68 years ago today, the largest war in history began

[mahler10th]

Quote from: Maciek on 22 June 2009, 23:05:11
So what exactly does the West "owe" to Soviet Russia?

Shostakovich?   

[bwv 1080]

So what exactly does the West "owe" to Soviet Russia?

Nothing to Soviet Russia per se, only respect to the individuals who were responsible for the defeat of Hitler

Also a correction of the emphasis given to the Western powers accomplishments in comparison to the Russian that is nearly a mirror image of the actual contribution the two sides gave to the effort towards Germany's defeat.

[bwv 1080]

The proposition that Soviet Russia only got involved in World War Two in 1941 when the Germans invaded Russian territory is however dubious.

Its a bullshit proposition, but it was not made here

[Coopmv]

The war to end all wars ...

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Just a couple of points to the above:

People are referring to "Russia," which is a bit annoying, since no country of that name existed between 1922 and 1991. Rather, there was something called the "Council [Soviet] Union," a multinational entity consisting of various republics, of which Russia was the largest.

Of those republics, Russia didn't suffer the worst from the war. The hardest-hit republics were Ukraine and Belarus, which lost something like 25-30% of their population. I think they deserve some mention as well.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

all you can say is that it would have been worse under the Nazis who planned to starve out the majority of the Slavic populations to make room for German colonization

I have met plenty of Poles, Russians, Czechs, Ukrainians, Lithuanians et al. who maintain that life was better under the Communists (for ordinary people at least) than it is now. However, I have never met anyone in these countries who wanted to live under Nazi rule again.

[knight66]

http://www.memo.ru/daytoday/5katyn_eng.htm

Try reading this. At almost one blow, the male intelligentsia of a nation was massacred by Russians. Officers in the Polish forces were mainly drawn from that class.

Not quite the act of liberators; rather of ruthless landgrabbers

Mike

[Coopmv]

I have met plenty of Poles, Russians, Czechs, Ukrainians, Lithuanians et al. who maintain that life was better under the Communists (for ordinary people at least) than it is now. However, I have never met anyone in these countries who wanted to live under Nazi rule again.

Globalization is a very brutal game.  Most western industrilaized nations are now feeling the effect of job losses and decline in living standard ...

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Globalization is a very brutal game.  Most western industrilaized nations are now feeling the effect of job losses and decline in living standard ...

Sure. But my larger point was that most people who lived under "actually existing socialism" (to use a popular dissident term) do not view it as an unalloyed evil akin to Nazism, but as something with both positive and negative aspects. When the system collapsed, they gained something, but they lost something too.

[Florestan]

Maciek, Mike, Dundonell --- Thank you so much for expressing my views and thoughts on the matter.

Spitvalve --- I am curious about "the positive" aspects of Communism: is there anyone of them that would have not been achieved had Communism never took over this or that country?

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Spitvalve --- I am curious about "the positive" aspects of Communism: is there anyone of them that would have not been achieved had Communism never took over this or that country?

I have no idea - that's hypothetical history.

Don't get me wrong, I think Communism was a disaster in many ways. It is noteworthy, however, that there are plenty of people in various countries who lived under the system itself (i.e. not campus lefties who have never experienced it firsthand) who find things to praise about it. For this reason (among others), I find the "Communism was just as bad as Nazism" argument dubious.

[Florestan]

Don't get me wrong,

Don't worry, I don't.

I think Communism was a disaster in many ways. It is noteworthy, however, that there are plenty of people in various countries who lived under the system itself (i.e. not campus lefties who have never experienced it firsthand) who find things to praise about it.

Tell me about that! The nostalgia of Communism is rather strong here in Romania especially among older people , but their reasoning is flawed. They praise Communism for building block of flats, hospitals, subway, factories, schools etc, as if had Romania remained a Westernized Kingdom at the end of WWII all these would have never been built. Furthermore,. they praise Communism for providing each and every citizen with a job and a home and for imposing fixed prices on everything --- i.e, they praise it for exactly the things that spelled ruin to the Communist economy and resulted in a general and unprecedented impoverishment of Romanian society. (It is true that anybody had a job --- but the money he earned were worthless since there was (almost) nothing to buy. The years 1981-89 have been particularly appaling, with hundred-meter long queues for everything, with severe shortages of, among others, basic food, toilet paper, razors, with daily cutoffs of electricity, heating, water, gas... anyway, I don't even want to remember all that).

