The Great Purge

[Agent327]

And where I claimed that 2-3 millions are all victims of stalinism? From this number, 800,000 can be counted as "victims of stalinism", as executed political inmates.

Also government at least partially responsible for deaths because of famine, but I didn't consider them here, because they were not repressed.

Since the GULAG system is part of official repression ALL victirms must me counted, as I pointed out on another thread, because the soviet 'legal system' denies ANY defendant certain basic legal rights.

A state-induced famine isn't repression? You must be joking.

 

[plarq]

Well, I think red_elk has legitmate claim to seperate political purge (which hit cadre of Soviet bureaucracy and army), classes purge (hit dissidents, wealthy people, bourgeois, so on) and unintentional purge (hit anyone neglected by the government).

 

[Yeekim]

How could you read sites of evil occupants!

Know thine enemy...

 

[red_elk]

Since the GULAG system is part of official repression ALL victirms must me counted, as I pointed out on another thread, because the soviet 'legal system' denies ANY defendant certain basic legal rights.

For now, I'm considering all victims of penal system (GULAG, labor camps, exile places), and documented number of these people is 2-3 millions. To be fair, criminals should not be counted as victims of political repressions. It is possible if, for example, all people being executed in China or USA last years (Russia and Europe has no capital punishment) will also be considered as victims of repressions. If yes, no problem.

A state-induced famine isn't repression? You must be joking.

It was not, because there was no intention to kill these people. I can believe Stalin was cruel dictator, but he definitely wasn't crazy idiot, to kill millions of people of own country before war. Again, he has responsibility for these deaths as well.

Well, I think red_elk has legitmate claim to seperate political purge (which hit cadre of Soviet bureaucracy and army), classes purge (hit dissidents, wealthy people, bourgeois, so on) and unintentional purge (hit anyone neglected by the government).

Right, I can just clarify that here I'm considering first two categories together.

 

[luiz]

Well, the wiki article about Stalin referenced him 3 times, while Volkogonov has only one reference as author of alternative point of view together with Yakovlev and few other people. I understand that wikipedia is not the most credible source, but it has something to do with mainstream point of view.

Check Volkogonov on Google and than check Zemovsk. See who is more cited.

Furthermore, I already gave Volkogonov's extensive credentials. Soviet general, head of the history department of the army, lead the commission that declassified the Moscow Files. What does Zemovsk have on him? Nothing.

Table contains number of total arrests.
Sorry, but article absolutely clearly disproves Volkogonov numbers:

First, even if it disagrees with Volkogonov, it is not the same as "disprove", as Volkogonov has much more credibility than your etext article.

This contradicts with Volkogonov's 3.5 millions for late 30's only.

That 2.3 millions number is a joke. The text you quoted to goes on:

On the other hand, the 2.3 million does not include several suspected categories of death in custody. It does not include, for example, deaths among deportees during and after the war as well as among categories of exiles other than “kulaks.”

Agree that he is quite credible, but it doesn't make him right automatically. Solzhenitsyn is also very credible and has many references, it doesn't change the fact that numbers from his books are badly exaggerated.

Sozhenitsyn didn't have access to soviet documents, Volkogonov had greater access than any other author. Your author admits he had a limited research base, unlike Volkogonov. It is obvious he is underestimating things, and not counting things that obviously should be counted.

Sozhenitsyn has alot of merit for describing the mechanics of soviet repression, but his number are obvioulsy rough estimates.

I wouldnt count famine victims as victims of repressions, together with people intentionally killed, which doesn't mean I'm justifying such governmental actions. And I didn't start discussing them just because I havent got enough information about famine victims yet. For deported people - they certainly must be included except those who were not innocent. Some groups were deported during a war because they were collaborating with Nazis, thus such action was in interests of the country, which was fighting for survival.

Now you are being silly. The famines were in part manufacutured - Stalin was waging war on certain segments of the population and wanted them to starve to death- and in part of the result of outright barbarism both in planning and executing the agricultural policies.

The people who died in the famines might as well have been executed, there's no moral difference whatsoever.

