Mass killings under communist regimes

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

For broader coverage of this topic, see Crimes against humanity under communist regimes.

communist states
  Communist states that existed in the past
  Communist states that exist in the present day
Part of a series on
Communism
Concepts
Economics
Variants
History
Organisations
People
By region
Symbols
Criticism
Related topics
 Communism portal
icon Socialism portal
Part of a series on
Genocide
Issues
15th–19th century genocides
Early 20th century genocides
World War II (1939–1945)
Cold War (1940s–1991)
Contemporary genocides
Related topics
Category

People's Republic of China, and the Cambodian genocide in Democratic Kampuchea (now Cambodia
) .

The concepts of connecting disparate killings to the status of the communist states which committed them, and of trying to ascribe common causes and factors to them, have been both supported and criticized by the academic community. Some academics view these concepts as an indictment of communism as an ideology, while other academics view them as being overly simplistic and rooted in anti-communism. There is academic debate over whether the killings should be attributed to the political system, or to the leaders of the communist states; similarly, there is debate over whether all the famines which occurred during the rule of communist states can be considered mass killings. Mass killings which were committed by communist states have been compared to killings which were committed by other types of states. Monuments to the victims of communism exist in almost all the capitals of Eastern Europe, as well as many other cities in the world.

Terminology and usage

See also: Genocide definitions and Mass killing § Terminology

Several different terms are used to describe the intentional killing of large numbers of noncombatants.[1][2][3][4][5][6] According to historian Anton Weiss-Wendt, the field of comparative genocide studies has very "little consensus on defining principles such as definition of genocide, typology, application of a comparative method, and timeframe."[7] According to professor of economics Attiat Ott, mass killing has emerged as a "more straightforward" term.[8]

The following terminology has been used by individual authors to describe mass killings of unarmed civilians by

communist governments
, individually or as a whole:

  • premeditated mass killing" narrower than genocide in that it targets a part of a population defined by its social status, but broader than politicide in that the group is targeted without regard to their political activity.[11]
  • Crime against humanity – historian Klas-Göran Karlsson uses crimes against humanity, which includes "the direct mass killings of politically undesirable elements, as well as forced deportations and forced labour." Karlsson acknowledges that the term may be misleading in the sense that the regimes targeted groups of their own citizens, but he considers it useful as a broad legal term which emphasizes attacks on civilian populations and because the offenses demean humanity as a whole.[12] Historian Jacques Sémelin and Mann[13] believe that crime against humanity is more appropriate than genocide or politicide when speaking of violence by communist regimes.[5]
  • summary killings, and mass deaths due to the governmental acts of criminal omission and neglect, such as in deliberate famines as well as killings by de facto governments, such as warlords or rebels in a civil war.[15] This definition covers any murder of any number of persons by any government,[16] and it has been applied to killings that were perpetrated by communist regimes.[17][18]
  • autogenocide, and the deaths that occurred under Leninism and Stalinism in the Soviet Union, as well as those that occurred under Maoism in China, have been controversially investigated as possible cases. In particular, the Soviet famine of 1930–1933 and the Great Chinese Famine, which occurred during the Great Leap Forward, have both been "depicted as instances of mass killing underpinned by genocidal intent."[24]
  • Red holocaust – the term, which was coined by the
    European Jews."[31]
  • autocratic regimes, especially communist, are prone to mass killing generically, but not so strongly inclined (i.e. not statistically significantly inclined) toward geno-politicide."[40] According to professor of economics Attiat F. Ott and associate professor of economics Sang Hoo Bae, there is a general consensus that mass killing constitutes the act of intentionally killing a number of non-combatants, but that number can range from as few as four to more than 50,000 people.[41] Sociologist Yang Su used a definition of mass killing from Valentino but allows as a "significant number" more than 10 killed in one day in one town.[42] He used collective killing for analysis of mass killing in areas smaller than a whole country that may not meet Valentino's threshold.[43]
  • Politicide – genocide scholar Barbara Harff defines genocide and politicide, sometimes shortened as geno-politicide, to include the killing of political, economic, ethnic, and cultural groups, some of whom would not otherwise be covered by the Genocide Convention.[44][45][46] Political science Manus I. Midlarsky uses politicide to describe an arc of large-scale killing from the western parts of the Soviet Union to China and Cambodia.[47] In his book The Killing Trap: Genocide in the Twentieth Century, Midlarsky raises similarities between the killings of Stalin and Pol Pot.[48]

