Communism's Greatest Crimes

[Clear Skies]

Originally posted by Sava


Just compare the death counts. In WWII alone, Stalin killed abuot 2x more people than Hitler.

Also, compare the standard of living. If you were a non-Jewish German living in Nazi Germany, life was very good. If you were a Russian in the Soviet Union, life was very bad.

That's why Communism is worse than Fascism.

Hm. My typical argument against this would be that Stalin wasn't really a Communist in the classic sense of the word - he was a half-delusive nmegalomaniacal paranoiac. Trouble is, Hitler was much the same thing...although he was definitely closer to a true Fascist than Stalin was to a true Communist.
What I'm trying to say is, I think bits of Communism are just about redeemable, whereas Fascism is totally indefensible. And I'm talking ideologies, not implementation. I'd hate to see either of them implemented.

[Stefu]

Contrary to the Batista government that spent all its money making Havana an attractive and fun place for elite Cubans and foreigners, the Castro government has spent its money improving the lives of the people in rural areas, away from the spotlight - where it counts.

I sort of half-excepted this to end with "RE-ELECT CASTRO!"

A full 1/3rd of it's population would have been destroyed.

What, like 1/2th of the Finnish working class?

The only reputable study has put Stalin's victims at between 800,000 and 900,000, not including the collectivisation famine victims.

Whatever you say, Professor Irvingnovski!

[steelehc]

Someone said that Hitler killed 6 million Jews, and another 4 million Gypsies and other "undesirables." I must correct this.

The number of Jews killed was "only" about 5 million. There were about 1.5-2.5 million other people killed, both in the camps and by the Einsatzgruppen, the mobile death squads. Not counting war deaths, the Nazi victim total is on the order of 7.5-8 million. I am not trying to minimize this, but correct it.

As for those who say that Stalin only killed 900,000 people? They are wrong, plain and simple. The numbers will never be known for sure, but they are far in excess of a million.

Steele

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by steelehc
As for those who say that Stalin only killed 900,000 people? They are wrong, plain and simple. The numbers will never be known for sure, but they are far in excess of a million.

Steele

This was the number of executions. As I said, it didn't include the number of famine victims.

[Natan]

Originally posted by steelehc
Someone said that Hitler killed 6 million Jews, and another 4 million Gypsies and other "undesirables." I must correct this.

The ten million total is the generally accepted one.

The number of Jews killed was "only" about 5 million.

AFAIK it was 5.7 million.

There were about 1.5-2.5 million other people killed, both in the camps and by the Einsatzgruppen, the mobile death squads.

No, there were about 2 million Soviet POWs killed in the camps alone.

Not counting war deaths, the Nazi victim total is on the order of 7.5-8 million. I am not trying to minimize this, but correct it.

That depends on whether you count the whole villages of people they exterminated on the eastern front, in the Balkans, and even in France as "war deaths."


Chegitz: Does it include all the people who died in the Gulag?

[chequita guevara]

No, it does not. Those who died in the gulag generally were not executed. Furthermore, most of those who died did so during the war years, and the years immediately following the war. There wasn't enough food and supplies for the troops, so naturally prisoners are going to get short shrifted. It's ugly, but when you're facing the Nazis, sometimes you have to make evil choices. And when you're Stalin, you can do them easily and still sleep at night.

Remember, most of the people who went to the gulag (most, not all, Saras) did so for real crimes, such as theft, rape, and murder, and not for political crimes. Hell, political crimes were more likely to get you shot than sent to the gulag. Most people who served in the gulags did eventually, get released. They tended to stay near their former prison, which is how the Soviets managed to settle Siberia.

Finally, that number of people executed also includes the war years, which means a lot of people were executed for being Nazi collaborators.

None of the above should be taken as justifiying the conditions under Stalinism. There were numerous crimes against humanity committed. It shouldn't have been that way, and it didn't have to be that way. But remember, before all that could happen, they had to wipe out the all the old Communists, who never would have stood for it. It was the new generations of bureaucrats, who appropriated the revolution for their own ends, that committed these crimes, to protect their priveldges. Doesn't let communism off the hook, however, since we created that Frankenstein monster.

