9 ms·

We're all incredibly lucky that the soviet union folded into dust, instead of surviving like the Chinese communist party. People were welcoming Nazis as libera

We're all incredibly lucky that the soviet union folded into dust, instead of surviving like the Chinese communist party. People were welcoming Nazis as liberators back in the day, which should say a bit about how bad the soviets were.

ch4s3 11y ago
>People were welcoming Nazis as liberators back in the day Do you have a citation for that?
- buzzdenver 11y ago
  I'm not a historian, but if 10-20% of the population in my state died of famine and persecution like it happened in Ukraine, then I would not be surprised if anyone taking over the reins would be welcome.
  - guard-of-terra 11y ago
    Ukraine was mostly created by early USSR. Many of regions with famine were "assigned" to Ukrainian SSR after revolution. They were not officially considered Ukraine before the revolution. Core Russian regions (Volga river basin, for example) also had famines just as bad. Same thing with Belarus.
- zeckalpha 11y ago
  Not a citation, but here's a soviet depiction of that time: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091251/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091251/
- eveningcoffee 11y ago
  Probably not in Poland (because it was attacked by Germany and SU simultaneously), but elsewhere where Soviets (I am kind here towards Russians) where able to implement, or tried to implement their regime, it was very plausible. I start with Finland, this was a mixed bag, they were attacked by SU in Winter War and while Finns had allied relations with Germans after that, they kept the promises made in the peace treaty in Moscow and not did help to make Leningrad to surrender (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War). Baltic states were forced to accept SU military bases right before the start of WWII (as it was later discovered, there was agreement between SU and Germany called Molotov-Rippentrop Pact that divided the countries between SU and Germany in Europe). Accepting military bases leaded to SU military backed coup d'état in all Baltic states that lead to political murders and repressions (10s of thousands people murdered, 100s of thousands deported (men into labour camps where most of them died and women and children with into Siberia (with 1/2 death rate)). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Baltic_states_%281940%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Balti... Man made famine in Ukraine should be more well known. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor I do not think that you could find any poll from that period, but I believe that you can imagine that this is highly likely that any force that managed to end the horrors was welcomed at least in the beginning. As you can see, the political situation was favouring the Germans but they managed to turn it around.
- yk 11y ago
  For example Bloodlands by Timothy Snyder. Especially in Ukraine starting in the early '30ies, but also in eastern Poland from '39 onwards, the NKVD had a quite horrendous human rights record. So the Nazi troops were greeted at liberators when they arrived in '41. At that point the Nazi atrocities had not reached the heights they are infamous for.
  - guard-of-terra 11y ago
    I would imagine their worst human rights record was inside core Russia. They had to destroy all the old world, after all.
    - yk 11y ago
      Depends on your favorite measure for atrocities, there was a civil war in Russia, there were the Stalinist purges all over the Soviet Union, there was the colonization of the Asian part of Russia and there was Holdomor. Each of these are among the worst human rights abuses, but actually I am not sure if you can really argues which one of them was worse.
      - guard-of-terra 11y ago
        There was a civil war all over the place. The "ukrainian" part is well documented by Bulgakov, for example. Not going to argue.
nbaksalyar 11y ago
> We're all incredibly lucky that the soviet union folded into dust [...] > People were welcoming Nazis as liberators back in the day You should consider, though, that the late Soviet Union is nothing like it was in Stalin's time. Almost a different country.
- eveningcoffee 11y ago
  On the surface it was nice and shiny - friendship of the nations. In the core it was the same Russian chauvinism that obsessed all the non Russian nations. Russians do not understand it till today and are today more and more willing to execute the genocide against their neighbours when given the change (source: following the Russian media) due to aggressive xenophobic media campaign.
  - guard-of-terra 11y ago
    Wat? USSR had "reverse colonialism" where outskirts siphoned resources from Russian center. Compare standards of living in Georgia or Estonia to those of central RSFSR. If you look at nationality of USSR leaders, they are overwhelmingly not Russian. Even when they were, they had neither possibility nor intent to spend resources on Russian people.
    - eveningcoffee 11y ago
      Yes, I know. The international imperialism and four seasons is the cause of all the misfortune, and fascist from Baltic states and Georgia. This is what stops a common Russian to live in prosperity. Did I cover all the bases? I could give you my understanding about the root cause of Russian misfortune, but if you happen to be Russian (as it seems to be the case), you would probably not appreciate it. You would probably think that I try to insult you while it is just not true. Just some bits of history hurt. I know it from my own experience. But I think that there is a deep historical reason why your named countries are doing in much sense better that Russia despite the lack of natural resources or endless fields of fertile soil.
balladeer 11y ago
> People were welcoming Nazis as liberators back in the day As long as they were not in the Nazis' "don't belong on this planet" list.
- prodmerc 11y ago
  Bulgaria, Romania, Yugoslavian states and Hungary all welcomed the Nazis at first, hoping to get rid of the soviets. Of course they realized they were just as bad or worse (also Germany and USSR had a secret pact)...
  - ust 11y ago
    This is completely incorrect. All of these countries were monarchies leading to the WW2, and all of them, except Yugoslavia, had fascistic tendencies. While they did welcomed the Nazis (again, Yugoslavia is an exception, it was invaded, not just by the Nazis, but by the surrounding countries as well, who were by that time Nazi puppet states), that was not to "get rid of the soviets". I am not trying to absolve Stalinist regime of it's atrocities, or that these countries didn't see Soviets as a threat, but this is just wrong. Also, they didn't "realized" that Nazis were "just as bad or worse", they were on the losing side of the war (again, exception is Yugoslavia, although there was a Nazi puppet state in Croatia), and their regimes were subsequently defeated by the USSR, which then included them in their sphere of influence (Warsaw pact, etc.), and yes, from that point on, effectively ruled them (Yugoslavia had it's on independent dictator, Tito). But to claim "welcoming the Nazis to rid of Soviets" is just factually wrong. What is puzzling for me, is that all of this is readily available on the wiki pages of these respective countries. It seems that relying on "common narrative" is all too great.
  - AnAfrican 11y ago
    The Soviets got into those countries after the Nazis. They had no Soviets to get rid of by the time they welcomed the Nazis.
    - prodmerc 11y ago
      Some did: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pac...

