Ukraine

Let it vote for partition.

I’ve never heard a good explanation of why we should hold this artificial “nation” together. Let the Europeans go with Europe, let the Russians go with Russia.

[Update a few minutes later]

Fascism, Russia and Ukraine:

The populist media campaign for the Eurasian Union is now in the hands of Dmitry Kiselyov, the host of the most important talk show in Russia, and since December also the director of the state-run Russian media conglomerate designed to form national public opinion. Best known for saying that gays who die in car accidents should have their hearts cut from their bodies and incinerated, Kiselyov has taken Putin’s campaign against gay rights and transformed it into a weapon against European integration. Thus when the then German foreign minister, who is gay, visited Kiev in December and met with Vitali Klitschko, the heavyweight champion and opposition politician, Kiselyov dismissed Klitschko as a gay icon. According to the Russian foreign minister, the exploitation of sexual politics is now to be an open weapon in the struggle against the “decadence” of the European Union.

Following the same strategy, Yanukovych’s government claimed, entirely falsely, that the price of closer relations with the European Union was the recognition of gay marriage in Ukraine. Kiselyov is quite open about the Russian media strategy toward the Maidan: to “apply the correct political technology,” then “bring it to the point of overheating” and bring to bear “the magnifying glass of TV and the Internet.”

Why exactly do people with such views think they can call other people fascists? And why does anyone on the Western left take them seriously? One line of reasoning seems to run like this: the Russians won World War II, and therefore can be trusted to spot Nazis. Much is wrong with this. World War II on the eastern front was fought chiefly in what was then Soviet Ukraine and Soviet Belarus, not in Soviet Russia. Five percent of Russia was occupied by the Germans; all of Ukraine was occupied by the Germans. Apart from the Jews, whose suffering was by far the worst, the main victims of Nazi policies were not Russians but Ukrainians and Belarusians. There was no Russian army fighting in World War II, but rather a Soviet Red Army. Its soldiers were disproportionately Ukrainian, since it took so many losses in Ukraine and recruited from the local population. The army group that liberated Auschwitz was called the First Ukrainian Front.

The other source of purported Eurasian moral legitimacy seems to be this: since the representatives of the Putin regime only very selectively distanced themselves from Stalinism, they are therefore reliable inheritors of Soviet history, and should be seen as the automatic opposite of Nazis, and therefore to be trusted to oppose the far right.

Again, much is wrong about this. World War II began with an alliance between Hitler and Stalin in 1939. It ended with the Soviet Union expelling surviving Jews across its own border into Poland. After the founding of the State of Israel, Stalin began associating Soviet Jews with a world capitalist conspiracy, and undertook a campaign of arrests, deportations, and murders of leading Jewish writers. When he died in 1953 he was preparing a larger campaign against Jews.

This all points out the meaninglessness of “right” and “left” in Eurasia, and the nonsense of the notion (as Jonah Goldberg is always quick to point out) that fascism is “right wing.” Both Nazism and Stalinism are perversions of Marxism (not to imply that Marxism can ever be applied in the real world unperverted). Their differences are trivial relative to their similarities.

[Update a while later]

This seems sort of peripherally related: “Time travelers, don’t kill Hitler.”

I disagree with the notion that the Holocaust was the Worst Thing Ever, or even uniquely evil. The notion that it is is largely squid ink to distract us from the much greater crimes of Stalin, Mao, and other communist monsters, whom much of academia either wants to downplay as unrepresentative of “true” Marxism, or actually admire.

[Update late morning]

No, fascism and socialism still aren’t opposites.

26 thoughts on “Ukraine”

  1. About Ukraine splitting: an overly simple political answer is that Russian-speaking Ukrainians don’t want to be repressed under Putin, even while remaining Russophiles. A more complex anti-split argument involves following the money (where it is earned, who earns it, who stole what and when, etc). That’s not to say Ukraine shouldn’t split, I’m just saying that more complex anti-split arguments based on economics can be sensibly be made.

    About Hitler vs Stalin, you might find this interesting:
    http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/hitler-vs-stalin-who-killed-more/?pagination=false
    The Too Long Didn’t Read version: post-cold-war estimates are more accurate, and it turns out that Hitler killed far more people.

    1. Even if Hitler killed more people, that doesn’t excuse Stalin, and Mao probably killed more than both of them put together. But it’s still perfectly acceptable on campus to be a Maoist.