Whatever the Communists boast of having achieved, it was achieved in the free world better, with less human and financial cost and without ruining the economy.

For this reason (among others), I find the "Communism was just as bad as Nazism" argument dubious.

But why? Exactly the same arguments made by those who nostalgically praise Communism have been advanced by those who nostalgically praise Nazism.

IMO, Communism was not "just as bad" as Nazism --- it was much worse, if only for killing far, far more people. It was also much more hypocritical: Nazi never made a secret of their doctrines and plans and acted them out accordingly. Communism, on the other hand, preached universal fraternity and liberation while acting out hatred and enslavement.

I take them both in absolute horror.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Whatever the Communists boast of having achieved, it was achieved in the free world better, with less human and financial cost and without ruining the economy.

Agreed.

IMO, Communism was not "just as bad" as Nazism --- it was much worse, if only for killing far, far more people.

The numbers game is a slippery one to play. For one thing, Nazism lasted 12 years and was confined to Europe; Communist regimes have existed since 1917, all over the world, and still exist in some places (including the world's largest country). So I don't think this comparison is valuable (and if we're doing body counts, I suspect the one from Western imperialism and colonialism beats them all). Furthermore, on a personal level, I have met Communists who I thought were decent (if misguided) human beings; I can't say the same for Nazis (and I have met a few).

But to speak only for myself (and I do have some firsthand experience living in a commie country, so I'm speaking at least partly from personal experience), not all Communist countries have been the same in practical terms, and if I were forced to make a choice, I would much rather live in one of the more moderately authoritarian countries (like Hungary or Poland post-1956, Czechoslovakia in the 1960s, or Yugoslavia before it started to break up) than in any country ruled or occupied by Nazis.

But, of course, liberal democracy beats them both.

[Florestan]

The numbers game is a slippery one to play.

True. However, I didn't imply that Nazism was somehow more humane than Communism, but just that, history being as it was, bottom line the death toll of Communism is heavier than that of Nazism.

I have met Communists who I thought were decent (if misguided) human beings; I can't say the same for Nazis (and I have met a few).

Are you talking about pragmatic Communists who were members of a Communist party just because they were compelled to be, in order to advance their career or to provide for their families, or about hard line aparatchiks and politruks?

not all Communist countries have been the same in practical terms

Agreed. Poland or Hungary or Czechoslovakia or Yugoslavia were, economically speaking, better off than Romania, Bulgaria or Albania and the cult of the party and its leader never attained the delirious and megalomaniac level attained in the latter countries. I am not sure about repression, though --- I suspect it was just as tough.

and if I were forced to make a choice, I would much rather live in one of the more moderately authoritarian countries (like Hungary or Poland post-1956, Czechoslovakia in the 1960s, or Yugoslavia before it started to break up) than in any country ruled or occupied by Nazis.

Well, yes and no. Both in the former and in the latter cases, if you kept your mouth shut and pledged allegiance (if only symbolic) to the party line you would have lived a relatively safe life (except if you were a Jew in the latter). But no sooner had you begun to grumble or openly protest than you'd have run into trouble in both cases.

Culturally speaking though, I agree with you. The atmosphere in Nazi Germany must have been more sinister than in the counter-examples you provided.

Bottom line, I would have had any country west of Hungary over them at anytime after the WWII. 

But, of course, liberal democracy beats them both.

Absolutely.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Are you talking about pragmatic Communists who were members of a Communist party just because they were compelled to be, in order to advance their career or to provide for their families, or about hard line aparatchiks and politruks?