Estimates

Cover of the first edition of The Black Book of Communism

According to historian

genocide scholars are focused primarily on establishing patterns and testing various theoretical explanations of genocides and mass killings. They work with large data sets that describe mass mortality events globally and have to rely on selective data provided by country experts; researchers cannot expect absolute precision, and it is not required as a result of their work.[54]

Any attempt to estimate a total number of killings under communist regimes depends greatly on definitions. Historian

Scholars of communism have mainly focused on individual countries, and genocide scholars have attempted to provide a more global perspective, while maintaining that their goal is not reliability but establishing patterns.[54] Scholars of communism have debated on estimates for the Soviet Union, not for all communist regimes, an attempt which was popularized by the introduction to The Black Book of Communism which was controversial.[55] Among them, Soviet specialists Michael Ellman and J. Arch Getty have criticized the estimates for relying on émigré sources, hearsay, and rumor as evidence,[56] and cautioned that historians should instead utilize archive material.[57] Such scholars distinguish between historians who base their research on archive materials, and those whose estimates are based on witnesses evidence and other data that is unreliable.[58] Soviet specialist Stephen G. Wheatcroft says that historians relied on Solzhenitsyn to support their higher estimates but research in the state archives vindicated the lower estimates, and that the popular press has continued to include serious errors that should not be cited, or relied on, in academia.[59] Rummel was also another widely used and cited source[60] but not reliable about estimates.[54]

Notable estimate attempts include the following:[60]

  • In 1993, Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor to Jimmy Carter, wrote that "the failed effort to build communism in the twentieth century consumed the lives of almost 60,000,000."[61]
  • In 1994, Rummel's book Death by Government included about 110 million people, foreign and domestic, killed by communist democide from 1900 to 1987.[62] This total excluded deaths from the Great Chinese Famine of 1958–1961 due to Rummel's then belief that "although Mao's policies were responsible for the famine, he was misled about it, and finally when he found out, he stopped it and changed his policies."[63][64] Rummel would later revise his estimate from 110 million to about 148 million due to additional information about Mao's culpability in the Great Chinese Famine from Mao: The Unknown Story, including Jon Halliday and Jung Chang's estimated 38 million famine deaths.[63][64]
    • In 2004, historian
      Tito's Yugoslavia as an overestimation based on the inclusion of low-quality sources, and stated that Rummel's other estimates may suffer from the same problem if he used similar sources for them.[65] Rummel responded with a critique of Dulić's analysis.[66] Karlsson says that Rummel's thesis of "extreme intentionality in Mao" for the famine is "hardly an example of a serious and empirically-based writing of history",[67] and describes Rummel's 61,911,000 estimate for the Soviet Union as being based on "an ideological preunderstanding and speculative and sweeping calculations".[68]
  • In 1997, historian Stéphane Courtois's introduction to The Black Book of Communism, an impactful yet controversial[55] work written about the history of communism in the 20th century,[69] gave a "rough approximation, based on unofficial estimates". The subtotals listed by Courtois added up to 94.36 million killed.[70] Nicolas Werth and Jean-Louis Margolin, contributing authors to the book, criticized Courtois as obsessed with reaching a 100 million overall total.[71]
    • In his foreword to the 1999 English edition, Martin Malia wrote that "a grand total of victims variously estimated by contributors to the volume at between 85 million and 100 million."[72] Historian Michael David-Fox states that Malia is able to link disparate regimes, from radical Soviet industrialists to the anti-urbanists of the Khmer Rouge, under the guise of a "generic communism" category "defined everywhere down to the common denominator of party movements founded by intellectuals."[73] Courtois' attempt to equate Nazism and communist regimes was not fruitful on both scientific and moral grounds, because such comparisons are generally controversial.[74]
  • In 2005, professor Benjamin Valentino stated that the number of non-combatants killed by communist regimes in the Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia alone ranged from a low of 21 million to a high of 70 million.[75]
  • In 2010, professor of economics
    Red Holocaust that the internal contradictions of communist regimes caused the killing of approximately 60 million people and perhaps tens of millions more.[76]
  • In 2012, academic Alex J. Bellamy wrote that a "conservative estimate puts the total number of civilians deliberately killed by communists after the Second World War between 6.7 million and 15.5 million people, with the true figure probably much higher."[77]
  • In 2014, professor of Chinese politics Julia Strauss wrote that while there was the beginning of a scholarly consensus on figures of around 20 million killed in the Soviet Union and 2–3 million in Cambodia, there was no such consensus on numbers for China.[78]
  • In 2017, historian Stephen Kotkin wrote in The Wall Street Journal that 65 million people died prematurely under communist regimes according to demographers, and those deaths were a result of "mass deportations, forced labor camps and police-state terror" but mostly "from starvation as a result of its cruel projects of social engineering."[79][80]