      1. This article is also interesting: it puts Mao below Stalin and Hitler in the number of deliberate murders, and it addresses various other ways to look at the question:
        http://necrometrics.com/tyrants.htm
        (I should note that I’m being apolitical here and I’m certainly not excusing or supporting anyone — I’m just talking about how murders are counted.)

        1. I think the numbers in that second link are quite suspect (and they contradict my first link), but I think the 2nd link is interesting as an an example of someone downplaying Mao for a non-ideological reason.

    2. Thirty-three percent more civilians, by the numbers given in the article. That means the winner is either Mao or Rachel Carlson.

  2. To the left, anything bad is obviously ‘right wing’, because everything ‘right wing’ is bad, while everything ‘left wing’ is just lovely and wonderful.

    Now Stalin is no longer the Hero Of The Proletariat, I’ve even seen lefties calling him ‘right wing’.

    1. Heck, I sometimes debate a hardcore communist nitwit from New York who claims that Stalin was an ultra-capitalist.

      1. Gee you must have some extra time on your hands. You’d be better of spending it watching paint dry – you’ll never convince a person so distanced from reality.

  3. Again, much is wrong about this. World War II began with an alliance between Hitler and Stalin in 1939. It ended with the Soviet Union expelling surviving Jews across its own border into Poland. After the founding of the State of Israel, Stalin began associating Soviet Jews with a world capitalist conspiracy, and undertook a campaign of arrests, deportations, and murders of leading Jewish writers. When he died in 1953 he was preparing a larger campaign against Jews.

    Things are a lot more complicated than that. Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union had a non-aggression pact, not an alliance. The Soviet Union had been in a war with Poland 1919-1921. Stalin was one of the leaders and they lost the war and a lot of territory of the former Russian Empire to Poland. As for the Poles, it is true the Germans manufactured a casus belli to start that war, but they weren’t that innocent either. Back when Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia in 1938, Poland and Hungary had no qualms about taking chunks out of Czechoslovakia as well.

    1. As for his treatment of Jews it is well known Stalin didn’t like them. He was particularly disgusted when his son Yakov decided to marry one. Besides Trotsky being Jewish the fact is Stalin was anti-clerical. So it is hardly surprising he viewed any religious person with suspicion. Yet AFAIK he never handed any Soviet Jews to Hitler.

  4. I find the silence from Moscow today rather ominous, and the fact there seems to be no notice being taken of it incomprehensible. A successful rebellion in Ukraine is a massive setback for Putin’s goals, and I suspect he’s going to try something, probably within the next 48 to 72 hours. He now has a pretext; cross the border to “prevent bloodshed”. He could even use his phone call with our nitwit in chief as a claimed agreement in principle (outsmarting Obama is about as hard as outsmarting a boiled egg).

    I sincerely hope I’m wrong.

    1. I think Obama has some personal feelings that shape his views of Putin’s actions these days. Obama doesn’t really have any problems with Putin’s governing style, he kinda digs it, but Putin acted against Obama’s interests causing him to lose face. Of all the evils in the world, that is the one Obama will not stand for.

      Obama’s foreign policy isn’t guided by an overarching strategy other than to deal with each international indecent as an isolated event. His response to what is going on in the Ukraine is anti-Putin on a personal level. Otherwise we would have likely seen a response like the one he had for Honduras where he supported the imposition of leftist tyranny.

  5. Ukraine is not going to split.

    Yanukovich is on the run, hiding out in Donetsk:
    #Ukraine’s parliamentary speaker says #Yanukovich tried to flee to #Russia, now in city of Donetsk – Interfax Reuters 11:46 AM – 22 Feb 2014

    Yanukovych blocked from taking plane to Russia, now in Donetsk – parliament speaker Turchynov via Interfax 12:03 PM – 22 Feb 2014

    According to the Kyiv Post:
    Apparently, Yanukovych is still in Ukraine. Border Service: Yanukovych’s plane not let out of country due to lack of required documents. 3:26 PM – 22 Feb 2014

    And the army of seperatist thugs organized with help from Moscow? According to Obozrevatel, the “Ukrainian Front” conference will be dissolved in order to “preserve unity” and activists there will cooperate with authorities in the investigation of both the mayor of the city of Karkhiv and and governor of the region of Karkhiv, both being investigates for separatism. Reports saying both have fled across the river to Russia.

    Meanwhile, for the person who appears to have ordered the deadly assault on the protestors:
    Border control didn’t let ex-Interior Minister Zakharchenko to leave the country – Ukraine’s agency of border control stmt 2:25 PM – 22 Feb 2014

    He was trying to cross the border into Belarus.

