h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Stalin knew exactly what he was doing
Marx was a theorist
Lenin tried to realise Marx's ideals but came up again human nature
Stalin tried to change human nature and eliminated those who did not conform
Sadly communism is rather like most religion great in theory and full of noble aspirations impractical in reality and a nightmare when fanatical followers try to compel people to conform to their version of the dogma - and that's coming from a former Trotskyist

But again...not at all justifying Mao (and I have credentials here A5141369)...Mao's most significant crime, the Great Famine, was less murderous intent and more sheer stupidity and crass indifference to human suffering.

And if we want to count the crass indifference as a crime (and we should!) then let's add the Bengal Famine:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943

and US indifference to the Bangladeshi genocide:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2011/50/the-blood-telegram.html

What with the near constant state of colonial and post-colonial war in sub-Saharan Africa, I think we can more-or-less conclude that *nobody* much cared about human life in the C20th.

>>Stalin knew exactly what he was doing

Yyyyesss...but I'm not sure that he had a Grand Communist Plan. He was more concerned with his own interests. A true megalomaniac.

Jung Chang makes a similar argument about Mao. I slightly disagree there. At least in his revolutionary period, Mao was an innovative (if misguided) theorist. But his revolutionary theory was about how to smash imperialism and gain power, not about how to run a happy and successful society.

Firstly the great leap forward was as a result of Mao's megalomania it resulted in his decree that China should produce more grain than the USA and more steel than Britain (without industrializing) - large areas were deforested and huge numbers of workers diverted from the fields and elsewhere to produce vast amounts of useless low grade pig iron (which the peasants referred to as ox-dung) in home made furnaces - the loss of labour and environmental damage resulted in crop failures and famine - faced with impossible targets and fearing punishment collective farms just reported increasingly exaggerated (and in many cases absurd) production figures which the bureaucrats happily passed on and people starved because the official figures said there were vast surpluses of grain.

After this Mao was sidelined by party leaders and for a wile became a figure head until he used his influence and editorship of the People's Daily to incite the cultural revolution and a revolt again st the leaders who had ousted him and the loyal communist who saw him for what he was - this resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands in fighting and brutal persecution of people who had given their all to try and realise communism in China and hundreds of thousands more in labour camps.

I'm not for one second disagreeing about Mao's megalomania, tuc (see my Cultural Revolution Entry, linked above). I'm just suggesting that it took a different form to 'Let's go out and kill people.' Rather, it was 'I have this cunning plan...' - and when that manifestly didn't work, 'I see no famine.' (actual quote). Even The Cultural Revolution - that was by no means tightly orchestrated by Mao. It was chaos unleashed in a monstrous fit of pique.

All this is slightly different to a deliberate process of making lists, rounding people up, loading them onto specially marshalled trains, shipping them to extermination centres with specially designed and constructed facilities...all the while diverting resources from an ongoing war. (and there was considerable tension between Nazis who wanted to prioritise extermination and those who thought Jews* should 'give back' labour to The Fatherland.

Or is it? Any efforts in China obviously took gargantuan levels of mobilisation. And when it comes to it...dead is dead.

But I can't help but think it is simplistic and possibly intellectually lazy to play the numbers game - comparing one lot of mass murders to another. They all have their separate cause and characters. It also perhaps does a disservice to the victims. Kulak? Jew? Rwandan? Just dead folk.

Thoughts?






* In this context, we do mean Jews.

> My point was it is the five million who often get forgotten.
<

Forgotten by whom?

So many times when I talk about it people can hardly wait to come out with....but don't forget the Gypsies, the Gays, the mentally handicapped blah..

And certainly in the museums at both camps all types of people are mentioned..also the colour of stars worn and which particular huts they were put in.

I think that's a cliched idea that is certainly not my experience.

The point is that the vast number of one group were the Jews...and also if you study Hitler's speeches it is the Jews that get talked about most of the time.

I think that's a perfectly valid point. Indeed, may others were murdered. It's been pointed out that many there were also murdered elsewhere. But anti-Semitism was a signal feature of Nazi ideology. It is reasonable to highlight this.

I think one of the more interesting figures is the total number of Jews in Europe at the time; infuriatingly, I cannot remember it and it it too near midnight for me to spend half an hour tracking down reliable figures, but it it was either 8 or 10 million I believe. In other words, almost all of them *were* killed.

That's German efficiency for you.

I can't really take in the concept of the stats.

I only really started to take it in a bit in a way they touched me when I had a long standing relationship with a Jewish Guy.

He told me so much stuff about the richness of Ashkenasi Jewish culture in Eastern Europe..mostly to do with Poland.

It was incredibly artistic, especially to do with stories and music. But he said they were pacifist....and that whole culture was virtually wiped from the face of the earth.

That is something I can get more of a grip on rather than numbers.

>>But he said they were pacifist...

Well - not all. Let's not forget the fierce resistance that some put up.