Crimes of Lenin & his government

[gewehrdork]

[Split from "As ye sow, so do ye reap"]




Oleg - here's a link for you.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004 ... 3635.shtml

[Oleg Grigoryev]

Oleg - here's a link for you.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004 ... 3635.shtml

meaning what?

Lenin's Cheka, a predecessor of the KGB, murdered an estimated half million Russians. Lenin's policies led directly to the death of millions of more Russians through famine and economic depression.

?????????????????? Lenin was responsible for the famine and dipression? meaning that prior to November of 1917 Russia was well off economically and food-wise?????

[michael mills]

Oleg asked:

?????????????????? Lenin was responsible for the famine and dipression? meaning that prior to November of 1917 Russia was well off economically and food-wise?????

Lenin and the members of his government were of course not responsible for things like crop failure, drought, bad weather etc, or world economic conditions.

But they were responsible for how the government of Soviet Russia responded to the problem of famine and depression, ie whether they chose to do everything in their power to help the starving peasantry, or whether they used those factors to break the resistance of the peasantry to Bolshevik rule.

In the 1990s, there had been a huge famine in Russia resulting from bad weather and crop failure. The Tsarist Government immediately organised relief for the starving, and managed to keep the death rate to a very low level. The Tsar' saw himself as the father of his people, and as having a responsibility to help them in times of trouble.

During the famine of 1920-21, the Bolshevik regime in Russia at first did absolutely nothing to provide relief, seeing the widespread starvation in the Volga region as an opportunity to crush peasant resistance.

Only after a lot of pressure from outside did Lenin grudgingly permit the United States relief mission under Herbert Hoover and the Norwegian relief mission under Fridtjof Nansen and Vidkun Quisling to enter the country and provide food aid to the starving people. Even then his police agents placed many obstacles in the way of the relief effort.

When the relief missions had completed their work and left Russia, Lenin arrested all the members of the Russian committees that had worked together with the foreigners and had them executed as spies and traitors.

That is the difference between the Tsarist and Bolshevik regimes in the way they treated their own people.

It has been estimated that in the last 50 years of the Bolshevik regime, some 25,000 people lost their lives as a result of government repression of revolutionary movements, or through things like pogroms. The great majority of the 25,000 died during or after the uprising of 1905.

By contrast, the Bolshevik regime in the first few years of its existence, from 1918 to 1921, is estimated to have caused through repression of anti-Bolshevik movements the deaths of 500,000 persons, ie 20 times as many as the Tsarist regime in 50 years.

That difference may be traced back to the fact that the Tsarist regime, for all its faults, considered itself to have an obligation, in part based on religion, to care for the peoples of Russia, and particularly for the peasantry. The Bolshevik regime felt itself to be under no such obligation, in part because Marxist ideology was hostile to and contemptuous of the peasantry, and also because the Bolshevik regime consisted to a large degree of non-Russians and members of an ethnic group that had no connections to the peasant masses, and had a tradition of hostility toward them.

[michael mills]

Oleg asked:

?????????????????? Lenin was responsible for the famine and dipression? meaning that prior to November of 1917 Russia was well off economically and food-wise?????

Lenin and the members of his government were of course not responsible for things like crop failure, drought, bad weather etc, or world economic conditions.

But they were responsible for how the government of Soviet Russia responded to the problem of famine and depression, ie whether they chose to do everything in their power to help the starving peasantry, or whether they used those factors to break the resistance of the peasantry to Bolshevik rule.

In the 1990s, there had been a huge famine in Russia resulting from bad weather and crop failure. The Tsarist Government immediately organised relief for the starving, and managed to keep the death rate to a very low level. The Tsar' saw himself as the father of his people, and as having a responsibility to help them in times of trouble.

During the famine of 1920-21, the Bolshevik regime in Russia at first did absolutely nothing to provide relief, seeing the widespread starvation in the Volga region as an opportunity to crush peasant resistance.

Only after a lot of pressure from outside did Lenin grudgingly permit the United States relief mission under Herbert Hoover and the Norwegian relief mission under Fridtjof Nansen and Vidkun Quisling to enter the country and provide food aid to the starving people. Even then his police agents placed many obstacles in the way of the relief effort.

When the relief missions had completed their work and left Russia, Lenin arrested all the members of the Russian committees that had worked together with the foreigners and had them executed as spies and traitors.

That is the difference between the Tsarist and Bolshevik regimes in the way they treated their own people.