Criticism of estimates

Criticism of the estimates are mostly focused on three aspects, namely that the estimates are based on sparse and incomplete data when significant errors are inevitable,

anti-communist oversimplifications.[91][92] In addition, the communist grouping as applied by Courtois and Malia in The Black Book of Communism has been claimed to have no adequate explanation by historian Alexander Dallin,[93] and Malia is able to link disparate regimes, from radical Soviet industrialists to the anti-urbanists of the Khmer Rouge, under the guise of a "generic communism" category "defined everywhere down to the common denominator of party movements founded by intellectuals."[73]
Criticism of Rummel's estimates have focused on two aspects, namely his choice of data sources and his statistical approach. According to Barbara Harff, the historical sources Rummel based his estimates upon can rarely serve as sources of reliable figures.[94] The statistical approach Rummel used to analyze big sets of diverse estimates may lead to dilution of useful data with noisy ones.[94][95]

Another criticism, as articulated by ethnographer and

political left.[98][failed verification] They say the same body-counting can be easily applied to other ideologies or systems, such as capitalism and colonialism. However, alongside philosopher Scott Sehon, Ghodsee wrote that "quibbling about numbers is unseemly. What matters is that many, many people were killed by communist regimes."[96][99]

Proposed causes and enabling factors

Main article: Criticism of communist party rule

Communist party mass killings have been criticized by members of the political right, who state that the mass killings are an indictment of communism as an ideology, and has also been criticized by other socialists such as

authoritarian regimes, and not caused by communism itself, and point to mass deaths that they say were caused by anti-communism and capitalism[96][97] as a counterpoint to those killings.[100]

Ideology

Historian

criminality, stating that "Communist regimes ... turned mass crime into a full-blown system of government",[70] while adding that this criminality lies at the level of ideology rather than state practice.[105]

The last issue, printed in red ink, of Karl Marx's journal Neue Rheinische Zeitung from 19 May 1849

Professor Mark Bradley writes that communist theory and practice has often been in tension with

proletariat."[106] Rustam Singh states that Marx had alluded to the possibility of peaceful revolution; after the failed Revolutions of 1848, Singh states that Marx emphasized the need for violent revolution and revolutionary terror.[107]

Literary historian George Watson cited an 1849 article written by Friedrich Engels called "The Hungarian Struggle" and published in Marx's journal Neue Rheinische Zeitung, and commented that "entire nations would be left behind after a workers' revolution against the bourgeoisie, feudal remnants in a socialist age, and since they could not advance two steps at a time, they would have to be killed. They were racial trash, as Engels called them, and fit only for the dung-heap of history."[108] One book review criticized this interpretation, maintaining that "what Marx and Engels are calling for is ... at the very least a kind of cultural genocide; but it is not obvious, at least from Watson's citations, that actual mass killing, rather than (to use their phraseology) mere 'absorption' or 'assimilation', is in question."[109] Talking about Engels' 1849 article, historian Andrzej Walicki states: "It is difficult to deny that this was an outright call for genocide."[110] Jean-François Revel writes that Joseph Stalin recommended study of the 1849 Engels article in his 1924 book On Lenin and Leninism.[111]

According to Rummel, the killings committed by communist regimes can best be explained as the result of the marriage between absolute power and the absolutist ideology of Marxism.[112] Rummel states that "communism was like a fanatical religion. It had its revealed text and its chief interpreters. It had its priests and their ritualistic prose with all the answers. It had a heaven, and the proper behavior to reach it. It had its appeal to faith. And it had its crusades against nonbelievers. What made this secular religion so utterly lethal was its seizure of all the state's instruments of force and coercion and their immediate use to destroy or control all independent sources of power, such as the church, the professions, private businesses, schools, and the family."[113] Rummels writes that Marxist communists saw the construction of their utopia as "though a war on poverty, exploitation, imperialism and inequality. And for the greater good, as in a real war, people are killed. And, thus, this war for the communist utopia had its necessary enemy casualties, the clergy, bourgeoisie, capitalists, wreckers, counterrevolutionaries, rightists, tyrants, rich, landlords, and noncombatants that unfortunately got caught in the battle. In war millions may die, but the cause may be well justified, as in the defeat of Hitler and an utterly racist Nazism. And to many communists, the cause of a communist utopia was such as to justify all the deaths."[112]

