do not see anything illegitimate or unproductive about it. Especially as far as the subject of the nascent and mature stages of totalitarian societies are concerned, these models have yielded remarkable results.

Xaito

08-23-2007, 09:54 PM

Guys come one seriously, stop replying to him. He wont change our view, and what we think about our birthplace. Enough already. Let him talk to himself here.

should have listened to you when you said it the first time.
would have saved me some time I threw away for replying to that... guy.
(blocklist, problem solved)

Igor01

08-23-2007, 09:56 PM

Igor, I referred to the joint article by Ritters****/Zemskov/***** published in the October 1993 edition of the American Historical Review. Unfortunately my Russian is rather underwhelming and not sufficient for scholarly publications, but I suspect heavily that the content of the article you provided will be similar or identical to the one I am referring to; The article in question can be reviewed in its entirety under the following link:http://www.etext.org/Politics/Staljin/Staljin/articles/AHR/AHR.html
I would appreciate if you could match and verify the respective figures. When reviewing the annual averages for the inmate population of the GULag, it must be taken into consideration however that they mask the extremely high fluctuation among the victims- under the Stalinist Aegis, an approximate, conservatively estimated total of 18 million individuals went through the system, if Applebaum is to be believed. These number however does not take into account the veritable score of individuals who died on transport or were sentenced to forced labour outside the GULag, not to speak of the deported Balts, Volga Germans, "Kulaks", etc which further considerably raises the total of forced labourers- which obviously too were victims of political repression just the same. In short, the issue at hand is utterly complex- questions of methodology and scope are of the utmost importance- and the accurate number of victims cannot possibly be established. But what can and must be ascertained is that the number of the victims of the GULag was considerably higher than a superficial glance at Zemskovs figures might suggest.

Thanks for the link Indiana Jones, I haven't had time to study it in great detail but after a very brief examination I can say that "your" article uses some of the data published in the article I linked in my post. However, Zemskov's article has a lot more statistical data as well as a very in-depth look at the methodology used.

From what I can see in the article you linked, the 18 million number you mentioned is attributed to Antonov-Ovseenko, not Zemskov, and is not consistent with findings of other researchers, even those leaning towards the high end of estimates, like Conquest and Medvedev. Zemskov published a number of articles where he discusses his methodology, he mentions Antonov-Ovseenko's findings without much reverence and insists that his own research which relies on archival data completely disproves the estiimates by the high-end camp proponents (Antonov-Ovseenko is on the extreme high end of the high-end estimates). Zemskov maintains the view that the GPU/NKVD/MGB/MVD archive data which was made available in the recent years, while far from being complete, is nevertheless representative of the true orders of magnitute of the victims of political repressions in USSR. There is just too much evidence pointing to that conclusion while the high-end figures cannot be substantiated by any factual data.

The article you referred to seems to share a view similar to that of Zemskov and others who lean towards much smaller numbers. I'll take the liberty of quoting a small passage from the article:

The long-awaited archival evidence on repression in the period of the GreatPurges shows that levels of arrests, political prisoners, executions, and general camp populations tend to confirm the orders of magnitude indicated by those labeled as “revisionists” and mocked by those proposing high estimates. Some suspicions about the nature of the terror cannot be sustained, others can now be confirmed. Thus inferences that the terror fell particularly hard on non-Russian nationalities are not borne out by the camp population data from the 1930s. The frequent assertion that most of the camp prisoners were “political” also seems not to be true.

Ideally I would like to be able to quote Zemskov's materials but unfortunately I cannot find any of his works translated into English. If you feel masochistic enough to torture yourself with machine translated text, there is a Maksudov/Zemskov dispute, Maksudov is critiquing Zemskov methodology and questions how sound his approach is (he also raises the issue of the deported kulaks, famine in Ukraine and Gulag victims of different ethnicities). Zemskov addresses these concerns in great detail. The discussion can be found here: http://history.tuad.nsk.ru/Author/Russ/Z/Zemskov/Articles/DISPUT.HTM

I apologize for not being able to translate his articles, I neither have the time nor the necessary command of English. If I get a chance, I'll try to make a compressed digest with some key statements and statistical results.

