Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 23:21:40 -0500 (EST) From: "Michael D. Damore" <mdamore-AT-moose.uvm.edu> Subject: Re: In Defense of Uncle Joe. To the Stalin Haters The first few lines make this seem like a joke, but since the writer gets his ideas from the PLP, I understand. WHat's next the representative from MIM Notes. Mike On Wed, 22 Mar 1995, Alfred Joseph wrote: > In defense of Uncle Joe. > I have become mildly distressed reading the mush about the > so-called "crimes of Stalin". Joe Stalin, "Uncle Joe" to the millions of > European workers who waited for liberation by the RED ARMY during WW 2, was > a revolutionary communist. Attacks on Joe Stalin, whether from Rush or > from some pseudo-leftist is in reality an attack on communism, workers' > power. The following is an article that was printed in the June 29, 1994 > issue of Challenge. Challenge is the newspaper of the Progressive Labor > Party. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------- > > --I've just reread The Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey, the skillful but > reactionary, British mystery writer. Although, this is a work of fiction, > she shows how generations of historians have repeated the British "party > line," the myth- first put abroad to justify Henry's VII's usurpation of > the throne in 1485- that Richard III murdered the "Two Princes in the > Tower."* > In the course of her argument she makes a few remarks through her > fictional character, Laura, which I find highly relevant to discussions > about the USSR during Stalin's time: > "It's an odd thing when you tell someone the true facts of a > mythical tale they are indignant not with the teller but with you. They > don't want to have their ideas upset. It rouses some vague uneasiness in > them, I think, and they resent it. If they were merely indifferent it > would be natural and understandable, but it is much stronger than that, > much more positive. They are annoyed. Very odd, isn't it?" > Or again..."Perhaps there was something in Laura's theory that > human nature found difficult to give up preconceived beliefs. That there > was some vague inward opposition to, and resentment of, a reversal of > accepted fact." > I first read this book half a decade or so ago after writing an > article about the Military Purges in the USSR. In doing research on them > in the late '70s and early 80s, I found-as did Josephine Tey about the > story of Richard III's "murder" of the Princes In The Tower- that there was > no evidence whatsoever for the almost universally accepted version of the > Military Purges of '37- '38: that Stalin planned this in advance, and that > the officers in question were "innocent" of whatever they were charged > with. On the contrary, I discovered that there was a great deal of > circumstantial evidence that the charges were true, and much evidence too, > that Stalin and the Soviet government reacted with great shock to their > discovery of a plot. > Persevering in this research, I read virtually every book and > article cited by Robert Conquest in his "magnum opus," THE GREAT TERROR . > With widening amazement, I discovered that Conquest either flagrantly > misused his sources; misrepresented them; or that in many cases, the > "sources" Conquest cited (often hundreds of times) were dismissed as > virtually valueless by even anti-communist scholars at the time they were > published. I also discovered that virtually nobody ever sharply questioned > Conquest on this- though there were certainly questions ( very polite > questions) raised in some of the scholarly book reviews of his book. > In the '80s, I spent a good deal of time researching the movie, > Harvest of Despair , about the so-called "man-made famine" in the Ukraine > in the early '30s. When I discovered that this story, too, was a complete > fabrication, and was known to be such even before it was shown on PBS ( it > is still making the rounds, by the way)- I was less surprised than I might > have been. Still, the extent to which utter lies were simply accepted as > historical truth- as long as they were anti-communist, anti-Stalin lies- > was breathtaking. > It was interesting to see a well-known article in the Village Voice > in the late '80s come to the same conclusion, and cite several historians > as stating that Conquest was a liar. > Of the horror tales virtually taken for granted as true concerning > Stalin, I have researched many at this point in my life, and have never > found a single one that is true, or anywhere near it. Naturally, they have > a life completely independent of my research. They go on and on. > Naturally, because they are good anti-communist stuff. And- not > incidentally- they feed the prejudices of quite a few of those on the > "left", such as the admirers of Trotsky, the Social-"democrats", and > anarchists, whose whole political edifices are built around the figure of > Stalin-As-A-Monster. > One can read books by J.R. Getty and the other historical > revisionists associated with him nowadays to see how real, if bourgeois, > research dismantles the fantasies and myths of the Stalin-haters. Few do, > I suspect, and for the reasons that Josephine Tey mentions in the > quotations reproduced above. > The truth is that the statement by Marx and Engels- that the > proletarians "have nothing to lose but their chains"- does not adequately > take ideology into consideration. Workers can, in struggle, abandon the > false ideologies that have gripped their minds in this capitalist world. > But many intellectuals on the "left" seldom engage in struggle, or in > enough of it; or, there is too much "bookworm" allegiance to certain > ideologies that have long been found comforting to really want to see them > overturned. > How many of us go out there and look for good critiques of our > own preconceived positions? How many of us lean over backward, so to > speak, and check out the evidence for the positions that call into question > our own cherished preconceptions? The truth is- we are, too often, afraid > to do this. The truth will forever elude those who act in this way. > Concerning Stalin, I personally have no fears. When I find > evidence, I look at it. When the horror stories that are universally > repeated by bourgeois and "leftist" sources together are supported with > good evidence, I'll accept them. Can the Trotskyists, anarchists, > social-democrats, et al.., say the same thing? > Tey is an arch-conservative and elitist. Nonetheless, The Daughter > of Time effectively demonstrates that a version of history that has no > decent evidence can hoodwink, for centuries, even "professional" historians > supposedly "trained" to look for evidence, but who in fact are looking for > minor variations o some orthodoxy or other. For Richard III, read Stalin; > it works! > > *Henry VIII killed two of his wives: Anne Boleyn in 1536 and Catherine > Howard, in 1542. Richard III was, and is, said to have murdered his two > nephews, who were one-time heirs to the throne of England, in 1484 or 1485. > The Josephine Tey book deals with Richard III and the "Princes in the > Tower." It concludes that probably Henry VII, who defeated Richard III and > seized the throne of England in 1485, was the one who really had the > princes murdered. Their bodies were in fact found in the 17th century, > buried under a staircase in the Tower. > Henry VII was the father of Henry VIII, but otherwise the murders > are not related. British history is confusing enough. The Tower was a > Royal residence then, not exclusively a prison, as it later became. > > Enough already with these mindless thinly veiled anti-communist attacks on > Joe Stalin and the communist movement. While millions around the world > suffer and die from war and famine and homelessness and .... So-called > "leftists" debate, wondering if Stalin is to communism as Ariel Sharon is > to Zionism. What madness. This is a prime example of how we are all > susceptible to the vicious hegemonic process in this society, the ruling > class has convinced some of us that Hitler and Stalin are the opposite > sides of the same coin. They bring out so-called "scholars" and other > political reactionaries to present evidence concerning what occurred in the > Soviet Union when the Bolsheviks were trying to established workers' power > over one-sixth of the worlds surface. Before you join the chorous, look at > the mosic sheet. Fight for Communism. > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > alfredo jose > > If the misery of our poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our > institutions, great is our sin. -CHARLES DARWIN. > > "The earth shall rise on new foundations. We have been naught, we shall be > all." Words from the L'INTERNATIONALE > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > ^^ > > > > --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- > --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005