ch4s3 11y ago

>People were welcoming Nazis as liberators back in the day Do you have a citation for that?

buzzdenver 11y ago
I'm not a historian, but if 10-20% of the population in my state died of famine and persecution like it happened in Ukraine, then I would not be surprised if anyone taking over the reins would be welcome.
- guard-of-terra 11y ago
  Ukraine was mostly created by early USSR. Many of regions with famine were "assigned" to Ukrainian SSR after revolution. They were not officially considered Ukraine before the revolution. Core Russian regions (Volga river basin, for example) also had famines just as bad. Same thing with Belarus.
zeckalpha 11y ago
Not a citation, but here's a soviet depiction of that time: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091251/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091251/
eveningcoffee 11y ago
Probably not in Poland (because it was attacked by Germany and SU simultaneously), but elsewhere where Soviets (I am kind here towards Russians) where able to implement, or tried to implement their regime, it was very plausible. I start with Finland, this was a mixed bag, they were attacked by SU in Winter War and while Finns had allied relations with Germans after that, they kept the promises made in the peace treaty in Moscow and not did help to make Leningrad to surrender (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War). Baltic states were forced to accept SU military bases right before the start of WWII (as it was later discovered, there was agreement between SU and Germany called Molotov-Rippentrop Pact that divided the countries between SU and Germany in Europe). Accepting military bases leaded to SU military backed coup d'état in all Baltic states that lead to political murders and repressions (10s of thousands people murdered, 100s of thousands deported (men into labour camps where most of them died and women and children with into Siberia (with 1/2 death rate)). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Baltic_states_%281940%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_the_Balti... Man made famine in Ukraine should be more well known. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor I do not think that you could find any poll from that period, but I believe that you can imagine that this is highly likely that any force that managed to end the horrors was welcomed at least in the beginning. As you can see, the political situation was favouring the Germans but they managed to turn it around.
yk 11y ago
For example Bloodlands by Timothy Snyder. Especially in Ukraine starting in the early '30ies, but also in eastern Poland from '39 onwards, the NKVD had a quite horrendous human rights record. So the Nazi troops were greeted at liberators when they arrived in '41. At that point the Nazi atrocities had not reached the heights they are infamous for.
- guard-of-terra 11y ago
  I would imagine their worst human rights record was inside core Russia. They had to destroy all the old world, after all.
  - yk 11y ago
    Depends on your favorite measure for atrocities, there was a civil war in Russia, there were the Stalinist purges all over the Soviet Union, there was the colonization of the Asian part of Russia and there was Holdomor. Each of these are among the worst human rights abuses, but actually I am not sure if you can really argues which one of them was worse.
    - guard-of-terra 11y ago
      There was a civil war all over the place. The "ukrainian" part is well documented by Bulgakov, for example. Not going to argue.

