Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Stalin's Contributions

Discussion in 'Prelude to War & Poland 1939' started by kowalskil, Mar 8, 2013.

  1. kowalskil

    kowalskil Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    The message below has been posted at our university forum. The author once accused me of spreading cold war propaganda (referring to my two books).

    Ludwik Kowalski, author of "Diary of a Former Communist"

    http://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/life/intro.html

    =================================

    ” March 7 2013

    To the Editor:

    Istvan Deak’s review “Could Stalin Have Been Stopped?” (NYRB March 13 2013 - http://www.nybooks.c...…topped/?page=1) is filled with statements about Soviet history that are factually false. Here is a partial list:

    * There was no “intentional killing by starvation of millions of Ukrainians” by Stalin. Every Western expert rejects the “Holodomor” myth, which originated with pro-Nazi Ukrainian nationalists in the 1950s.

    * Stalin did not “shoot hundreds of thousands of imaginary political enemies in the later 1930s.” NKVD chief Nikolai Ezhov did so, as a part of his conspiracy against the Soviet government. In 1939-40 he and over a hundred of his top NKVD men were tried and executed for these horrific crimes.

    * Stalin did not “attempt” to “eliminate much of the Polish leadership”. It was the Nazis who did so, in their “AB-Aktion.”

    * There exists an important dispute over who shot the Poles in the murders known as the Katyn Massacre and good evidence that the Soviets shot some Polish POWs and the Germans later shot the rest.

    * Stalin was not a “dictator.” He worked collaboratively with other Politburo members and was sometimes defeated. Stephen G. Wheatcroft has termed Stalin’s prewar method of rule “Team Stalin.”

    * There were no “combined Nazi and Soviet invasions.” The Red Army did not “invade Poland” on September 17 1939. Abandoned by its government the Soviets had to prevent the German army from marching up to the existing Soviet border, something no country would have permitted. Winston Churchill said that the Soviets were right to do so.

    * Though armed and equipped by the Soviet Union in 1941-42 the “anti-Nazi army formed by General Władysław Anders” refused to fight the Nazis until 1944.

    * The Polish Home Army”, riddled with anti-Semitism, shot Jews escaping from the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1943 and collaborated with the German army against the Red Army.

    * American and British pilots were not “routinely denied landing rights” when “trying to help the Home Army.” They were denied such rights for a few weeks in August-September 1944 because, like General Władysław Anders, Stalin considered the Warsaw Uprising to be a crime against the Polish people.

    * There is no evidence that the Soviets “massacred thousands of innocent” Poles.

    A Hungarian, Deak fails to mention that Hungary invaded the Soviet Union side by side with Nazi Germany, and Hungarian forces murdered at least hundreds of thousands of innocent Soviet citizens, including many Jews.

    Grover Furr, Montclair State University “
     
  2. Slipdigit

    Slipdigit Good Ol' Boy Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    17,717
    Likes Received:
    2,238
    Location:
    Alabama
    Welcome Ludwig. I will read your diaries later this evening.
     
  3. TiredOldSoldier

    TiredOldSoldier Ace

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    452
    Welcome Ludwig,

    There seems to be some very personal views of events hanging around in those quotes, some of the statements I believe to be false, while others I beleve to be at least partially true, many I know too little about to have an informed opinion. Stalin was one of the most ruthless leaders of a century where ruthless leader abunded and technology made large scale massacres all too easy. Cold war propaganda systematically fails to put his actions "in context", he was paranoid but he had lots of real enemies and no reason to trust the west that had supported the "whites", While there is little doubt he wasn't a very nice guy I still hold to the theory that if he hadn't been there there'se a good chance I would be writing this post in German rather than in English.
     
    urqh likes this.
  4. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    236
    Reply to the different points

    1)About the homodor :yes ,but :being nationalist Ukrainian,does not mean being pro nazi

    2)About the purges : no :what the Cheka did,was ordered by Stalin

    3)Stalin liquidated the préwar Polish communist party leadership

    4)Katyn :no,this is communist propaganda :it was Stalin,even Putin is recognizing this

    5) NO :Stalin was a dictator :as Kroetsjov said :If Stalin said :dance,a wise man would dance.