Friendofall

08-23-2007, 10:08 PM

This makes me sad yes what the Russians are doing is wrong covering up the truth is always wrong yet Americans point fingures but we do the same thing covering up what we did to the Native Americans and Filipinos or how the Japanese cover up what they did to the Chinese, Koreans, Filipinos, and POWs or how the Turks deny what they did to the Armenians and the list goes on and on we as Humans should attempt to bring to light the evil acts of the past so that we may remember them and stop something like them from happening again but we are forgetful and to caught up in out own little worlds to realize this we need to build bridges of peace and understanding not drive the wedge deeper spliting us more and more we need peace and understanding and we need to admit that we have all done wrong and work towards ending our selfish conflicts and truly taking steps towards peace we are all brothers in spirit all brothers in the eyes of God why must we continue such pointless lies , half truths and endless conflict?

Laworkerbee

08-23-2007, 11:55 PM

Americans point fingures but we do the same thing covering up what we did to the Native Americans

The most well executed genocide in history is well known and well documented, leave America out of this.

Friendofall

08-23-2007, 11:59 PM

The most well executed genocide in history is well known and well documented, leave America out of this.

I am sorry if I offended you but I only ment to show that all people have done wrong was the Russian killings in the name of Communism really any different from what we did to the Native Americans in the name of Anglo Protestant manifest destiny?

California Joe

08-24-2007, 12:00 AM

koozya

08-24-2007, 12:03 AM

Hey gang lets all listen to Roman S. I guess he cant take the heat. He still hasnt come up with one make that 1 rebutal to the article....and now hes telling you all what to do...He was even afraid to answer the simple question I put to him about being a Russian or an American.....Christ he even sounds like a Nazi "Do it for the Fatherland" .....Pus-y
u need to go see doctor.

shocker1

08-24-2007, 12:03 AM

I am sorry if I offended you but I only ment to show that all people have done wrong was the Russian killings in the name of Communism really any different from what we did to the Native Americans in the name of Anglo Protestant manifest destiny?
What the hell is that? Here is a new avatar that any self-respecting Georgia boy should use.

Friendofall

08-24-2007, 12:06 AM

There's never been a coverup in the US about what was done to the natives here you assclown.

But it is ignored and glazed over all in the name of American greatness just like we pave over our actions in Korea to protect America interests in the late 1800's or how we laid waste to the Philippines in the name of American freedom. When our history books hide these facts from our children is it no better than covering it up? When the actions of the US army against a people with no real economy or technology is called a "war" and when the most cited events of those conflicts are massacres that are omitted from our school history books in favor of the false image of American purity is that no better than a coverup?

Friendofall

08-24-2007, 12:08 AM

What the hell is that? Here is a new avatar that any self-respecting Georgia boy should use.

I'm a native born New York man thank you very much. That and Sherman has always been a sort of hero of mine since I was little.

shocker1

08-24-2007, 12:09 AM

I'm a native born New York man thank you very much. That and Sherman has always been a sort of hero of mine since I was little.
Carpetbagger!:-*$

All in good fun

Friendofall

08-24-2007, 12:16 AM

Carpetbagger!:-*$

All in good fun

All in good fun but I do say I love the South it has truly become my home.

Friendofall

08-24-2007, 12:22 AM

Christ, its been in our face since the Lone Ranger and whats his nuts. You found out about it all, and as far as I can see no one is covering anything up, its all out there to wallow in. The difference is we are not draging out the perpertrators of these acts and saying it was alright to do it.

I guess my point once again is misconstrued I never ment to bad mouth my country only ment that many powerful Americans pefer to glaze over the acts of wrong commited by our nation in an attempt to make America seem blameless.

Friendofall

08-24-2007, 12:24 AM

figures.......liberal NY school system.........

I actually am a very conservative Roman Catholic thank you. I pefer to fallow my own political views and not tote the line of any one of the parties.