nbaksalyar 11y ago

> We're all incredibly lucky that the soviet union folded into dust [...] > People were welcoming Nazis as liberators back in the day You should consider, though, that the late Soviet Union is nothing like it was in Stalin's time. Almost a different country.

eveningcoffee 11y ago
On the surface it was nice and shiny - friendship of the nations. In the core it was the same Russian chauvinism that obsessed all the non Russian nations. Russians do not understand it till today and are today more and more willing to execute the genocide against their neighbours when given the change (source: following the Russian media) due to aggressive xenophobic media campaign.
- guard-of-terra 11y ago
  Wat? USSR had "reverse colonialism" where outskirts siphoned resources from Russian center. Compare standards of living in Georgia or Estonia to those of central RSFSR. If you look at nationality of USSR leaders, they are overwhelmingly not Russian. Even when they were, they had neither possibility nor intent to spend resources on Russian people.
  - eveningcoffee 11y ago
    Yes, I know. The international imperialism and four seasons is the cause of all the misfortune, and fascist from Baltic states and Georgia. This is what stops a common Russian to live in prosperity. Did I cover all the bases? I could give you my understanding about the root cause of Russian misfortune, but if you happen to be Russian (as it seems to be the case), you would probably not appreciate it. You would probably think that I try to insult you while it is just not true. Just some bits of history hurt. I know it from my own experience. But I think that there is a deep historical reason why your named countries are doing in much sense better that Russia despite the lack of natural resources or endless fields of fertile soil.

balladeer 11y ago

> People were welcoming Nazis as liberators back in the day As long as they were not in the Nazis' "don't belong on this planet" list.

prodmerc 11y ago
Bulgaria, Romania, Yugoslavian states and Hungary all welcomed the Nazis at first, hoping to get rid of the soviets. Of course they realized they were just as bad or worse (also Germany and USSR had a secret pact)...
- ust 11y ago
  This is completely incorrect. All of these countries were monarchies leading to the WW2, and all of them, except Yugoslavia, had fascistic tendencies. While they did welcomed the Nazis (again, Yugoslavia is an exception, it was invaded, not just by the Nazis, but by the surrounding countries as well, who were by that time Nazi puppet states), that was not to "get rid of the soviets". I am not trying to absolve Stalinist regime of it's atrocities, or that these countries didn't see Soviets as a threat, but this is just wrong. Also, they didn't "realized" that Nazis were "just as bad or worse", they were on the losing side of the war (again, exception is Yugoslavia, although there was a Nazi puppet state in Croatia), and their regimes were subsequently defeated by the USSR, which then included them in their sphere of influence (Warsaw pact, etc.), and yes, from that point on, effectively ruled them (Yugoslavia had it's on independent dictator, Tito). But to claim "welcoming the Nazis to rid of Soviets" is just factually wrong. What is puzzling for me, is that all of this is readily available on the wiki pages of these respective countries. It seems that relying on "common narrative" is all too great.
- AnAfrican 11y ago
  The Soviets got into those countries after the Nazis. They had no Soviets to get rid of by the time they welcomed the Nazis.
  - prodmerc 11y ago
    Some did: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pac...