Benjamin Valentino writes that "apparently high levels of political support for murderous regimes and leaders should not automatically be equated with support for mass killing itself. Individuals are capable of supporting violent regimes or leaders while remaining indifferent or even opposed to specific policies that these regimes and carried out." Valentino quotes Vladimir Brovkin as saying that "a vote for the Bolsheviks in 1917 was not a vote for Red Terror or even a vote for a dictatorship of the proletariat."[114] According to Valentino, such strategies were so violent because they economically dispossess large numbers of people,[115][39] commenting: "Social transformations of this speed and magnitude have been associated with mass killing for two primary reasons. First, the massive social dislocations produced by such changes have often led to economic collapse, epidemics, and, most important, widespread famines. ... The second reason that communist regimes bent on the radical transformation of society have been linked to mass killing is that the revolutionary changes they have pursued have clashed inexorably with the fundamental interests of large segments of their populations. Few people have proved willing to accept such far-reaching sacrifices without intense levels of coercion."[116] According to Jacques Sémelin, "communist systems emerging in the twentieth century ended up destroying their own populations, not because they planned to annihilate them as such, but because they aimed to restructure the 'social body' from top to bottom, even if that meant purging it and recarving it to suit their new Promethean political imaginaire."[117]

saboteurs, or worst of all, internal traitors were wrecking the plan. Under no circumstances could it be admitted that the vision itself might be unworkable, because that meant capitulation to the forces of reaction."[118] Michael Mann writes that communist party members were "ideologically driven, believing that in order to create a new socialist society, they must lead in socialist zeal. Killings were often popular, the rank-and-file as keen to exceed killing quotas as production quotas."[119] According to Vladimir Tismăneanu, "the Communist project, in such countries as the USSR, China, Cuba, Romania, or Albania, was based precisely on the conviction that certain social groups were irretrievably alien and deservedly murdered."[120] Alex Bellamy writes that "communism's ideology of selective extermination" of target groups was first developed and applied by Joseph Stalin but that "each of the communist regimes that massacred large numbers of civilians during the Cold War developed their own distinctive account",[121] while Steven T. Katz states that distinctions based on class and nationality, stigmatized and stereotyped in various ways, created an "otherness" for victims of communist rule that was important for legitimating oppression and death.[122] Martin Shaw writes that "nationalist ideas were at the heart of many mass killings by Communist states", beginning with Stalin's "new nationalist doctrine of 'socialism in one country'", and killing by revolutionary movements in the Third World was done in the name of national liberation.[123]

Political system

Further information: Communist state
Moscow Trial

Bolshevik use of violence was repeated in every communist revolution." Phrases which were first uttered by Vladimir Lenin and Cheka founder Felix Dzerzhinsky were uttered all over the world. Applebaum states that as late as 1976, Mengistu Haile Mariam unleashed a Red Terror in Ethiopia.[124] To his colleagues in the Bolshevik government, Lenin was quoted as saying: "If we are not ready to shoot a saboteur and White Guardist, what sort of revolution is that?".[125]

Alexander Nikolaevich Yakovlev, architect of perestroika and glasnost and later head of the Presidential Commission for the Victims of Political Repression, elaborates on this point, stating: "The truth is that in punitive operations Stalin did not think up anything that was not there under Lenin: executions, hostage taking, concentration camps, and all the rest."[127] Historian Robert Gellately concurs, commenting: "To put it another way, Stalin initiated very little that Lenin had not already introduced or previewed."[128]

civil rights and rejection of the values of civil society. Hicks writes that whereas "in practice every liberal capitalist country has a solid record for being humane, for by and large respecting rights and freedoms, and for making it possible for people to put together fruitful and meaningful lives", in socialism "practice has time and again proved itself more brutal than the worst dictatorships prior to the twentieth century. Each socialist regime has collapsed into dictatorship and begun killing people on a huge scale."[129]

Eric D. Weitz states that the mass killing in communist states is a natural consequence of the failure of the rule of law, commonly seen during periods of social upheaval in the 20th century. For both communist and non-communist mass killings, "genocides occurred at moments of extreme social crisis, often generated by the very policies of the regimes",[130] and are not inevitable but are political decisions.[130] Steven Rosefielde writes that communist rulers had to choose between changing course and "terror-command" and more often than not, they chose the latter.[131] Michael Mann posits that a lack of institutionalized authority structures meant that a chaotic mix of both centralized control and party factionalism were factors which contributed to the killings.[119]