It has been estimated that in the last 50 years of the Bolshevik regime, some 25,000 people lost their lives as a result of government repression of revolutionary movements, or through things like pogroms. The great majority of the 25,000 died during or after the uprising of 1905.

By contrast, the Bolshevik regime in the first few years of its existence, from 1918 to 1921, is estimated to have caused through repression of anti-Bolshevik movements the deaths of 500,000 persons, ie 20 times as many as the Tsarist regime in 50 years.

The difference between Tsarism and Bolshevism in their respective reactions to the suffering of the common people may be traced back to the fact that the Tsarist regime, for all its faults, considered itself to have an obligation, in part based on religion, to care for the peoples of Russia, and particularly for the peasantry. The Bolshevik regime felt itself to be under no such obligation, in part because Marxist ideology was hostile to and contemptuous of the peasantry, and also because the Bolshevik regime consisted to a large degree of non-Russians and members of an ethnic group that had no cultural or family connections to the peasant masses, and had a tradition of hostility toward them.

[Oleg Grigoryev]

n the 1990s, there had been a huge famine in Russia resulting from bad weather and crop failure. The Tsarist Government immediately organised relief for the starving, and managed to keep the death rate to a very low level. The Tsar' saw himself as the father of his people, and as having a responsibility to help them in times of trouble.

1890s – I assume?

During the famine of 1920-21, the Bolshevik regime in Russia at first did absolutely nothing to provide relief, seeing the widespread starvation in the Volga region as an opportunity to crush peasant resistance.

not true to put it mildly.

Only after a lot of pressure from outside did Lenin grudgingly permit the United States relief mission under Herbert Hoover and the Norwegian relief mission under Fridtjof Nansen and Vidkun Quisling to enter the country and provide food aid to the starving people. Even then his police agents placed many obstacles in the way of the relief effort.

When the relief missions had completed their work and left Russia, Lenin arrested all the members of the Russian committees that had worked together with the foreigners and had them executed as spies and traitors.

not exactly true also for instance one the person who responsible for relief effort was coma5rde Stalin himself.

By contrast, the Bolshevik regime in the first few years of its existence, from 1918 to 1921, is estimated to have caused through repression of anti-Bolshevik movements the deaths of 500,000 persons, ie 20 times as many as the Tsarist regime in 50 years.

A little disingenuous to compare to different periods don’t you think? How many people died as per-action caused by anti-Bolshevik forces during the same years mr.Mills –that is 1918-1921?

That difference may be traced back to the fact that the Tsarist regime, for all its faults, considered itself to have an obligation, in part based on religion, to care for the peoples of Russia, and particularly for the peasantry.

yes that is why it was last reign in Europe to abandon serfdom, and that is why there was Pugachev uprising – because peasants were treated or so well in Czarist Russia.

The Bolshevik regime felt itself to be under no such obligation, in part because Marxist ideology was hostile to and contemptuous of the peasantry, and also because the Bolshevik regime consisted to a large degree of non-Russians and members of an ethnic group that had no connections to the peasant masses, and had a tradition of hostility toward them.

would you care to elaborate on that? Them damn joos again? Btw Czarist government including Czar himself also had very little to do with being Russians as far as ethnicity goes. Bolshevik regime was hostile towards wealthy peasants it had absolutely nothing against poor ones –of which there was a majority.

[gewehrdork]

Oleg - here's a link for you.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004 ... 3635.shtml

meaning what?

Lenin's Cheka, a predecessor of the KGB, murdered an estimated half million Russians. Lenin's policies led directly to the death of millions of more Russians through famine and economic depression.

?????????????????? Lenin was responsible for the famine and dipression? meaning that prior to November of 1917 Russia was well off economically and food-wise?????

Oleg ; Again you obviously misconstrue and muddy the facts. Of course Lenin was a butcher,murderer and the like.As the statements referred to the 1920's and into the 1930's starvation of vast tracks of the russian breadbasket to make them more acceptable to glorious communisim. And to think that any communist economical system can be healthy for all is another obvious "kazaaam ..... right over your head" missed factoid.
And let's not forget the 'no prisioner's" attitude tthe reds took in their rise to power after 1917. No bloodless actions there !.

[Oleg Grigoryev]

Oleg ; Again you obviously misconstrue and muddy the facts.

what facts? Your article made an error which you are reluctant to admit.

Of course Lenin was a butcher,murderer and the like.

No more so than the opposing side.