I was quite surprised that even English wikipedia (not to mention Russian), begins section about number of victims, with data from and references to Zemskov articles, like the most recent and reliable information.
The number of 4 millions (without famine victims) is possible, because I haven't seen clear disproval of that so far. But Volkogonov numbers are much higher, I cannot agree with it.

The article's conclusion is that the minimum of surplus deaths is 10 millions. This after citing your dear Zemovsk as well as many other modern writers.

10 millions is the absolute minimum, 20 millions is more likely.

 

[red_elk]

Check Volkogonov on Google and than check Zemovsk. See who is more cited.

How to do this? By checking whose surname is giving more search results?
Well, Volkogonov has 98000, Zemskov 286000, Zemovsk - 1
Congratulations, you have just invented a new word!

That 2.3 millions number is a joke. The text you quoted to goes on:

2.3 millions number doesn't include some categories of victims, but also including some other categories twice. That's why I stated 2-3 millions as approximate estimation around 2.3.

The famines were in part manufacutured - Stalin was waging war on certain segments of the population and wanted them to starve to death- and in part of the result of outright barbarism both in planning and executing the agricultural policies.

This needs to be proven - there are too many lies on this whole topic, I cannot just believe it.

10 millions is the absolute minimum, 20 millions is more likely.

I'm not discussing 10 millions number, as it seems to be the number including famine deaths. I don't have the data about famines.

Range of your estimations is amazing. I suppose, if error of estimation is 5 millions, you just cannot talk about any exact numbers from documents. Such data can be get only as a result of rough extrapolations and assumptions.
Compare with this:
1,575,259 people arrested by security police (1937-1938) (percent of political arrests from this number?)
1,053,829 persons died in GULAG (1934-1953) (what percent of criminals?)
786,098 executed political prisoners (1930-1953)
389,521 peasants died in exile (1932-1940)
86,582 people died in prisons (1939-1951)

Does Volkogonov give anywhere such kind of data, explaining how he got 20 millions in total?

 

[luiz]

How to do this? By checking whose surname is giving more search results?
Well, Volkogonov has 98000, Zemskov 286000, Zemovsk - 1
Congratulations, you have just invented a new word!

I meant the ones that refer to the actual person, not others with similar surnames. this is my result searching for Zemskov. Apparently, not a single link in page one refers to your historian. Obscure indeed. When I search Volkogonov, this is my result. Only one link is not about Dmitri Volkogonov. That's a good comparisson.

2.3 millions number doesn't include some categories of victims, but also including some other categories twice. That's why I stated 2-3 millions as approximate estimation around 2.3.

He presumes he may be double counting, but he is not sure and does not know how many, and admits that many categories where killings were tremendously high are not counted at all. Some estimate.

This needs to be proven - there are too many lies on this whole topic, I cannot just believe it.

If you bothered to read Volkogonov's book, which is backed by documents straight from the Moscow Files, you'd see. There are other books on the issue as well.

Stalin's agricultural policies were as criminal as the GULAG. It is proven. You should really try a book by a non-apologist, but even reading wiki's links, which sometimes have useful references, could be a great start.

I'm not discussing 10 millions number, as it seems to be the number including famine deaths. I don't have the data about famines.

Range of your estimations is amazing. I suppose, if error of estimation is 5 millions, you just cannot talk about any exact numbers from documents. Such data can be get only as a result of rough extrapolations and assumptions.
Compare with this:
1,575,259 people arrested by security police (1937-1938) (percent of political arrests from this number?)
1,053,829 persons died in GULAG (1934-1953) (what percent of criminals?)
786,098 executed political prisoners (1930-1953)
389,521 peasants died in exile (1932-1940)
86,582 people died in prisons (1939-1951)

Does Volkogonov give anywhere such kind of data, explaining how he got 20 millions in total?

Volkogonov's estimate, from his Stalin biography:

Collectivisation in 1937-38 cost 8.5-9 million lives; in 1937-38, 4.5-5.5 million people were arrested, of which 800,000-900,000 were sentenced to death, many others died in custody; at the end of the 1940s, between 5.5 and 6.5 million prisoners were held in the Gulag Archipelago. Volkogonov estimates that the Stalin era claimed between 19 and 22 million lives, not including war victims but including victims of deportations.