Back to the topic at hand what the Russians are doing is very deplorable and yes should be condemed by all.

Friendofall

08-24-2007, 12:41 AM

No your point was not misconstrued, you flat out said the US covers its evils and hides the truth, well you were wrong with that because it only takes google to find out whats what. No filters on the history, do you know how long it would take to teach every student EVERY bit of US history, good and bad? But what is taught is supposed to stir those who are interested to go deeper and learn more.

What powerful Americans are you speaking of, please? Make America seem blameless, Christ for the past 40 years we've been flagellating ourselves over everything that walked or crawled in this country.

I concede to you sir you I feel that you stand very strongly in your ideology and I respect that and I will take your words to heart for their is always room for growth and change in ones own view am I not right?

Friendofall

08-24-2007, 12:54 AM

Bless me father....you were taught by Jesuits? There is aways room to grow.

Actually yes I was and I was taught that there is always room for change and growth in ones own life.

Friendofall

08-24-2007, 01:07 AM

Go in peace and watch your back on this forum brother.

Thank you I will be sure to do so.

RomanS

08-24-2007, 01:27 AM

hahahhahahahaha
reading the last 2 pages made my evening more fun

Alan

08-24-2007, 02:13 PM

hahahhahahahaha
reading the last 2 pages made my evening more fun

Roman man, that teacup in the avatar.

I have had a hellacious time finding a decent tea set here in Canada. The jandles on the cups are uncomfortable, or the pattern is wrong, or the cups are too small... and just as I thought I found a perfect set, not only was it 80 dollars for something china made, but the design was too easy to tip over.

And here I see Putin with that marvelous tea cup in his hands, no doubt a Russian made set with comfortable handles that probably comes with a nice pot that has a non-spill nozzle.

Those political bastards, truly they are shameless, them and their tea sets.

Xaito

08-24-2007, 02:39 PM

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/8189/11286963id2.jpg

my favourite teacup.

Alan

08-24-2007, 02:41 PM

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/8189/11286963id2.jpg

my favourite teacup.

It's beautiful, and the handle looks perfect for the hold with the index finger. Where was it made?

How do you like your tea? I like mine with milk and 1.5 spoons of sugar. Preferably of the Orange Pecoe variety.

Laworkerbee

08-24-2007, 02:51 PM

Thats because your an ignorant assh0le...........So what are you a Russian or an American? Or perhaps a leach?

He is a hard working Russian immigrant Trace, no need for name calling man.

Xaito

08-24-2007, 03:41 PM

It's beautiful, and the handle looks perfect for the hold with the index finger. Where was it made?

How do you like your tea? I like mine with milk and 1.5 spoons of sugar. Preferably of the Orange Pecoe variety.

yes the handle is really good - thatswhy I like it so much. It was made back then in the Soviet Union - I've taken it with me to Germany - too bad its the last one of its set.

I drink my tea without sugar - sometimes with a slice of lemon or milk when I drink it with cookies or sweets in the afternoon.
In the morning I drink it without anything - out of a coffee mug becaue its bigger then my favourite cup ;)

kalkun

08-24-2007, 03:52 PM

Speaking about tea cups, my granny still has and uses dishes,cups and stuff like that made in GDR/DDR. :)

tyovan

08-24-2007, 04:29 PM

Thats because your an ignorant assh0le...........So what are you a Russian or an American? Or perhaps a leach?

Why can't he be a Russian-American?

Laworkerbee

08-24-2007, 04:34 PM

Why can't he be a Russian-American?

Like African American? rofl God I hate that term.

RomanS

08-24-2007, 04:44 PM

Thats because your an ignorant assh0le...........So what are you a Russian or an American? Or perhaps a leach?

Im a Russian, living, working and paying my taxes in America.

To be an American, I would have to be born in the United States of America. Than you are considered an American. Many Americans come in different shapes, sizes, nationalities, races and colors. To me, there is no difference. They are Americans if they were born in United States.

Just like I look at Russians in Russia. If the person's parents are Ukranian, Moldavian, Georgian, Chechen, or even Jewish. I DONT GIVE A RATS ASS what is that person's background is. To me He/SHE is a Russian.