    6)The Soviet invasion :agree

    7)NO :the Anders army was equipped by the British/US and fought against the Germans at Monte Cassino

    8)NO: the Polish Homle Army did not collaborate with the Germans

    9)The Warsaw uprising :Stalin did not care about the Polish people,and,it is dishonest to claim that the Allied air crew were denied such rights only in august-september,because,august/september was the period of the Warsaw uprising .

    10)=a strawman

    11)= a strawman

    Several of these 11 points are only pure communist propaganda
     
    Tamino likes this.
  5. Tamino

    Tamino Doc - The Deplorable

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2011
    Messages:
    2,591
    Likes Received:
    302
    Location:
    Untersteiermark
    After so many years of spreading carefully prepared mixture of truth and lies it is impossible to judge these statements impartially. Now, it is impossible to reverse that process of creating public opinion and separate lies from the truth and I wouldn't even bother doing so.

    One thing is certain: he helped to save the world from Nazis and that itself is a great achievement.
     
  6. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    25,522
    Likes Received:
    1,966
    Location:
    Finland
    Well, denial is the easiest way to reverse things. You make the other one prove things and you can just deny these for lack of evidence....

    If Stalin was such a nice guy why did Lenin in his last will say that Stalin should never have any power in the Communist party. And how did Stalin steal the power....making the members fight each other and then Stalin eliminated them one by one. THAT is a dictator and stealer of power.
     
  7. Tamino

    Tamino Doc - The Deplorable

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2011
    Messages:
    2,591
    Likes Received:
    302
    Location:
    Untersteiermark
    I see what you mean Kai and I do respect your view. :)

    For some he is still is a demi god and for some embodiment of the Evil. For me, during the World War he was a leader of a nation opposing aggression. I neither idealize nor demonize him. I am viewing West and the East from location situated exactly where the Iron Curtain used to be for decades, just few kilometers to south-east. Believe me I don't care and don't trust neither of opposing ideologies.

    What I really wanted to say is that I'm rejecting endless ideological polarization regarding Josif Vissarionovich because it distorts perception of events both at the East and the West. While reading books I simply skip over too political chapters to make reading easier and unbiased.
     
  8. Slipdigit

    Slipdigit Good Ol' Boy Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    17,717
    Likes Received:
    2,238
    Location:
    Alabama
    Ludwig, I read nearly all of your diary. I enjoyed it and am glad you have posted it.

    I ask that readers confine their comments to the contents of the diary and avoid broader discussion of Stalinism and the man, unless it pertains to the diary. We already have a good many threads that discuss that dictator and his minions, but this is the only one that discuss this diary.
     
  9. steverodgers801

    steverodgers801 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    1,661
    Likes Received:
    73
    While he may have saved the world he also helped create Hitler. There are numerous records of lists of names of "enemies to be purged", everyone has Stalins approval on them and he often wrote on those he knew. This guy reminds me of David Irving.
     
  10. Tamino

    Tamino Doc - The Deplorable

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2011
    Messages:
    2,591
    Likes Received:
    302
    Location:
    Untersteiermark
    Hi Ludwik, :)

    I have been to Poland on many occasions and I started to be fond of Poland after a while. Poland isn't a country of apparent beauty which overwhelms you at the first glance. For me, affection for Poland came later as a taste and smell of the country of your origin in the spring. I have realized my affection towards Poland during a short trip from Lodz to Warsaw about a decade ago. I also have personal relationships with some Poles and I am looking forward to meeting them on their way to summer vacations at our Adriatic coast.