 

[red_elk]

I meant the ones that refer to the actual person, not others with similar surnames. this is my result searching for Zemskov. Apparently, not a single link in page one refers to your historian. Obscure indeed. When I search Volkogonov, this is my result. Only one link is not about Dmitri Volkogonov. That's a good comparisson.

This proves that several known Russians have surname Zemskov. BTW, searching in Russian, gives a first two references to historian, and others references from the first page are related to either musician (Andrey) or historian (Viktor).
He is known and referenced enough to say he is not some sort of extremist, but serious scientist. The number of references has some "weight", but it's not as important as documentary evidence, which, as it seems to me, is much more exact in Zemskov analysis.

You should really try a book by a non-apologist,

Non-apologists tend to claim ridiculously tremendous numbers, like 60 millions. How can I believe them?

Volkogonov's estimate, from his Stalin biography:

Collectivisation in 1937-38 cost 8.5-9 million lives; in 1937-38, 4.5-5.5 million people were arrested, of which 800,000-900,000 were sentenced to death, many others died in custody; at the end of the 1940s, between 5.5 and 6.5 million prisoners were held in the Gulag Archipelago. Volkogonov estimates that the Stalin era claimed between 19 and 22 million lives, not including war victims but including victims of deportations.

A few comments:
1. Most of the numbers are very general and unexact. Summing numbers you given, we will get (8.5-9 mln) + (0.8-0.9 mln) + (many others) = 20 millions? It's hard to call this "historical analysis".
2. "in 1937-38, 4.5-5.5 million people were arrested". Documented number is 1,575,259. Does he explain from where he got 3-4 millions more? Or you think they (Getty, Rittersporn, Zemskov) are lying?
3. "at the end of the 1940s, between 5.5 and 6.5 million prisoners were held in the Gulag Archipelago". This seems to be not accepted even in what you called "mainstream"

The total population of the camps varied from 510,307 (in 1934) to 1,727,970 (in 1953)

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

Don't want to be a "wimp", but I really don't see why I should trust Volkogonov more than others. I have serious doubts that he is amongst the authors which fell to the rage of self-condemnation during Perestroika years, when we were listening from TV about grotesque numbers, up to 100 millions of people (devoured by Stalin personally ).

 

[Yeekim]

Guys, your debate is pointless.
On one hand, nothing on this matter can be proven without documented evidence.
On the other hand, the "documented evidence" does not prove anything either. The volume of relevant documents is huge, they often contradict themselves and a good number of them are simply unreliable.
This means they need to be used selectively. And by using them selectively, one can reach nearly any conclusion he desires.

Hell, there were entire cities in USSR which never appeared on official maps. Few dozens altogether, I believe. It would, no doubt, be entirely possible for a historian to make a case that these never existed, by basing his research on contemporary official sources which never mention them. Only problem is that as they exist in brick and concrete even today, it is possible to prove otherwise.

With people long dead and buried, this is hopeless. Documented numbers should definitely be multiplied by some number, but it is impossible to say whether this should be closer to 1.23 or 3.21.

And is it really important whether Stalin had 1 million people shot in 1937-1938 or 2 millions? Would it really change your perception of him?

 

[luiz]

This proves that several known Russians have surname Zemskov. BTW, searching in Russian, gives a first two references to historian, and others references from the first page are related to either musician (Andrey) or historian (Viktor).
He is known and referenced enough to say he is not some sort of extremist, but serious scientist. The number of references has some "weight", but it's not as important as documentary evidence, which, as it seems to me, is much more exact in Zemskov analysis.

But when I search Google for zemskov I don't find famous russians, I find a bunch of commoners. Volokogonov is an international figure, any bookstore in freakin' Brazil has his books. Zemskov is anonymous.

Non-apologists tend to claim ridiculously tremendous numbers, like 60 millions. How can I believe them?

60 millions is not a mainstream number just for Stalin's period.