I can become a US citizen if I want to, and I will have a US Passport. But that will not make me an American. I will just be a Russian born with an American paper.

Now as far as where what country do I like better, I will tell you which.

My heart is with both, it has many chambers. Lets say the right chamber has the compartment where love for Russia is getting pumped. And the left chamber is reserved for US of A. I love both equally. To me they are my parents. I would die for both, but i cant serve in either.

You know Trace, Russians and Americans are actually quite the same kind. We both love and will fight for our birthplaces/homes till we are dead. Be it on the internet or during war.

Its just better to let it go, trust me.

Laworkerbee

08-24-2007, 04:47 PM

Russians the best "enemies" we ever had :hug:

we should all toast to that

Alan

08-24-2007, 04:55 PM

yes the handle is really good - thatswhy I like it so much. It was made back then in the Soviet Union - I've taken it with me to Germany - too bad its the last one of its set.

A tragedy.

I drink my tea without sugar - sometimes with a slice of lemon or milk when I drink it with cookies or sweets in the afternoon.

A lemoner eh? Frankly, never got the appeal myself, too tangy for my likings.

In the morning I drink it without anything - out of a coffee mug becaue its bigger then my favourite cup ;)

Hard core drinker, I understand, I'm not a morning easy-waker either.

spineshank00

08-24-2007, 05:52 PM

You know Trace, Russians and Americans are actually quite the same kind. We both love and will fight for our birthplaces/homes till we are dead. Be it on the internet or during war.

Yup. No other people would fight for their home.:|

Laworkerbee

08-24-2007, 05:54 PM

Yup. No other people would fight for their home.:|

Roman was trying to ease the situation and find common ground, or is that lost on you? :roll:

RomanS

08-24-2007, 05:58 PM

Yup. No other people would fight for their home.:|

our little conversation was between an American and a Russian.
hence the comparising

spineshank00

08-24-2007, 06:02 PM

our little conversation was between an American and a Russian.
hence the comparising

you could also have said that you share the common trait of having two legs. Not trying to start anything but it just sounded like you were the two only nations who would fend for themselves.

Laworkerbee

08-24-2007, 06:04 PM

you could also have said that you share the common trait of having two legs. Not trying to start anything but it just sounded like you were the two only nations who would fend for themselves.

Why are you interjecting here, feeling left out?

NORWEGIANS CAN FIGHT!!! NORWAY STRONG!!!

Happy now?

Friendofall

08-24-2007, 06:06 PM

Be at peace friends were all brethren in the spirit of international solidarity lets just let this go and all agree that the Human race as a whole would defend what it loves and holds dear.

RomanS

08-24-2007, 06:07 PM

Be at peace friends were all brethren in the spirit of international solidarity lets just let this go and all agree that the Human race as a whole would defend what it loves and holds dear.

Amen

lets put this one to rest, too many people got slained today

spineshank00

08-24-2007, 06:10 PM

Why are you interjecting here, feeling left out?

NORWEGIANS CAN FIGHT!!! NORWAY STRONG!!!

Happy now?

I'm not Norwegian, so not really.

Laworkerbee

08-24-2007, 06:11 PM

Then change your god damned location so I can address you properly, seems you just want a pissing match.

Whats with people today :cantbeli:

spineshank00

08-24-2007, 06:15 PM

Then change your god damned location so I can address you properly, seems you just want a pissing match.

Whats with people today :cantbeli:

My location won't really change my nationalityp-)

Flamming_Python

08-24-2007, 08:51 PM

My location won't really change my nationalityp-)

What's that then, big-mouth shark country? ;)

Nordmannen

08-25-2007, 07:21 AM

Why are you interjecting here, feeling left out?

NORWEGIANS CAN FIGHT!!! NORWAY STRONG!!!

Happy now?