    Your diary is indeed interesting literature. We both have something in common: we've been born and lived in the eastern European socialism, behind the Iron Curtain. We both know communists; you were a member of communist party. I have never been a communist and never wanted to be but I know them very well, especially their little selfish reasons. For me, communists were little cheap opportunistic crooks who wanted to enjoy minor benefits of the membership: faster promotions, state scholarships, shorter waiting times to get a car, cheap accommodation etc. For me, there was nothing worthy abandoning personal persuasions. We also know that they weren't so dangerous at all - nasty but not so dangerous. I never liked them but I never hated them either. I was indifferent towards ideologies. I've always were and still I am interested in my own private affairs and in intellectual challenges.

    My question is: why have you applied for membership of Polish Communist Party and what is the primary reason for such bitter disappointment with ideology you've supported.

    I am sure your answer to that simple question might shed more light on real nature of socialist regimes.
     
    urqh likes this.
  11. KodiakBeer

    KodiakBeer Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,329
    Likes Received:
    1,709
    Location:
    The Arid Zone
    Would WWII have even happened if Stalin had not allied himself with Hitler to attack Poland? Would Hitler have gone into Poland if the Soviets had said "Nyet" and allied themselves with the Poles?

    Stalin's ruthlessness may have helped defeat Germany, but it was a war he brought on himself.
     
    Karjala likes this.
  12. Jenisch

    Jenisch Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    20
    The Holodomor is considerated a genocide by several countries. There are Western authours, such as Tymothy Snyder, who claim it was a deliberated action to starve the Ukranians. According to such authours, it was not an action simply to kill millions, but to liquidate the oppositon among them. There's no concensus about this, however.


    Ah, he did... Stalin belived that them, specially the minorities target such as the Poles, could have been colaborating for what he perceived to be the countries which represented the greatest treat to the USSR in the 1930s: Germany, Poland and Japan.
    But Stalin did just this: he ordered the security chiefs to execute the actions and later executed them.

    Both of them did. The Germans actually wanted to destroy the majority of the Polish population, while the Soviets wanted to destroy it's intelligence. In the period of joint occupation, the Germans and Soviets shot about 200,000 Poles, with about half to each side.

    Communist propaganda reaches ridiculous status...

    Stalin did not worked alone, but no dicatorship worked alone.

    The Red Army was supposed to defend the Soviet territory. It could have been even from Poland and Germany coming from the same borders. This is a fallacy.

    In overal, there's a lot of political propaganda in this "article".
     
    Karjala likes this.
  13. Centurion

    Centurion New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    At the Eastern Edge of the Monacan Nation
    "* There were no “combined Nazi and Soviet invasions.” The Red Army did not “invade Poland” on September 17 1939. Abandoned by its government the Soviets had to prevent the German army from marching up to the existing Soviet border, something no country would have permitted. Winston Churchill said that the Soviets were right to do so."

    THis is the point I most disagree with from what resarch I've done. The Molotov Ribbentrop Pact of 1939 divided Eastern Europe between the U.S.S.R. and Nazi Germany. When the Nazis invaded Poland Stalin proclaimed it to be nore longer sovreign and was taken back land that was rightly of the Soviet Union, or at least that's what he said. His invasion destroyed what little chances the poles had at winning.
    Here is an excerpt:
    Text of the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact
    The Government of the German Reich and The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics desirous of strengthening the cause of peace between Germany and the U.S.S.R., and proceeding from the fundamental provisions of the Neutrality Agreement concluded in April, 1926 between Germany and the U.S.S.R., have reached the following Agreement:
    Article I. Both High Contracting Parties obligate themselves to desist from any act of violence, any aggressive action, and any attack on each other, either individually or jointly with other Powers.
    Article II. Should one of the High Contracting Parties become the object of belligerent action by a third Power, the other High Contracting Party shall in no manner lend its support to this third Power.
    Article III. The Governments of the two High Contracting Parties shall in the future maintain continual contact with one another for the purpose of consultation in order to exchange information on problems affecting their common interests.
    Article IV. Should disputes or conflicts arise between the High Contracting Parties shall participate in any grouping of Powers whatsoever that is directly or indirectly aimed at the other party.
    Article V. Should disputes or conflicts arise between the High Contracting Parties over problems of one kind or another, both parties shall settle these disputes or conflicts exclusively through friendly exchange of opinion or, if necessary, through the establishment of arbitration commissions.
    Article VI. The present Treaty is concluded for a period of ten years, with the proviso that, in so far as one of the High Contracting Parties does not advance it one year prior to the expiration of this period, the validity of this Treaty shall automatically be extended for another five years.
    Article VII. The present treaty shall be ratified within the shortest possible time. The ratifications shall be exchanged in Berlin. The Agreement shall enter into force as soon as it is signed.