Leaders

Mao Zedong in 1959

Professor Matthew Krain states that many scholars have pointed to revolutions and civil wars as providing the opportunity for radical leaders and ideologies to gain power and the preconditions for mass killing by the state.[132] Professor Nam Kyu Kim writes that exclusionary ideologies are critical to explaining mass killing, but the organizational capabilities and individual characteristics of revolutionary leaders, including their attitudes towards risk and violence, are also important. Besides opening up political opportunities for new leaders to eliminate their political opponents, revolutions bring to power leaders who are more apt to commit large-scale acts of violence against civilians in order to legitimize and strengthen their own power.[133] Genocide scholar Adam Jones states that the Russian Civil War was very influential on the emergence of leaders like Stalin and it also accustomed people to "harshness, cruelty, terror."[134] Martin Malia called the "brutal conditioning" of the two World Wars important to understanding communist violence, although not its source.[135]

Historian

personalist leadership of Stalin and Mao, who were incentivized by having both control of the security apparatus used to carry out the purges and control of the appointment of replacements for those purged.[138] Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek attributes Mao allegedly viewing human life as disposable to his "cosmic perspective" on humanity.[139]

American historian and author William Rubinstein wrote that "Most of the millions who perished at the hands of Stalin, Mao Tse-tung, Pol Pot and the other communist dictators died because the party's leaders believed they belonged to a dangerous or subversive social class or political grouping."[140]

Comparisons to other mass killings

See also: Anti-communist mass killings

disappearances" in Guatemala during the civil war, and the assassinations and state terrorism that were associated with Operation Condor throughout South America.[143] Vincent Bevins argues that the anti-communist mass killings that were perpetrated during the Cold War have been far more impactful on shaping the contemporary world than communist mass killings have been.[144]

Debate over famines

Further information: Soviet and communist studies
Soviet famine of 1932–1933
, with areas where the effects of famine were most severe shaded

According to historian

Marxist–Leninist, Ethiopia and Mozambique, were the only such countries to suffer these deadly famines."[146]

Russian Duma also denied that the famine in Ukraine constituted a genocide, stating that it was not designed to target particular ethnic groups.[152]

In contrast, according to

Holocaust. Instead the extermination consisted of four steps: 1) extermination of the Ukrainian national elite 2) liquidation of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church 3) extermination of a significant part of the Ukrainian peasantry as "custodians of traditions, folklore and music, national language and literature 4) populating the territory with other nationalities with intent of mixing Ukrainians with them, which would eventually lead to the dissolvance of the Ukrainian nation.[156][161]

Benjamin Valentino writes: "Although not all the deaths due to famine in these cases were intentional, communist leaders directed the worst effects of famine against their suspected enemies and used hunger as a weapon to force millions of people to conform to the directives of the state."[116] Daniel Goldhagen says that in some cases deaths from famine should not be distinguished from mass murder, commenting: "Whenever governments have not alleviated famine conditions, political leaders decided not to say no to mass death – in other words, they said yes." Goldhagen says that instances of this occurred in the Mau Mau rebellion, the Great Leap Forward, the Nigerian Civil War, the Eritrean War of Independence, and the War in Darfur.[162] Martin Shaw posits that if a leader knew the ultimate result of their policies would be mass death by famine, and they continue to enact them anyway, these deaths can be understood as intentional.[163]

Economics professor Michael Ellman is critical of the fixation on a "uniquely Stalinist evil" when it comes to excess deaths from famines. Ellman posits that mass deaths from famines are not a "uniquely Stalinist evil", commenting that throughout Russian history, famines, and droughts have been a common occurrence, including the Russian famine of 1921–1922, which occurred before Stalin came to power. He also states that famines were widespread throughout the world in the 19th and 20th centuries in countries such as India, Ireland, Russia and China. According to Ellman, the G8 "are guilty of mass manslaughter or mass deaths from criminal negligence because of their not taking obvious measures to reduce mass deaths" and Stalin's "behaviour was no worse than that of many rulers in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries."[164]

Memorials and museums

See also: Black Ribbon Day, Double genocide theory, and Prague Declaration
The "Victims of Communism Memorial" in Washington, DC.