NORWAY... AND SCANDINAVIA IN GENERAL STRONG!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.imagehost.ro/pict/2513192246d0022a983a2.jpg

Indiana Jones

08-27-2007, 07:44 PM

Thanks for the link Indiana Jones, I haven't had time to study it in great detail but after a very brief examination I can say that "your" article uses some of the data published in the article I linked in my post. However, Zemskov's article has a lot more statistical data as well as a very in-depth look at the methodology used.

From what I can see in the article you linked, the 18 million number you mentioned is attributed to Antonov-Ovseenko, not Zemskov, and is not consistent with findings of other researchers, even those leaning towards the high end of estimates, like Conquest and Medvedev. Zemskov published a number of articles where he discusses his methodology, he mentions Antonov-Ovseenko's findings without much reverence and insists that his own research which relies on archival data completely disproves the estiimates by the high-end camp proponents (Antonov-Ovseenko is on the extreme high end of the high-end estimates). Zemskov maintains the view that the GPU/NKVD/MGB/MVD archive data which was made available in the recent years, while far from being complete, is nevertheless representative of the true orders of magnitute of the victims of political repressions in USSR. There is just too much evidence pointing to that conclusion while the high-end figures cannot be substantiated by any factual data.

The article you referred to seems to share a view similar to that of Zemskov and others who lean towards much smaller numbers. I'll take the liberty of quoting a small passage from the article:

The long-awaited archival evidence on repression in the period of the GreatPurges shows that levels of arrests, political prisoners, executions, and general camp populations tend to confirm the orders of magnitude indicated by those labeled as “revisionists” and mocked by those proposing high estimates. Some suspicions about the nature of the terror cannot be sustained, others can now be confirmed. Thus inferences that the terror fell particularly hard on non-Russian nationalities are not borne out by the camp population data from the 1930s. The frequent assertion that most of the camp prisoners were “political” also seems not to be true.

Ideally I would like to be able to quote Zemskov's materials but unfortunately I cannot find any of his works translated into English. If you feel masochistic enough to torture yourself with machine translated text, there is a Maksudov/Zemskov dispute, Maksudov is critiquing Zemskov methodology and questions how sound his approach is (he also raises the issue of the deported kulaks, famine in Ukraine and Gulag victims of different ethnicities). Zemskov addresses these concerns in great detail. The discussion can be found here: http://history.tuad.nsk.ru/Author/Russ/Z/Zemskov/Articles/DISPUT.HTM

I apologize for not being able to translate his articles, I neither have the time nor the necessary command of English. If I get a chance, I'll try to make a compressed digest with some key statements and statistical results.
Igor, first of all thank you for the dispute you provided. I´ll attempt to coerce an acquaintance of mine into translating it. Still, if that fails, and I am afraid it will, I would be very appreciative if you could present an abstract.
As far the origin of the 18 million figure of total inmates is concerned I quoted it more or less on top of my head from Applebaum, who, if IIRC in turn refers to the recent "standard" works, that is: Bacon, Gulag at war, p.101-122 , also see for a discussion of the issue ie.: Pohl, The Stalinist Penal System, both of which draw their estimates mainly from primary, statistic material. It has been a long time though since I read them. I am not familiar with the writings of Mr. Maksudov. As a particularly striking example to illustrate the high degree of fluctuency in the GULag, Pohl points out in some length that in the year 1947 alone, almost 1,5 million individuals entered the GULag, while another million was released. According to Bacon in the year 1943 alone, close to one million prisoners were drafted into the Red Army, whereas, if we follow Zemskov and with him the NKVD figures, on January 1st 1944 the inmate population totaled at 1179 819, which, unless the two years in question are utterly unrepresentative, would strongly indicate substantial transfers in and out of the system. Since both sides operate with the same sources nowadays, it appears to me that the discrepancy between the respective "camps" figures might be caused to a large degree by different methodology and a varying approach to inclusiveness-Michael Ellmann has published a very enlightening article on this topic in Vol 54/7 of the "Europe-Asia studies" which attempted (unsuccessfully though) to reconcile ie. the rather spectacular mudslinging contest between the esteemed gentlemen Wheatcroft and Conquest.