I'm talking about 1) pragmatic Communists; and 2) a more rare group - idealists who may or may not have belonged to the Party, but believed in "socialist principles" and tried to follow them in their own lives. Such people struck me as naive, but I did not find them to be evil or malevolent. I'm definitely not talking about "hard line apparatchiks."

Agreed. Poland or Hungary or Czechoslovakia or Yugoslavia were, economically speaking, better off than Romania, Bulgaria or Albania and the cult of the party and its leader never attained the delirious and megalomaniac level attained in the latter countries. I am not sure about repression, though --- I suspect it was just as tough.

Here I will be lazy, and link to a short article I wrote several years ago, dealing with these particular issues:

http://www.nypress.com/article-8535-lessons-from-around-the-bloc.html

Bottom line, I would have had any country west of Hungary over them at anytime after the WWII. 

Sure. But sometimes history gives us only bad choices, and we have to play the hand that's dealt to us 

[vandermolen]

Like Maciek, I have no wish to diminish the heroism of the Russian soldiers who fought against the German army between 1941 and 1945 or to minimise the absolutely crucial role which Russia played in the defeat of Nazi Germany. The scale of fighting on the Eastern Front was immense and easily dwarfs the numbers who fought in other campaigns.

The proposition that Soviet Russia only got involved in World War Two in 1941 when the Germans invaded Russian territory is however dubious. Russia had invaded Poland on September 17, 1939 as a consequence of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact signed with Germany on 23 August. Following that invasion Soviet Russia annexed Eastern Poland. In November 1939 Soviet Russia invaded Finland('The Winter War' of Nov.1939-March 1940). In June 1940 Soviet Russia invaded and annexed Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The same month Soviet Russia annexed Bessarabia and the Upper Bukovina from Rumania. In each case brutal repression and mass deportations of civilians followed the annexation. Russian exploitation of the wartime situation between 1939 and 1941 to enforce and extend domination over Eastern Europe should never be forgotten...just as we should never forget the suffering of the Russian people between 1941 and 1945.

Yes, I agree. I have always had an interest in the historical significance of June 22nd as it is my birthday (but not in 1941)

France also surrendered to Germany on 22/6/1940.

[bwv 1080]

The real point is that by acknowledging the fact that the USSR is almost entirely responsible for destroying Germany's military, the whole narrative of WW2 changes.  No longer can it be spun as a triumph of "citizen-soldiers" mustered from freedom-loving liberal democracies over totalitarian oppression. Rather it is a sordid struggle between two more or less equally brutal totalitarian systems, one of which we allied ourselves with for self-defense and then engaged in a permanent war footing for 45 years, which created (at least in the US) a bloated military-industrial complex that now has to continually find new threats to justify its existence. 

[Coopmv]

I have no idea - that's hypothetical history.

Don't get me wrong, I think Communism was a disaster in many ways. It is noteworthy, however, that there are plenty of people in various countries who lived under the system itself (i.e. not campus lefties who have never experienced it firsthand) who find things to praise about it. For this reason (among others), I find the "Communism was just as bad as Nazism" argument dubious.

There are two main reasons why the Chinese Communists are still around while the Russian Communists are not.

1) The myopic American policy makers somehow thought Russian Communists were evil while the Chinese Communists were not.

2) The overseas Chinese from Hong Kong and Taiwan have helped build up the economy of Communist China from next to nothing to something meaningful.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

There are two main reasons why the Chinese Communists are still around while the Russian Communists are not.

You forgot:

3) The Chinese Communists themselves recognized the system wasn't working, and decided to liberalize the economy without liberalizing the political structure. (Had they done it the other way around, they would be where the Soviet Communists are now.)

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

self loathing liberals who rail against their own nation and culture

Jeez, am I one of those? Thanks for a good laugh 

What if you were German?

Talk about missing the point. You have totally missed mine, which was a practical one relating to the actual experience of living in different types of societies.

Since I'm not German, I can't really answer your question. But being who I am, I would rather live in West Germany than East Germany, and I would rather live in East Germany than Nazi Germany.

Nazism = protected their own nation at the expense of the innocent life of others.

Except of course for those members of their own nation who happened to disagree with Nazism.