Monuments to the victims of communist states exist in almost all the capitals of Eastern Europe and there are several museums documenting communist rule such as the

European Day of Remembrance for Victims of Stalinism and Nazism.[174]

According to anthropologist

anti-communist narrative "based on a series of categories and figures" to "denounce Communist state violence (qualified as 'Communist crimes', 'red genocide' or 'classicide') and to honour persecuted individuals (presented alternatively as 'victims of Communism' and 'heroes of anti totalitarian resistance')."[176]

See also

Communist movements and violence

Violence by governments in general and comparative studies

References

Citations

  1. ^ Wheatcroft 1996, pp. 1320–1321.
  2. ^ Krain 1997, pp. 331–332.
  3. ^ Valentino 2005, p. 9.
  4. ^ Karlsson & Schoenhals 2008, p. 6.
  5. ^ a b Sémelin 2009, p. 318.
  6. ^ Su 2011, pp. 7–8.
  7. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2008, p. 42.
  8. ^ Ott 2011, p. 53.
  9. ^ Mann 2005, p. 17.
  10. ^ Sémelin 2009, p. 37.
  11. ^ Sangar 2007, p. 1, paragraph 3.
  12. ^ Karlsson & Schoenhals 2008, p. 104.
  13. ^ Sémelin 2009, p. 344.
  14. ^ Harff 2017, p. 112.
  15. ^ Harff 2017, pp. 112, 116.
  16. ^ Harff 2017, p. 116.
  17. ^ Fein 1993a, p. 75.
  18. ^ a b Rummel 1993.
  19. ^ Harff 2003, p. 50.
  20. ^ Jones 2010, p. 137.
  21. ^ van Schaack 1997, p. 2267.
  22. ^ Staub 2000, p. 368.
  23. ^ Wayman & Tago 2010, pp. 3–4.
  24. ^ Williams 2008, p. 190.
  25. ^ Möller 1999.
  26. ^ a b Hackmann 2009.
  27. ^ Rosefielde 2010, p. 3.
  28. ^ Rousso & Goslan 2004, p. 157.
  29. ^ Shafir 2016, p. 64.
  30. ^ Shafir 2016, pp. 64, 74.
  31. ^ Voicu 2018, p. 46.
  32. ^ Staub 1989, p. 8.
  33. ^ Staub 2011, p. 1000.
  34. ^ Charny 1999.
  35. ^ a b Esteban, Morelli & Rohner 2010, p. 6.
  36. ^ Valentino, Huth & Bach-Lindsay 2004, p. 387.
  37. ^ a b Valentino 2005, p. 91.
  38. ^ Ulfelder & Valentino 2008, p. 2.
  39. ^ a b Bellamy 2010, p. 102.
  40. ^ Wayman & Tago 2010, pp. 4, 11, 12–13.
  41. ^ Ott 2011, p. 55.
  42. ^ Su 2003, p. 4.
  43. ^ Su 2011, p. 13.
  44. ^ Harff & Gurr 1988, p. 360.
  45. ^ Harff 2003, p. 58.
  46. ^ Wayman & Tago 2010, p. 4.
  47. ^ Midlarsky 2005, pp. 22, 309, 310.
  48. ^ Midlarsky 2005, p. 321.
  49. ^ Karlsson & Schoenhals 2008, p. 8.
  50. JSTOR 2697429
    .
  51. ISBN 9780801472732
    .
  52. ^ "Reevaluating China's Democide to 73,000,000". 24 November 2008.
  53. ^ a b Bradley 2017, pp. 151–153.
  54. ^ a b c Harff 2017.
  55. ^ a b c Dallin 2000.
  56. ^ Getty 1985, p. 5.
  57. ^ Ellman 2002.
  58. ^ Ellman 2002, p. 1151.
  59. ^ Wheatcroft 1999, p. 341: "For decades, many historians counted Stalin' s victims in 'tens of millions', which was a figure supported by Solzhenitsyn. Since the collapse of the USSR, the lower estimates of the scale of the camps have been vindicated. The arguments about excess mortality are far more complex than normally believed. R. Conquest, The Great Terror: A Re-assessment (London, 1992) does not really get to grips with the new data and continues to present an exaggerated picture of the repression. The view of the 'revisionists' has been largely substantiated (Getty & Manning 1993). The popular press, even TLS and The Independent, have contained erroneous journalistic articles that should not be cited in respectable academic articles."
  60. ^ a b Valentino 2005, p. 275.
  61. ^ Brzezinski 1993, p. 16.
  62. ^ Rummel 1994, p. 15, Table 1.6.
  63. ^ a b Rummel 2005a.
  64. ^ a b Rummel 2005b.
  65. ^ Dulić 2004, p. 85.
  66. ^ Rummel 2004.