  6. Ukraine parliament votes to remove president……..

    Drudge also linked to an article with this headline:

    “House fit for a tyrant: Protestors storm the sprawling, luxury estate of Ukraine’s fugitive president which has its own private zoo, golf course and is half the size of Monaco ”

    Tyrants love to live big while the drones suffer.

    Obama is coming back from what? A golfing date with a rich guy who owns his own golf course in the middle of the desert….said course needing lots of water that isn’t locally available?…….And that’s just the last of his endless stream of tin ear vacays.

  7. the nonsense of the notion (as Jonah Goldberg is always quick to point out) that fascism is “right wing.”

    Marxism is internationalist; facism is nationalist. Internationalism is usually considered an ideology of the left, nationalism an ideology of the right.

      1. Israel’s government is socialist. Hitler’s government was socialist. Is it really the case that “their differences are trivial relative to their similarities”?

    1. “Marxism is internationalist; facism is nationalist. Internationalism is usually considered an ideology of the left, nationalism an ideology of the right.”

      So Hitler was not being internationalist when he invaded Poland and Russia? Mussolini was not internationalist when he invaded Ethiopia? Japan was not internationalist when they invaded China, Korea, Java, etc?

      None of those guys wanted to install their form of government in the countries they invaded?

      This fallback position of yours to try and somehow maintain the left/right nonsense that lefties have used so that they can describe Conservatives as fascist is a pretty weak fallback.

      In fact it’s worse than weak…it’s infantile.

      1. Hitler was not being internationalist when he invaded Poland and Russia?

        Of course he wasn’t. Hitler was a fervent nationalist, and he invaded other countries to promote German power.

        None of those guys wanted to install their form of government in the countries they invaded?

        Hitler didn’t invade Poland so that there’d be more fascist governments in the world, he invaded to increase German power. The last thing he wanted in Poland was a Polish fascist government bent on increasing Polish power.

        Nationalists seek the advancement of their nation, internationalists (or universalists) seek the advancement of their ideals in every nation. No political movement or party is purely one or the other, but there are big differences to be seen. Marx thought workers from every nation should join together to revolt against their capitalist overlords; that class, and not nationality, was the grouping that mattered. His tombstone reads “Workers of all lands unite” — not “Deutschland Uber Alles”.

    2. Fascism is far more than just nationalism and we have seen a lot of nationalistic sentiment from the old USSR as well as present day Cuba and Venezuela countries that are also concerned with international agendas. There is a lot of overlap going on.

      Leftists try to say that any positive sentiment expressed or held for a person’s home country is fascism, which it isn’t. The implication is that a person must hate their country in order to prove to the thought police that they are not a nationalist and by extension a fascist.

      1. Fascism is far more than just nationalism

        Right, you can be a nationalist without being a fascist. But you can’t be a fascist without being a nationalist.

    3. @ Jim;
      Marxism is internationalist? Really? I suggest you might want to inform the Chinese and the North Koreans of that.

    4. Inter-/Nationalism is orthogonal to Leftism. That’s where Lefties get tripped-up. Since Leftism took over the West, Westerners have trouble understanding what “the right” is, just as fish have trouble with the concept of “dry.”

    5. This is a simplification. When Stalin said he wanted to do ‘communism in one nation’ he basically abandoned international communism the way Trotsky and others in the Soviet communist party wanted to. As for Fascism Mussolini for e.g. wanted to recreate the Roman Empire. Just because Nazis had xenophobic policies it does not mean all fascist states have to be like that. The best definition I have heard is regarding the support base, which in fascism typically comes from the unemployed and small businessmen, vs communism which typically comes from people working in the farming and industrial production sectors.

      Both in Italy and in Germany fascism arose as a way to beat down mass labor strikes during that period. Both were funded by conservatives. Both were accepted by the conservative heads of state. In Italy their Emperor and in Germany the President Paul von Hindenburg. In the Soviet Union it was a rebellion pure and simple. Then there is the soviets as an organization unit. Where worker organizations elected those above them. Fascist regimes worked the other way around.

  8. Then there is the soviets as an organization unit. Where worker organizations elected those above them.

    Except for those who tried to organize other parties to elect people with other ideas were arrested, convicted, and executed by those above.

    There was a lot if fascism going on in the founding of the Soviet Union. The fascism didn’t go away after the founding either.

    High sounding ideals do not a reality make.

Comments are closed.