Stalin "Engineered" Famine in Ukraine?

[CrimsonTide]

Is this true? I hear it as a talking point from Capitalists, and I hope I can truthfully refute it. Sources would be nice, too.

[chimx]

It depends who you ask. Look towards the end of the pinned thread entitled "Stalin's Crimes". It has sources from both sides.

[Comrade Marcel]

http://individual.utoronto.ca/mrodden/study/ssustudy.html

[chimx]

Bare in mind that the opinions stated by radical leftist historians are not indicitive of the opinions held by the general history community, and therefore should not be viewed exclussively as "the truth".

[Hiero]

The general history community are not communists.

Anyway I have never heard about any documents from the Soviet government which outlines the creation of a famine in Ukraine.

[Marukusu]

I see no reason why Stalin would starve so many of his own people to death on purpose. He wasn't a psycho and was "only" the general-secretary of the soviet communist party, not some taliban warlord that decided everything by himself.
There was a brutal famine in Ukraine in the 1930:s though, that's something you can't deny.

[beabuenosaires]

Though Stalin stands for many things that several people at RevLeft stand for, it is entirely possible that he was not a good man. It is possible that he believed what he believed in so much that he would stoop to less than dignified means to impress that on people. That doesn't mean that he felt his beliefs were any less right, but I do believe that he starved his people. Who knows why a man does what he does? But from what I've been learning in my 20th Century Comparitive Government class, it seems entirely true that Stalin was terrible to many of his people. I personally think that he had the potential somewhere in him to be a brilliant revolutionary for the greater good, but that got lost in translation. I have my political beliefs because I am FOR the people. At RevLeft, we are all ABOUT the people. And Stalin was a bastard to his.

Bea

[Councilman Doug]

That doesn't mean that he felt his beliefs were any less right, but I do believe that he starved his people.

What do you base these beliefs on, beyond the generally flawed theories of mainstream historians?

[Luís Henrique]

To put it simply, the right-wingers state that:

a) there was a famine in Ukraine in the early 30's, that resulted in up to 10,000,000 deaths;

b) such famine was the result of deliberate policies by the Stalinist dictatorship to create a famine;

c) the reason why the Stalinist dictatorship would deliberately create a famine in Ukraine is that the Stalinist dictatorship intended to commit genocide against the Ukrainian people.

Now, it is reasonably confirmed that:

a) there was a famine in the early 30's in the whole of the European Soviet Union, plus the Caucasus and Kazakhstan - not just in Ukraine, though it is possible that Ukraine was the region most heavily impacted. The death toll was huge, ranging from some 250,000 up to 3,000,000 people;

b) the famine resulted of the attempt to impose forced collectivisation upon the Soviet peasantry - reversing the policies followed by the Bolsheviks from 1917 to about 1928. The attempt was conducted with great disregard of the political climate among the peasantry, and the typical Stalinist policy of killing the messenger resulted in "great successes" being reported where there were only tragic failures happening;

c) not only the famine was not restricted to Ukraine, as pointed above, but the Soviet government later pursued policies to the end of minimise the disaster, when it became impossible to maintain the official lies about the "succesful" collectivisation (of course, the disaster was attributed, in the typical stalinist manner, to "saboteurs", not to the party line, which resulted in the equally typical indiscriminate and autophagic repression). Moreover, the Soviet Union regained sovereignity over the whole of Ukraine during 1944. Stalin only died in 1953, and, yet, curiously, there is absolutely no sign of ethnical cleansing, genocide, or even systematical discrimination against Ukrainians during the 1944-1953 period.

Luís Henrique

[chimx]

Moreover, the Soviet Union regained sovereignity over the whole of Ukraine during 1944. Stalin only died in 1953, and, yet, curiously, there is absolutely no sign of ethnical cleansing, genocide, or even systematical discrimination against Ukrainians during the 1944-1953 period.

In Khruschev's famous secret speech on Stalin, he jokingly stated that Stalin would have ethnically cleansed the Ukraine had it not been for the high population, after which his audience gave a whooping chuckle. This was brought up by Khrushchev because of the real history of ethnic cleansing in the USSR under Stalin. The "Stalin's Crimes" thread has information on it.