  67. ^ Karlsson & Schoenhals 2008, p. 79.
  68. ^ Karlsson & Schoenhals 2008, p. 35.
  69. ^ a b Aronson 2003.
  70. ^ a b Courtois 1999, p. 4.
  71. ^ Rutland 1999, p. 123.
  72. ^ Malia 1999, p. x.
  73. ^ a b David-Fox 2004.
  74. ^ Karlsson & Schoenhals 2008, pp. 53–54.
  75. ^ Valentino 2005, pp. 75, 91.
  76. ^ Rosefielde 2010, pp. 1, 7.
  77. ^ Bellamy 2012, p. 949.
  78. ^ Strauss 2014, pp. 360–361.
  79. ^ Chicago Tribune 2017.
  80. ^ Kotkin 2017.
  81. ^ a b c Harff 1996, p. 118.
  82. ^ Dulić 2004, p. 98.
  83. ^ Harff 2017, pp. 113–114.
  84. ^ Weiner 2002, p. 450.
  85. ^ Paczkowski 2001, p. 34.
  86. ^ Kuromiya 2001, p. 195.
  87. ^ a b Ghodsee 2014.
  88. ISBN 9780191017759
    . Retrieved 2 December 2021 – via Google Books. At first sight, accusations that Hitler and Stalin mirrored each other as they 'conducted wars of annihilation against internal and external enemeis ... of class, race, and nation,' seem plausible. But such a perspective, in reality a recapitulation of the long-discredited totalitarian perspective equating Stalin's Soviet Union with Hitler's National Socialist Germany, is not tenable. It betrays a profound misunderstanding of the distinct natures of the Stalinist and Nazi regimes, which made them mortal enemies. Stalin's primary objective was to forge an autarkic, industrialized, multinational state, under the rubric of 'socialism in one country'. Nationalism and nation-building were on Stalin's agenda, not genocide; nor was it inherent in the construction of a non-capitalist, non-expansionary state—however draconian.
  89. ^ Shafir 2016.
  90. ISBN 9781000712124
    . Retrieved 2 December 2021 – via Google Books.
  91. ^ a b Neumayer 2018.
  92. ^ Dujisin 2020.
  93. ^ Dallin 2000: "Whether all these cases, from Hungary to Afghanistan, have a single essence and thus deserve to be lumped together—just because they are labeled Marxist or communist—is a question the authors scarcely discuss."
  94. ^ a b Harff 1996.
  95. ^ Dulić 2004.
  96. ^ a b c d Ghodsee & Sehon 2018.
  97. ^ a b c Engel-Di Mauro 2021.
  98. ^ Courtois 1999, p. xvii.
  99. ^ Jones 2018.
  100. ^ Bevins 2020, pp. 238–240.
  101. ^ Karlsson & Schoenhals 2008, p. 5.
  102. ^ Gray 1990, p. 116.
  103. ^ Goldhagen 2009, p. 206.
  104. ^ Pipes 2001, p. 147.
  105. ^ Courtois 1999, p. 2.
  106. ^ Jahanbegloo 2014, pp. 117–118.
  107. ^ Jahanbegloo 2014, pp. 120–121.
  108. ^ Watson 1998, p. 77.
  109. ^ Grant 1999, p. 558.
  110. ^ Walicki 1997, p. 154.
  111. ^ Revel 2009, pp. 94–95.
  112. ^ a b Totten & Jacobs 2002, p. 168.
  113. ^ Totten & Jacobs 2002, p. 169.
  114. ^ Valentino 2005, pp. 33–34.
  115. ^ Valentino 2005, pp. 91, 93.
  116. ^ a b Valentino 2005, pp. 93–94.
  117. ^ Sémelin 2009, p. 331.
  118. ^ Chirot & McCauley 2010, p. 42.
  119. ^ a b Mann 2005, pp. 318, 321.
  120. ^ Tismăneanu 2012, p. 14.
  121. ^ Bellamy 2012, p. 950.
  122. ^ Katz 2013, p. 267.
  123. ^ Shaw 2015a, p. 115.
  124. ^ Hollander 2006, p. xiv.
  125. ^ Fitzpatrick 2008, p. 77.
  126. ^ Conquest 2007, p. xxiii.
  127. ^ Yakovlev 2002, p. 20.
  128. ^ Ray 2007.
  129. ^ Hicks 2009, pp. 87–88.
  130. ^ a b Weitz 2003, pp. 251–252.
  131. ^ Rosefielde 2010, p. xvi.
  132. ^ Krain 1997, p. 334.
  133. ^ Kim 2016, pp. 23–24.
  134. ^ Jones 2010, p. 126.
  135. ^ Malia 1999, p. xviii.
  136. ^ Rappaport 1999, pp. 82–83.
  137. ^ Thompson 2008, pp. 254–255.
  138. ^ Montagnes & Wolton 2019, p. 27.
  139. ^ Žižek 2006.
  140. ^ Rubinstein 2014.
  141. ^ Goldhagen 2009, p. 54.
  142. ^ a b Rosefielde 2010, pp. 225–226.
  143. ^ Aarons 2007, pp. 71 & 80–81.