    [The section below was not published at the time the above was announced.]
    Secret Additional Protocol.
    Article I. In the event of a territorial and political rearrangement in the areas belonging to the Baltic States (Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania), the northern boundary of Lithuania shall represent the boundary of the spheres of influence of Germany and U.S.S.R. In this connection the interest of Lithuania in the Vilna area is recognized by each party.
    Article II. In the event of a territorial and political rearrangement of the areas belonging to the Polish state, the spheres of influence of Germany and the U.S.S.R. shall be bounded approximately by the line of the rivers Narev, Vistula and San.
    The question of whether the interests of both parties make desirable the maintenance of an independent Polish States and how such a state should be bounded can only be definitely determined in the course of further political developments.
    In any event both Governments will resolve this question by means of a friendly agreement.
    Article III. With regard to Southeastern Europe attention is called by the Soviet side to its interest in Bessarabia. The German side declares its complete political disinteredness in these areas.
    Article IV. This protocol shall be treated by both parties as strictly secret.
    Moscow, August 23, 1939.
    For the Government of the German Reich v. Ribbentrop
    Plenipotentiary of the Government of the U.S.S.R. V. Molotov

    This is from Fordham University
    http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1939pact.html

    I'll have more to say as I conduct more research into the Politburo and purges of the 30s, as well the Warsaw Uprising.
     
    Karjala likes this.
  14. urqh

    urqh Tea drinking surrender monkey

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,683
    Likes Received:
    954
    THis is the point I most disagree with from what resarch I've done. The Molotov Ribbentrop Pact of 1939 divided Eastern Europe between the U.S.S.R. and Nazi Germany.


    I think that says it all on the matter....It was planned...It did not strike Stalin like a lightning bolt out of the blue once Germany had entered Poland...The demarcation was a joint plan. The new border between Germany and Russia was agreed in advance of any German move into Poland....The Russians insisting on Latvia too I believe.
     
  15. Tamino

    Tamino Doc - The Deplorable

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2011
    Messages:
    2,591
    Likes Received:
    302
    Location:
    Untersteiermark
    Just to mention that our friend Ludwik Kowalski, a former communist, the starter of this thread was last active on 8. march. His last activity was the opening post of this thread. After that he vanished. There may be just 2 reasons for that:

    1. health issues or
    2. he doesn't give a stuff what we think about his "questions"

    In case #1 I wish he recovers soon.
    In case #2 I don't give a stuff for his "questions".
     
  16. urqh

    urqh Tea drinking surrender monkey

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,683
    Likes Received:
    954
    Tamino.....The voice of the liberal wing of ww2 forums. :vampire: ...He said.... stuff.....
     
  17. Tamino

    Tamino Doc - The Deplorable

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2011
    Messages:
    2,591
    Likes Received:
    302
    Location:
    Untersteiermark
    I've thought that's a regular English phrase. Last time I've heard it was when Bernie Ecclestone said something like: "I don't give a stuff what Max Mosley thinks!" Is that phrase okay or is it too informal? Something like "I don't give a s....."
     
  18. urqh

    urqh Tea drinking surrender monkey

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,683
    Likes Received:
    954
    Stuffs ok....just funny coming from your writing...
     
  19. Tamino

    Tamino Doc - The Deplorable

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2011
    Messages:
    2,591
    Likes Received:
    302
    Location:
    Untersteiermark
    As the matter of fact it was intended. ;)
     
  20. belasar

    belasar Court Jester

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,515
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    I would not read over much in Mr. kowalski's posting habits, he tends to post infrequently.
     

Share This Page