[Guynemer]

I would like to apologize to everyone on Earth for starting this very tiresome and vaguely tasteless debate about whether or not the Nazis killed more than the Communists.

[Il Duce]

Though more Soiviet than communist still was bad and sparked thaat thing Ronald Reagan ended, hmm was it the cold war.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Il Duce
Though more Soiviet than communist still was bad and sparked thaat thing Ronald Reagan ended, hmm was it the cold war.

The US sparked the Cold War by threatening the USSR with nuclear weapons in 1946 over the occupation of Northern Persia. Not arguing the the Soviets had any right to be there, but facts are facts. The US acted against the Communists first.

[Il Duce]

You are right that was something that sparked tension but Russia and the US knew well that the US didnt have the capability to use nukes on any large scale at the time. And no shot were fired in that incident where airlifts were rountinly shot at.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Il Duce
You are right that was something that sparked tension but Russia and the US knew well that the US didnt have the capability to use nukes on any large scale at the time.

Russia was a part of the USSR, not the USSR itself. The USSR also knew that if push came tot shove, they would collapse in the face of a Western attack. It is only Western war weariness that saved them. The West could not yet justify a war against its former ally. Still that didn't stop the US from waging terrorism against the Eastern block. By the time of the Berlin Blockade, the US was already messing with elections in Italy, disallowing democratic Constitutions in Germany (which it had the authority to do), crushing unions in France, and launching a massacre and war in Greece. The Berlin Blockade was nothing compared to this.

[steelehc]

What about the successful democratic revolutions in Czechoslovakia and Hungary that were quelled by the Red Army? What about the fact that Germany was supposed to be re-united by 1949 under the terms of the surrender agreements, but was not because of Soviet refusal to give up their "colony?" What about the skirmish between US and Soviet forces to the west of Berlin? All of that is irrelevant because it doesn't help proove your point?

The ten million total is the generally accepted one.

No its not. Show me a source.

AFAIK it was 5.7 million.

5.7 million is one of the estimates. So is 10 million. So is 3.5 million. 5 million is about midway between the high and low estimates, and so is commonly used. 6 million is another estimate, but of the total number of camp victims, not merely Jews.

No, there were about 2 million Soviet POWs killed in the camps alone.

Source? I have never heard of this kind of slaughter. I know the nazis killed POWs, but not in such numbers.

Steele

[Il Duce]

These US crimes you speak of have some sense of truth to them but was nessecary to keep order in western europe, keep any sign of disallowal of Allied occupation for many years had to be crushed. This occupation was the only thing that prevented Soiviet attack on western europe. Stalin would have had no qualms about that, his previous perfomance dictated this. Stalin was high on hos own nationalism and previous history, no one has conquered Russia and the time of the year the war ended made a western attack on Russia foolish. THe red army was massive, had many captured German weapons, close weapons plants, and a huge population behind them. Russia could of easily had an advantage over allied troops for the critical first six months. Using nukes against Russia would have never occuured from 1946-1949 for the massive amount of Russians living in the US. Russia was the largest and most powerfulcountry in the USSR but I should have still classified it as the USSR though. Also which country was in a better position during the cold war, West Germany or Poland.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by steelehc
What about the successful democratic revolutions in Czechoslovakia and Hungary that were quelled by the Red Army? What about the fact that Germany was supposed to be re-united by 1949 under the terms of the surrender agreements, but was not because of Soviet refusal to give up their "colony?" What about the skirmish between US and Soviet forces to the west of Berlin? All of that is irrelevant because it doesn't help proove your point?

All of that happened later, after 1946-47. That would be like blaming the United States for starting WWII because they attacked the Japanese at Iwo Jima. If you want to talk about Soviet Cold War actions, we can do that. But as for starting it, though the West lays the blame at the feet of Stalin, it can only do so by ignoring its own actions. This isn't to deny thst Stalin didn't do some seriously evil sh*t. It's just that he had plenty of company from the West.