As the statements referred to the 1920's and into the 1930's starvation of vast tracks of the russian breadbasket to make them more acceptable to glorious communisim.

Lenin could hardly to do anything with the famine of the 30s since he was dead by then. Famine of the 20s was hardly designed by Bolsheviks – Russian peasantry suffered heavy losses as a result of WW 1 and the swigging pendulum of the Civil War that combined with bad season caused the famine. Like mr Mills noted that was not exactly the first famine to hit Russia. As for the 30s –the famine of that time was indeed in to the large degree caused by the clumsy agricultural polices but then again it was not the only reason. http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... wheatcroft

And to think that any communist economical system can be healthy for all is another obvious "kazaaam ..... right over your head" missed factoid.

poor China…

And let's not forget the 'no prisioner's" attitude tthe reds took in their rise to power after 1917. No bloodless actions there !.

Both sides took that attitude.

[michael mills]

yes that is why it was last reign in Europe to abandon serfdom, and that is why there was Pugachev uprising – because peasants were treated or so well in Czarist Russia.

Yes, Russia did abolish serfdom rather late in its history, only one or two years before the United States abolished slavery.

One of the reasons that for a long time prevented the abolition of serfdom was the opposition of the land-owning class to any measure that would deprive it of its cheap labour force, much the same factor that prevented the abolition of slavery in the United States for such a long time.

As for the Pugachevshchina of the 1770s, it had a number of causes. In part it was a peasant uprising, in part a Cossack mutiny, in part a rebllion of subject ethnic groups such as the Bashkirs.

But it was not a rebellion against the Tsarist system as such, for Pugachev claimed to be the true Tsar' Peter III, who had been deposed and murdered by his wife, Catherine.

[Beppo Schmidt]

No more so than the opposing side.

Therefore you admit that he was no less, either.

[Oleg Grigoryev]

No more so than the opposing side.

Therefore you admit that he was no less, either.

I don't know - I never saw defenite statistics on the white terror. Considering that the whole thing was pretty much an eye for an eye - it could be the case.

[Oleg Grigoryev]

yes that is why it was last reign in Europe to abandon serfdom, and that is why there was Pugachev uprising – because peasants were treated or so well in Czarist Russia.

Yes, Russia did abolish serfdom rather late in its history, only one or two years before the United States abolished slavery.

One of the reasons that for a long time prevented the abolition of serfdom was the opposition of the land-owning class to any measure that would deprive it of its cheap labour force, much the same factor that prevented the abolition of slavery in the United States for such a long time.

As for the Pugachevshchina of the 1770s, it had a number of causes. In part it was a peasant uprising, in part a Cossack mutiny, in part a rebllion of subject ethnic groups such as the Bashkirs.

But it was not a rebellion against the Tsarist system as such, for Pugachev claimed to be the true Tsar' Peter III, who had been deposed and murdered by his wife, Catherine.

What possible bearing does US slavery has on the subject? As for Pugachev claiming that he was a "good czar" - that was of the idealism of Russians. The same attitude prevailed during Stalin years -many believed that "Stalin did not know". But I am deviating, the point is Russian peasantry was handled very roughly by pretty much every Russian Czar. All the starting with construction of Petersburg and all the way to 1st Russian railroad between Moscow and Petersburg were build on the bones of Russian peasants without much concern for the well being of the later. Pugachev uprising why one of the largest was not the first one – there was Bolotnikov pursing before him and numerous smaller ones after –all suppressed by the means of arms

[gewehrdork]

" poor China… "...

And oleg don't forget that utopia North Korea. You seem not to realise that china is on a slide to capitolsim.It's old guard are not giving up communist oppression easily but they ARE losing !. It's only a matter of time before their masses see the light and drop that commie jacket for a good fitting warm and comfortable capitolist made item.

[Marcus]

gewehrdork,

Stay on topic, present day politics is off topic.

/Marcus

[Beppo Schmidt]

Lenin was responsible for the famine and dipression? meaning that prior to November of 1917 Russia was well off economically and food-wise?????

Well Lenin and Stalin don't appear to have done much about the famine and depression or much cared, do they?

[Kunikov]

Lenin was responsible for the famine and dipression? meaning that prior to November of 1917 Russia was well off economically and food-wise?????

Well Lenin and Stalin don't appear to have done much about the famine and depression or much cared, do they?

I'm sorry, what exactly is your evidence for stating that Stalin and/or Lenin didn't 'appear to have done much about the famine and depression or much cared'?