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31, 2007 11:54 pm
In Khruschev's famous secret speech on Stalin, he jokingly stated that Stalin would have ethnically cleansed the Ukraine had it not been for the high population,
The Ukrainian population was about 30,000,000 people in 1930. If Stalin was able to kill about 3,000,000 Ukrainians in just one year of famine, then, obviously, he would be able to kill, in the 9 year period between 1944 and 1953... 27,000,000 Ukrainians.

Which didn't happen, don't you agree?

Luís Henrique

[chimx]

Well maybe, but you are reading too much into my comment. I meant it as an interesting anecdote to lead into the fact that many historians do point to ethnic cleansing in Stalinist Russia, thought not in the Ukraine.

[Joseph Ball]

There are some interesting articles about this matter at this link http://www.as.wvu.edu/history/Faculty/Tauger/soviet.htm. Tauger is an alleged revisionist who has questioned the account of a man-made famine in the Ukraine (though he agrees famine did occur). I don't necessarily endorse everything he says but it is of great interest. I think we need to see famines as the result of an interaction of natural and (often unintended) human factors. Stalin didn't intentionally wish famine on his people, this is just right-wing propaganda. We need a more complex analysis of this difficult question.

[Brownfist]

I think that people need to recognize that Stalin was one man within a large governmental structure and did not do things on his own, and there often probably were contradictory opinions within the government with several people doing their own things. I think that there is some bourgeois myth that needs to be busted in which Stalin had complete and autocratic control over the entire government and comintern. Yes, we could say that he had a lot of influence and power, however, I think that it has been demonstrated repeatedly that he was not in complete control of every situation. I think that it is interesting how this bourgeois construction of the individual is super-imposed onto every ideological, political, and historical debate. I though that people on these boards were critical of the bourgeois construction of the individuals (perhaps not the libertarian anarchist types). Don't we need to start engaging in a historical practice that is more accurately descriptive and critical of the bourgeois histories that are provided to us?

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 03:32 am
Well maybe, but you are reading too much into my comment. I meant it as an interesting anecdote to lead into the fact that many historians do point to ethnic cleansing in Stalinist Russia, thought not in the Ukraine.
Stalin was criminal enough for what he did; there is no reason to fabricate inexistent crimes just to prove ourselves anti-Stalinists.

Luís Henrique

[chimx]

Luis: It was a joke made by Khruschev, not me.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

This is total farce. There are several reasons why this is false which I won't really get into, but chief among this that a) Stalin was not notified on the conditions in the Ukraine until late in the famine when he recieved a telegram from someone in the middle of it. He immediatly responded asking how much grain to send and what to do. There was then a response which came via mail, and Stalin scolded the person for not sending a telegram which was faster. He then ordered grain and programs like 'milk for every child' to combat the disaster (Source: wikipedia). b) There were many people from ukraine living elsewhere in the Soviet Union like Moscow, yet none of them were touched by the famine. Instead, the benefited from industrialization of the the Soviet Union. Lastly, similiar famines of the same or greater extent had occured in the Ukraine before and all over Eastern Europe, however they were not publisced because they weren't under socialism. The main sources and figures of the Ukraine famine came from Yellow Journalist William Randolph Hearst who got his source from the Gustapo which was attempting to prepare the world for an invasion of Ukraine that would make the Nazis look like liberators. Here are two readings worth taking a look at.

Fraud, Famine, and Fascism (http://rationalrevolution.net/special/library/famine.htm)
Lies Concerning the History of the Soviet Union (http://www.northstarcompass.org/nsc9912/lies.htm)

[Cryotank Screams]

I don't know exactly how accurate the following is but I read on the forum, that the famine was actually in large part conducted by the kulaks (see below quote), who purposely burned the crops and such, I also believe the ukranian famine, was talked about a bit in the below threads.


Originally posted by D'Anconia
Addendum to the minutes of Politburo [meeting] No. 93.

RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF PEOPLE'S COMMISSARS OF THE UKRAINIAN
SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC AND OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE
COMMUNIST PARTY (BOLSHEVIK) OF UKRAINE ON BLACKLISTING VILLAGES
THAT MALICIOUSLY SABOTAGE THE COLLECTION OF GRAIN.

In view of the shameful collapse of grain collection in the
more remote regions of Ukraine, the Council of People's
Commissars and the Central Committee call upon the oblast
executive committees and the oblast [party] committees as well as
the raion executive committees and the raion [party] committees:
to break up the sabotage of grain collection, which has been
organized by kulak and counterrevolutionary elements; to
liquidate the resistance of some of the rural communists, who in
fact have become the leaders of the sabotage; to eliminate the
passivity and complacency toward the saboteurs, incompatible with
being a party member; and to ensure, with maximum speed, full and
absolute compliance with the plan for grain collection.

The Council of People's Commissars and the Central Committee
resolve:

To place the following villages on the black list for overt
disruption of the grain collection plan and for malicious
sabotage, organized by kulak and counterrevolutionary elements:

1. village of Verbka in Pavlograd raion, Dnepropetrovsk
oblast.

...

5. village of Sviatotroitskoe in Troitsk raion, Odessa oblast.

6. village of Peski in Bashtan raion, Odessa oblast.

The following measures should be undertaken with respect to
these villages :

1. Immediate cessation of delivery of goods, complete
suspension of cooperative and state trade in the villages, and
removal of all available goods from cooperative and state stores.

2. Full prohibition of collective farm trade for both
collective farms and collective farmers, and for private farmers.

3. Cessation of any sort of credit and demand for early
repayment of credit and other financial obligations.

4. Investigation and purge of all sorts of foreign and
hostile elements from cooperative and state institutions, to be
carried out by organs of the Workers and Peasants Inspectorate.

5. Investigation and purge of collective farms in these
villages, with removal of counterrevolutionary elements and
organizers of grain collection disruption.
The Council of People's Commissars and the Central Committee
call upon all collective and private farmers who are honest and
dedicated to Soviet rule to organize all their efforts for a
merciless struggle against kulaks and their accomplices in order
to: defeat in their villages the kulak sabotage of grain
collection; fulfill honestly and conscientiously their grain
collection obligations to the Soviet authorities; and strengthen
collective farms.

CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL OF PEOPLE'S
COMMISSARS OF THE UKRAINIAN SOVIET SOCIALIST
REPUBLIC - V. CHUBAR'.

SECRETARY OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE OF THE
COMMUNIST PARTY (BOLSHEVIK) OF UKRAINE - S.
KOSIOR.

6 December 1932.

http://lcweb.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/k2grain.html

http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/lofiversi...php/t19070.html (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/lofiversion/index.php/t19070.html)
http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/lofiversi...p/t20844-0.html (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/lofiversion/index.php/t20844-0.html)

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by Cryotank [email protected] 01, 2007 10:11 pm
I don't know exactly how accurate the following is but I read on the forum, that the famine was actually in large part conducted by the kulaks (see below quote), who purposely burned the crops and such, I also believe the ukranian famine, was talked about a bit in the below threads.
Yes, there was Kulak sabotage. It was prompted by the mismanagement of the crisis by the SU government, though.

How would rich peasants not burn their crops, if the government was seizing them? They tried what peasants always do in such situations - going back to subsistence econom, until the prices rose back to their normal level. They didn't expect the government to react in the paranoid way it reacted.

The responsibility for the famine is essentially of the Soviet government, there should be no doubt about that. What is a reactionary fantasy is the idea that the famine was purposefully "engineered" to the end of eliminating the Ukrainian population.

Luís Henrique

[Dimentio]

In conclusion, the politics of collectivisation was not efficient. It would be better to build agricultural cities and replace the peasants with industrial-agricultural workers.