As for the rest, Natan is more than capable of handling it. I'll just put in my two cents that he's correct. The only figure I've heard for the number of Jews killed in the camps, outside of Apolyton, is 5.9 million. Two million Soviets died in the camps, 1.5 million Roma, 3 million Poles. There is a lot of overlap between the Soviets and Poles, and the Jews, so the numbers would seem to add up to be more then ten million, but ten million is the generally accepted number. I know that Soviet PoWs went to the death camps, but I'm sure they probably also went to the Stalags, and the deaths there aren't added in to the total number of death camp murders.

[GeneralTacticus]

Russia was a part of the USSR, not the USSR itself. The USSR also knew that if push came tot shove, they would collapse in the face of a Western attack. It is only Western war weariness that saved them. The West could not yet justify a war against its former ally. Still that didn't stop the US from waging terrorism against the Eastern block. By the time of the Berlin Blockade, the US was already messing with elections in Italy, disallowing democratic Constitutions in Germany (which it had the authority to do), crushing unions in France, and launching a massacre and war in Greece. The Berlin Blockade was nothing compared to this.

Massacres in Greece? Chegitz, I am begining to think you have an obsession with the idea of communists being massacred. The civil war in Greece came about because the communist guerillas were trying to overthrow the government and the government (backed up by the British) fought back. And btw, Stalin effectively sold out the communists in Greece, as he agreed with Churchill that Greece would be under British influence, and kept this promise by doing nothing as the communists were crushed.

As for the stuff about Italy, France, and Germany, the West had already seen the kind of stuff Stalin was getting up to in Eastern Europe, and I think it is perfectly acceptable that they took some action to secure Western Europe against Stalinism. Consider the fact that not one of the nations taken over by the communists after WW2 had even remotely free elections. The communists just got themselves voted in, and then ensured that they would not ever be allowed to be voted out. Compared to that, and the actions of a secret police, giving some political backing is nothing.

All of that happened later, after 1946-47. That would be like blaming the United States for starting WWII because they attacked the Japanese at Iwo Jima. If you want to talk about Soviet Cold War actions, we can do that. But as for starting it, though the West lays the blame at the feet of Stalin, it can only do so by ignoring its own actions. This isn't to deny thst Stalin didn't do some seriously evil sh*t. It's just that he had plenty of company from the West.

What about the Soviet role in emplacing dictators across Eastern Europe? Stalin was much more suspicious of the West than the West was of him. The Americans actually offered him the chance to receive Marshal Aid if he'd let American books films etc. into the USSR and Eastern Europe (which, if you want to talk about democracy and freedom, he had no right to keep out anyway), but he turned it down. He also wouldn't allow any of the Eastern European nations the chance to receive it either.

The US sparked the Cold War by threatening the USSR with nuclear weapons in 1946 over the occupation of Northern Persia. Not arguing the the Soviets had any right to be there, but facts are facts. The US acted against the Communists first.

Show me a reliable source on that and there's a remote potential I'll believe it.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Massacres in Greece?

The Greeks have brought this up several times on the boards.

And btw, Stalin effectively sold out the communists in Greece, as he agreed with Churchill that Greece would be under British influence, and kept this promise by doing nothing as the communists were crushed.

The crimes of Stalin do not exonerate the crimes of the West. Frankly, it wasn't Stalin's revolution to sell out. The Communists were the one's who had liberated Greece from the Nazis, not the British. The Brits had not right (thought they had the power) to overthrown the Communists and install the old King. Massacre may have been a bit of hyperbole on my part. I meant MASS MURDER! Communist were taken and tortured and murdered. Finally they had to take to the hills, just to stay alive!

As for the stuff about Italy, France, and Germany, the West had already seen the kind of stuff Stalin was getting up to in Eastern Europe, and I think it is perfectly acceptable that they took some action to secure Western Europe against Stalinism.

One, in 1947, Stalin had not replaced the governments in Eastern Europe yet, or all of them at any rate. Two, Communist governments that came to power electorally were unlikely to repeat the crimes of Stalinism. Three, no one outside of the USSR really knew what the hell was going on in the USSR, and probably wouldn't have bleieved it anyway.