  144. ^ Bevins 2020, p. 240.
  145. ^ a b Ghodsee 2014, p. 124.
  146. ^ Courtois 1999, p. 9.
  147. ^ Davies & Wheatcroft 2009, p. xiv.
  148. ^ Tauger 2001, p. 46.
  149. ^ Wheatcroft 2020.
  150. ^ Aldous & Kotkin 2017.
  151. ISBN 978-1784785642
    . Most scholars rejected this claim, seeing the famine as following from a badly conceived and miscalculated policy of excessive requisitioning of grain, but not as directed specifically against ethnic Ukrainians.
  152. ^ Gutterman, Steve (3 April 2008). "Russians reject calling '30s famine a genocide". The Boston Globe. Associated Press.
  153. ^ Payaslian 2021.
  154. ^ Britannica Holodomor.
  155. ISBN 9780674036529 – via Google Books
    .
  156. ^ a b "Holodomor was a genocide, according to the author of the term". Retrieved 9 December 2022.
  157. ^ Lemkin 2008.
  158. ^ Mace 1986, p. 12.
  159. ^ Naimark 2010, pp. 134–135.
  160. ^ Snyder 2010, p. vii.
  161. ^ Свобода, Радіо (28 November 2008). "Soviet Genocide in Ukraine". Радіо Свобода. Retrieved 9 December 2022.
  162. ^ Goldhagen 2009, pp. 29–30.
  163. ^ Shaw 2015b, "Structural contexts and unintended consequences".
  164. ^ Ellman 2002, p. 1172.
  165. ISBN 978-0-857-45643-4
    .
  166. JSTOR 10.5406/historypresent.4.2.0115
    .
  167. ^ Friendship Act (HR3000) (PDF). United States Congress. 1993. p. 15 at §905a1. Retrieved 14 November 2020 – via U.S. Government Publishing Office.
  168. ^ Fekeiki, Omar (13 June 2007). "The Toll of Communism". The Washington Post. Retrieved 19 November 2020.
  169. ISBN 978-0-300-17842-5
    .
  170. ^ "Wall of Grief: Putin opens first Soviet victims memorial". BBC News. 30 October 2017. Retrieved 19 November 2020.
  171. ^ "Victims of communism monument could be unveiled next spring". CBC News. 19 March 2018. Retrieved 19 November 2020.
  172. ^ "Estonia's Victims of Communism 1940–1991". Kommunismiohvrite memoriaal. 23 August 2018. 2018. Retrieved 19 November 2020.
  173. ^ "Cornerstone laid for new memorial for victims of communist crimes". ERR News. 4 May 2018. Retrieved 19 November 2020.
  174. ^ "Victims of Communism Memorial opened in Tallinn". ERR News. 24 August 2018. Retrieved 19 November 2020.
  175. JSTOR 10.5406/historypresent.4.2.0115
    .
  176. ISBN 9781351141741
    .

Bibliography

  • Makuch, Andrij. "The famine of 1932–1933". Encyclopædia Britannica online. Archived from the original on 23 November 2015. Retrieved 2 November 2015. The Great Famine (Holodomor) of 1932–1933 – a man-made demographic catastrophe unprecedented in peacetime. Of the estimated six to eight million people who died in the Soviet Union, about four to five million were Ukrainians ... Its deliberate nature is underscored by the fact that no physical basis for famine existed in Ukraine ... Soviet authorities set requisition quotas for Ukraine at an impossibly high level. Brigades of special agents were dispatched to Ukraine to assist in procurement, and homes were routinely searched and foodstuffs confiscated ... The rural population was left with insufficient food to feed itself.
  • ISBN 9780092862434
    .
  • Lemkin, Raphael (2008) [1953]. "Soviet Genocide in the Ukraine" (PDF). In Luciuk, Lubomyr; Grekul, Lisa (eds.). Holodomor: Reflections on the Great Famine of 1932–1933 in Soviet Ukraine. Kashtan Press.
    ISBN 978-1896354330. Archived from the original
    (PDF) on 2 March 2012. Retrieved 22 July 2012.

Further reading

Bibliographies

General

Soviet Union

China

Cambodia

Others

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes&oldid=1215138216"