A few comments:
1. Most of the numbers are very general and unexact. Summing numbers you given, we will get (8.5-9 mln) + (0.8-0.9 mln) + (many others) = 20 millions? It's hard to call this "historical analysis".
2. "in 1937-38, 4.5-5.5 million people were arrested". Documented number is 1,575,259. Does he explain from where he got 3-4 millions more? Or you think they (Getty, Rittersporn, Zemskov) are lying?
3. "at the end of the 1940s, between 5.5 and 6.5 million prisoners were held in the Gulag Archipelago". This seems to be not accepted even in what you called "mainstream"

The documents in Volkogonov's books are backed by references. Zemskov's numbers are backed by references. Volkogonov had access to 78 million documents; Zemskov had access to 3,000. Volkogonov is an internationally famous and acclaimed historian and former head of the history department of the soviet army and lead the commission that declassified the Moscow Files, and lived during the rule of all soviet leaders except Lenin. Zemskov is a nobody compared to him.

Don't want to be a "wimp", but I really don't see why I should trust Volkogonov more than others. I have serious doubts that he is amongst the authors which fell to the rage of self-condemnation during Perestroika years, when we were listening from TV about grotesque numbers, up to 100 millions of people (devoured by Stalin personally ).

Because he has the better credentials. And it's not just him. I already mentioned Yakovlec, in the wiki article they mention other russian historians who place their estimates above 10 millions. Not to mention westerners like Robert Conquest.

And, as I already said, Volkogonov was die hard communist. An orthodox. It was a shock for him to learn the degree of Stalin's monstousity, and even then he refused to denounce communism as a whole. Only during his extensive research while he headed the history department of the soviet army did he come to the conclusion that Lenin was also a monster, that in fact the bolsheviks were criminals and terrorists and that the USSR was beyond redemption.

 

[red_elk]

The documents in Volkogonov's books are backed by references. Zemskov's numbers are backed by references. Volkogonov had access to 78 million documents; Zemskov had access to 3,000.

Zemskov group had and has access to all the documents from archive, not 3000. And any historian today has access to all documents.

Volkogonov is an internationally famous and acclaimed historian and former head of the history department of the soviet army and lead the commission that declassified the Moscow Files, and lived during the rule of all soviet leaders except Lenin. Zemskov is a nobody compared to him.

Because he has the better credentials. And it's not just him. I already mentioned Yakovlec, in the wiki article they mention other russian historians who place their estimates above 10 millions. Not to mention westerners like Robert Conquest.

The important difference between them is the fact that Volkogonov was earning money from his books. As all the data was not declassified those days, nobody could check him and he could write anything to increase sales.

Today situation is totally different. Any historian can check the data himself, because archives are declassified. Zemskov, Rittersporn simply cannot lie, otherwise they will discredite themselves as scientists. They are giving exact numbers, in difference from Volkogonov's approximations. The most obvious example is number of people in GULAG camps. This number is well documented and easily verifiable. If your citation of Volkogonov was correct - he gave absolutely wrong numbers, and this can be verified by any historian today. According to wikipedia, the real numbers are 3-4 times less.

 

[luiz]

Zemskov group had and has access to all the documents from archive, not 3000. And any historian today has access to all documents.

Too bad he didn't check them all, as he admits.

As for Volkogonov, he had authority to check any document. Yeltsin made him pretty much plenipotentiary in that regard.

The important difference between them is the fact that Volkogonov was earning money from his books. As all the data was not declassified those days, nobody could check him and he could write anything to increase sales.

Now you're just being ridiculous.

Vokogonov was a sick man who couldn't care less about money. When he wrote his magnum opus, the biographies of the seven leaders of the Soviet Union, he was already diagnosed with cancer and knew he would die soon. If you read that book you will see it is his final statement to Russia and to mankind. It's in no small ammount him setting the score with his past that he then rejected. To hint that it was all about a commercial stunt is ridiculous and offensive.

Today situation is totally different. Any historian can check the data himself, because archives are declassified. Zemskov, Rittersporn simply cannot lie, otherwise they will discredite themselves as scientists. They are giving exact numbers, in difference from Volkogonov's approximations. The most obvious example is number of people in GULAG camps. This number is well documented and easily verifiable. If your citation of Volkogonov was correct - he gave absolutely wrong numbers, and this can be verified by any historian today. According to wikipedia, the real numbers are 3-4 times less.