Show me a reliable source on that and there's a remote potential I'll believe it.

Quoting Timewatch from the USSR thread:

What do you think Secretary of State Byrnes meant in the U.N. when he told the Soviet ambassador "Get out of Iran or we'll give it to you with both barrells!"

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

What do you think Secretary of State Byrnes meant in the U.N. when he told the Soviet ambassador "Get out of Iran or we'll give it to you with both barrells!"

Maybe he meant "kegs". Kegs of Budweiser....

[chequita guevara]

You know what, I was wrong. The US did not start the Cold War in 1946.

Britain began it in 1944, by attacking the Communist Greek partisans who had liberated Greece, and restoring the monarchy.

Greece was the first of the liberated states to be openly and forcefully compelled to accept the political system of the occupying power. It was Churchill who acted first and Stalin who followed his example, in Bulgaria and then in Rumania [sic], though with less bloodshed.

D.F. Fleming, The Cold War and its Origins, 1917-1960, (New York, 1961) pp183-5

[Imran Siddiqui]

but ten million is the generally accepted number.

I thought it was more like 12 million, but like it really matters .

[Imran Siddiqui]

Britain began it in 1944, by attacking the Communist Greek partisans who had liberated Greece, and restoring the monarchy.

Can you really consider this the beginning of the Cold War?

I mean, I'd think the beginning is the first diplomatic clash between the US and the USSR... like your Persia example or Stalin not allowing elections in Eastern Europe... something like that.

[chequita guevara]

The quote sort of says it all.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Explain.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
You know what, I was wrong. The US did not start the Cold War in 1946.

Britain began it in 1944, by attacking the Communist Greek partisans who had liberated Greece, and restoring the monarchy.

Quote:

Greece was the first of the liberated states to be openly and forcefully compelled to accept the political system of the occupying power. It was Churchill who acted first and Stalin who followed his example, in Bulgaria and then in Rumania [sic], though with less bloodshed. D.F. Fleming, The Cold War and its Origins, 1917-1960, (New York, 1961) pp183-5

This sounds like what the Soviets did to the (much weaker) British backed Polish resistance in the same year.

[chequita guevara]

There was a significant Polish resistence outside the Warsaw ghetto? I thought the Soviets just held back, and let the Nazis do their dirty work.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
There was a significant Polish resistence outside the Warsaw ghetto? I thought the Soviets just held back, and let the Nazis do their dirty work.

Yes there was a significant resistance in the countryside as well. Most of the leaders who survived the Nazis were either imprisoned or executed. A few were 're-educated', though most of the Soviet puppets (and all of the really important ones) were spirited away before the Germans took the Soviet half of Poland. I don't know whether the Soviets intended all along to run all of Poland, or if they merely wanted to solidify their control over their half, but in any event there was a very concerted effort to kill anyone who could interfere with their plans (Katyn forest, Warsaw ghetto and the liquidation of partisans), and to groom good Stalinists to run Poland.

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Guy, why do you insist on quoting Sava? Some of us have him on our ignore lists.

Just like a conservative, trying to shut up everyone who tries to make the world a better place.

Hitler and OBL (were/are who knows) were conservatives too.

Although Stalin was a lefty.

Guy, I had family that lived through Communism and Fascism. Don't tell me my argument is flawed when I get my information from people who were there.

My Great Aunt on my mother's side is the daughter of Serbia's former prime minister pre-WWII. She shook Stalin's hand.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Sikander
I don't know whether the Soviets intended all along to run all of Poland, or if they merely wanted to solidify their control over their half, but in any event there was a very concerted effort to kill anyone who could interfere with their plans (Katyn forest, Warsaw ghetto and the liquidation of partisans), and to groom good Stalinists to run Poland.

Evil nasty sh*t to be sure, but still, in this case, it was the Soviets who "liberated" Poland, and not the local partisans. In Greece, it was the partisans who liberated the country, and then Britain came in to "stabilize" things. When the ELAS refused to allow the King to come back or turn power over to the Brits, the Brits attacked them.