[bolshevik butcher]

No, Stalin did not "engineer" a famine. I might be a crazy trotskyist but this idea is just complete nonscense, it wouldn't have been in Stalin's interst to seirously weaken Ukriane. There was a natural famine in Ukraine that year, it was also not helped by the bueraucratic nature of the collectivizaiton that had been put in, but it ceratinlay wasn't an engineered famine.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 11:35 pm
In conclusion, the politics of collectivisation was not efficient. It would be better to build agricultural cities and replace the peasants with industrial-agricultural workers.
What does industrial-agricutlural workers excactly mean? Part of the policy of collectivisation was lending new farming machines to industrialise agriculture. You can look at many Soviet records to find proof of this.

[grove street]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 09:45 pm
This is total farce. There are several reasons why this is false which I won't really get into, but chief among this that a) Stalin was not notified on the conditions in the Ukraine until late in the famine when he recieved a telegram from someone in the middle of it. He immediatly responded asking how much grain to send and what to do. There was then a response which came via mail, and Stalin scolded the person for not sending a telegram which was faster. He then ordered grain and programs like 'milk for every child' to combat the disaster (Source: wikipedia). b) There were many people from ukraine living elsewhere in the Soviet Union like Moscow, yet none of them were touched by the famine. Instead, the benefited from industrialization of the the Soviet Union. Lastly, similiar famines of the same or greater extent had occured in the Ukraine before and all over Eastern Europe, however they were not publisced because they weren't under socialism. The main sources and figures of the Ukraine famine came from Yellow Journalist William Randolph Hearst who got his source from the Gustapo which was attempting to prepare the world for an invasion of Ukraine that would make the Nazis look like liberators. Here are two readings worth taking a look at.

Fraud, Famine, and Fascism (http://rationalrevolution.net/special/library/famine.htm)
Lies Concerning the History of the Soviet Union (http://www.northstarcompass.org/nsc9912/lies.htm)
Why does the world still beleive Nazi lies when it comes to Stalin and the Soviet Union. Ukraine wasn't the only country hit by famine because of the move towards collective farming, there was famine through-out the USSR. There is no proof that such famines were planned by Stalin. They happened because of the Kulaks reaction of collective farming. It is important to realise that the Kulaks were so determined not to have their farms turned into collectives that they destroyed their own crops, and livestock including animals used for transport of agricultural goods (horse back, donkey, ox ect were still the main source of transport). The Kulaks didn't stop at their own farms, but they brutaily attacked collectives and the peasants that worked on them. Such agricultural sabotage and devestating effects on a society that had faced years of war and was still trying to heal it'self from the scars left including former famines.

It is important to note that Stalin played a major part in ending the famines and once they had ened the USSR under the governance of Stalin enjoyed record harvests that rivaled anything previously experinced in all Russian and Ukraine history. Such agricultural success couldn't of been possible without the collectivisation of agricultural land.

[CrimsonTide]

Originally posted by grove [email protected] 03, 2007 12:06 pm
[QUOTE=LeftyHenry,February 01, 2007 09:45 pm]
It is important to note that Stalin played a major part in ending the famines and once they had ened the USSR under the governance of Stalin enjoyed record harvests that rivaled anything previously experinced in all Russian and Ukraine history. Such agricultural success couldn't of been possible without the collectivisation of agricultural land.
I've heard many say collectivization was not a good policy. Can anyone really say wether it was a good or bad policy, decisively?

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 12:20 pm
Can anyone really say wether it was a good or bad policy, decisively?
No.

You will have to take the trouble of thinking about it through your own brains. The most we can do is to argue pro or against, but there is no definitive authority on the subject among us.

(But if you really wish that someone else makes the decision for you...

It was a bad policy, whomever argues otherwise is bourgeois and corrupt. ;) )

Luís Henrique

[Spirit of Spartacus]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 10:30 pm
Is this true? I hear it as a talking point from Capitalists, and I hope I can truthfully refute it. Sources would be nice, too.
You can truthfully refute it. Of course you can.

But consider this...

Hasn't religion been "truthfully" refuted? Hasn't neo-classical economics been "truthfully" refuted? Neo-liberalism, post-modernism, finance capitalism, haven't all these been "truthfully" refuted?

But they go on, they're forced down the throats of the masses all the time. Do you expect the ruling-class to give up its favorite myth about communism, i.e. that communism is bad because Stalin killed X million people?

I don't.