Being ridiculous again. As Zemskov and the wiki article will tell you, it's all estimates. Zemskov admits, when dealing with victims, that he may be double counting and that he isn't even counting groups that could ammount to millions.

The fact is that today there are still considerable disagreement about the exact number of Stalin's victims. You are choosing to believe in obscure historians that nobody ever heard about instead of the credit ones and the mainstream.

And the mainstream, it is worth repeating, is that at least 10 million died because of Stalin, with a probable number of 20 millions.

 

[red_elk]

Volkogonov had access to 78 million documents; Zemskov had access to 3,000.

Too bad he didn't check them all, as he admits.

What's the purpose of your comparison of 78 millions (V. had access to) against 3 thousands (checked by Z.) documents? You want to say, Volkogonov checked 78 millions of documents?

Being ridiculous again. As Zemskov and the wiki article will tell you, it's all estimates. Zemskov admits, when dealing with victims, that he may be double counting and that he isn't even counting groups that could ammount to millions.

The fact is that today there are still considerable disagreement about the exact number of Stalin's victims. You are choosing to believe in obscure historians that nobody ever heard about instead of the credit ones and the mainstream.

And the mainstream, it is worth repeating, is that at least 10 million died because of Stalin, with a probable number of 20 millions.

I'll repeat,
Your quote from Volkogonov:

at the end of the 1940s, between 5.5 and 6.5 million prisoners were held in the Gulag Archipelago.

Actual exact numbers of people in GULAG:
1945 715506
1946 600897
1947 808839
1948 1108057
1949 1216361

This numbers can be easily verified, unlike "total" number of all repression victims. This has been already confirmed by several independent researchers. Even English wikipedia is giving data from the same table (for other years).

As we can see, at least one part of Volkogonov statistics has nothing to do with reality. Can we rely on his total estimations?

 

[plarq]

Don't want to be a "wimp", but I really don't see why I should trust Volkogonov more than others. I have serious doubts that he is amongst the authors which fell to the rage of self-condemnation during Perestroika years, when we were listening from TV about grotesque numbers, up to 100 millions of people (devoured by Stalin personally ).

I do consider "self-condemnation" quite a scary term for this matter. Because defending a tyrant is similar to masochism than defending dead people because of mismanagement (I don't use deliberate starvation to avoid misconceptions).

Yes, Russia is quite anti-glasnost these years. While it doesn't defend Soviet system, they blame neighboring countries for their anti-Russian attitude, which in fact is also anti-Soviet.

How can you expect former communist countries to trust you, when you abandoned communism yourself, while claiming Soviet Union help them develop economy and improve lives of these countries?

It's the Katyn massacre a Polish conspiracy? Is Gorbachev really an anti-Russian, anti-Soviet, pro-Polish, masochist?

 

[red_elk]

If somebody told you that Hitler killed 60 mln Jews, and you will tell that correct number is 6 mln.
In this case, will you be defending a tyrant?

 

[Agent327]

Interesting yet flawd comparison. Usually it is claimed that the number of Holocaust victims (mortal that is) is lower than 6 million, just like is claimed by some members on this thread with regard to communist victims. But if you really think the number of stalinist victims is limited to people actually imprisoned, you have no clue how dictatorship works. Victims' family members are afflicted as well, up to the point of actually being arrested and imprisoned themselves for the sole reason of being related to somebody already arrested. As hinted at before, this was not a judicial system at all, but a systemization of vengeance, grown out of hate.

It has been mentioned by one of said members that, according to exaggerated estimates, there actually weren't any free people at all. With the rule of law gone, that is absolutely correct.

Now if some people feel the need to calculate the exact numbers of people imprisoned under Stalin's regime, they are ofcourse free to do so. It might be interesting to compare such numbers to like numbers under Lenin and post-stalinist soviet leaders. But if someone pretends this is a thread about the 'Great Purge' (as compared to the purges executed before), it is not simply a matter of counting prisoners and people executed or starved through famine or otherwise. To return to the original comparison: the number of Holocaust victims isn't limited to those who were killed (in a way they are the lucky ones), there are also the survivors, who, even in later generations, carry with them the trauma of such a terrible experience. In much the same way the Soviet trauma may take a couple of generations to heal. This alone makes comparisons to more democratic societies - or even the czarist regime - utterly futile. The czars regime left no such trauma, on the contrary.

In spite of what some communist followers might like to believe, those times weren't heroic or great at all; any claims at the present day, with the present state of knowledge, to the contrary are delusional at best. And if this isn't supposed to be a eulogy for Stalin or soviet communism in general, a change of tone is very much needed.

 

[red_elk]

In other words, it's ok to write about 39 millions of people killed in GULAG, whereas it is 1 million?

 

[luiz]

What's the purpose of your comparison of 78 millions (V. had access to) against 3 thousands (checked by Z.) documents? You want to say, Volkogonov checked 78 millions of documents?

Yes, in fact the team he lead over several years checked all documents. Which is the difference between writing an obscure article that ends up on "etext" and leading the most important historical research of a generation, and writing books that became a reference throughout the world.

But of course you choose to believe in the bizarrely obscure article of a bizarrely obscure author that invests against the mainstream, because it seems that you have a hard time dealing with the fact that Stalin was one of the worst dictators in human history.

Actual exact numbers of people in GULAG:


This numbers can be easily verified, unlike "total" number of all repression victims. This has been already confirmed by several independent researchers. Even English wikipedia is giving data from the same table (for other years).

As we can see, at least one part of Volkogonov statistics has nothing to do with reality. Can we rely on his total estimations?

No, it is hard to have the exact number as not necessarily all prisioners were registered, and not necessarily all documents survived.

Furthermore, considering that many people died every year, many were released and many arrived, your numbers aren't even that different from Volkogonov's.

 

[luiz]

In other words, it's ok to write about 39 millions of people killed in GULAG, whereas it is 1 million?

Who wrote about 39 millions? Not Volkogonov.

It seems bizarre that you give so much credit to an author that doesn't even shows up on Google. Do you have some sort of agenda? Maybe you think Stalin wasn's so bad after all? That the Soviet Union was just another regime, and not one of the most criminal, depraved and monstrous experiences that ever occured on this planet?

 

[red_elk]

Yes, in fact the team he lead over several years checked all documents. Which is the difference between writing an obscure article that ends up on "etext" and leading the most important historical research of a generation, and writing books that became a reference throughout the world.
But of course you choose to believe in the bizarrely obscure article of a bizarrely obscure author that invests against the mainstream, because it seems that you have a hard time dealing with the fact that Stalin was one of the worst dictators in human history.

Search in google about statistics of Soviet penal system in 1930-1960. You'll be surprised about mainstream data. By "unknown" reason, mainstream numbers after 1990s reduced many times. After archives were declassified.

Why authors choose to take numbers from "bizarre obscure article", instead of your famous Volkogonov? Why wikipedia gives data of GULAG inmates of "510,307 (in 1934) to 1,727,970 (in 1953)", instead of Volkogonov's 5.5-6.5 millions?

No, it is hard to have the exact number as not necessarily all prisioners were registered, and not necessarily all documents survived.

Furthermore, considering that many people died every year, many were released and many arrived, your numbers aren't even that different from Volkogonov's.

Is 1.2 millions different from 5.5-6.5 millions (of people held in GULAG in late 1940s)?

Who wrote about 39 millions? Not Volkogonov.

It seems bizarre that you give so much credit to an author that doesn't even shows up on Google. Do you have some sort of agenda? Maybe you think Stalin wasn's so bad after all? That the Soviet Union was just another regime, and not one of the most criminal, depraved and monstrous experiences that ever occured on this planet?

39 millions is from R.J. Rummel. My agenda is to show that most of such kind of statistics from Cold War and Perestroika times is false. Main reason of this is the fact that archive data were not accessible to researchers. The problem is that such authors as Rummel are still considered by many people as credible sources, while it's proven they are not.