Propagands & Lies
jokoe at minot.com
Tue Apr 30 19:23:43 MDT 1996
From: Joe Koenigsman [jokoe at minot.com],North Dakota
As I told Barkley Rosser, Professor of Economics at James Madison
University, I'm not a Stalin apologist; but, I don't subscribe to
"right wing" propaganda bull s-hit, and Socio-Psycho-Babble! And,
for Barkley's edification, I do know what I'm talking about, and
don't read, listen to; or, believe Stalinist propaganda either!
However, if bad information was put on a scale of one to ten, I'd
have to rank Stalinist propaganda with a low of one, and "right wing"
propaganda as a ten. The assessment involves fact that, when improper
things occured in Russia, over the past 70 years, a Soviet government
bureaucracy, covered up information; but, when U.S. "right wingers"
gain any information about Russia, which appears durrogatory, they
magnify, distort, and lie about the information. And, if simple lie
isn't good enough, they fabricate one. This has been going on since the
Senator Joe McCarthy's era, and when, the Hoover Foundation was created
in 1954. Regarding the Stalinist propaganda, I'll say, "If Stalin's
propaganda was any damn good, Russia wouldn't be "freaked up" with
"parastroika" today, and have a bunch of "free marker" capitalists,
trying to turn Russia's bad economy into a "dog eat dog" disaster!
One of the biggest "right wing" lies, involves charges,that Stalin
and the communists, were guilty of murdering 12-20 million people in
Russia. This is absolutely absurd, however, it's great propaganda,
and people like Barkley Rosser, Brian Carnell, and other purveyors of
capitalist "right wing" philosophy know it. They don't give a s-it
one way, or the other about Stalin. He's been dead 43 years, yet we
hear nothing but Stalinism is evil, liberalism is evil, and capitalism
is all good. This is a bunch of bull s-it propaganda!
Today, information is surfacing from the few records, of that era in
Russia. What it reveals, it will reveal, and it may well provide some
insight, on what happened in Russia during the past 70 years. However
what has been occuring is, The "right wing," is gathering information
received from Soviet records, synthesizing it, and re-synthesizing it,
until it matches their "pre-formed conclusions" of what happened in
Russia. Then armed, with this new version of history, the "right
wingers" are then, initiating, a whole new propaganda attack, against
marxists, communists, socialists, liberals, unions, democrats, and any
other group, or person opposed to "free market" capitalism! The "right
wingers" are using this "bull s-it" to confuse and scare the people,
into believing capitalism, is a benovlent philosophy, and better than,
"The Second Coming of Christ." "This Is The Biggest Lie Of All!"
Rosser knows, I never said the 1930's "purge trials" were justified,
or that anyone should've been executed; or that Trotsky should've been
murdered. Hell, I'm against capital punishment in any form, for any
reason. And, I never said Stalin, didn't have some cupability in the
"purge trials." I merely said, those who were executed, were implicated
by confession, in a plot to put Trotsky in power, and Stalin was not
guilty of murder. And, I said, he did not order the assassination of
Trotsky. I'll say it again, "Stalin didn't murder any 12 to 20 million
people, nor did he order Trotsky's assassination. This is bull s-it
that "right wing" Socio-Psycho-Babblers wish everyone to believe.
Rosser takes umbrage, because I said Stalin "was not" guilty of mass
murder, and raises the "Sword of Damocles" over Stalin's head, stating
strongly, "that Nikolai Ivanovich Bukharin was tried secretly, tortured,
and made to confess; and then was executed unfairly, in the 30's "purge
trials" by Stalin's order." Rosser believes that by convincing everyone
that Stalin murdered Bukharin, they will believe the other charges, that
Stalin was guilty of murdering 12 to 20 million Russians. By denegrating
Josef Stalin, Rosser tries to denegrate communism as an evil thing. This
is specifically the "right wing" bull s-it that I object to, because
it's gross propaganda and Socio-Psycho-Babble.
To support his wild comments, professor Barkley Rosser, claims
personal link to Bukharin's widow, and other Stalinists, whom he says
were arrested on trumped up charges, by Stalin's order, and tortured at
length in Lubyanka prison. Rosser believes, his claims will not be
disputed, because he's a professor of economics, and has nubleous
personal acquaintenances, who suffered by Stalin's hand to corrobrate
his false claims.
I won't question Rosser's claim to personal links with Bukharin's
widow, or, the other Stalinists, he says were treated so badly, but I do
question credibility of his claims, about how Bukharin died, because the
claims are germaine, to Rosser's assertion that Stalin was a murderer.
Many people are under an impression, the famous Russian "purge trials"
of 1936-38, involved secrecy, where victims were dragged from their
beds, taken to Lubyanka prison, tortured to obtain false confessions,
and were hauled before, an unnamed panel of judges, who sentenced them
to death, or imprisonment in Siberia. Many people are under impression
that Josef Stalin directed the arrests for his own reasons, ordered the
investigations and torture to obtain confessions, and ordered executions
or imprisonment in Siberia. This is so far from the truth, it's amazing
people would believe it.
When Sergei Mironovich Kirov was murdered in 1934, investigation
indicated a conspiracy existed, to overthrow Russia's government and the
communist party, and put the exile Leon Trotsky in power. Because names
of Zinoviev and Kamenev surfaced, decision was made to hold hearings in
1936, that had aspects of a trial, because of the gravity of the
situation, and fact that it had full weight of the politburo. Zinoviev
and Kamenev were brought before the hearings, and interrogated about
their part in the affair. While the trial originally began as a closed
hearing, it was not conducted in secret. While it was not open to the
public, at large, it was open to all members of the politburo. And, by
time Bukharin was brought before the hearings, even outside officials
were in attendence. When Bukharin was interrogated, U.S. Ambassador John
Davies was in attendance.
When the hearings began, it was believed, only Zinoviev and Kamenev
(Trotsky's brother-in-law) were involved, but as matters progressed,
more and more names surfaced, some in high position, and many in lower
levels of the military and governmenmt. Eventually Bukharin's name
emerged. Because high ranking communist officials, members of the
politboro were named, they were treated with respect, and none of them
were tortured, to make them sign any confession.
Of six politboro members executed, each of them, including Bukharin,
condemned themselves by their own answers, at the hearing interrogation.
Bukharin was one of the last politboro members, interrogated at the
hearings, and the way he was treated, gives clear indication that
neither he, or the other five politboro members executed, were tortured,
or forced to sign any confession. Aleksey Rykov did sign a confession,
but only to save his life, after being condemned to execution by his own
I don't believe Nikolai Ivanovich Bukharin was directly involved in
the plot to put Trotsky in power, but he was implicated by Rykov, who
was involved in the plot to support Trotsky; and Bukharin admitted to
involvement with Tomsky, who was planning a coup d'etat, and overthrow
of the communist party to establish a new government. In testimony at
the hearings, Bukharin denied specific allegations, and admitted others,
with explanation of what he did. He then made comments, of self critism,
that indicated guilt, while explaining his actions.
Whether any believe it or not, Stalin (referred to as Kouba), who was
Bukharin's friend, advised Bukharin in the hearing, to not be so hard on
himself in comment, but when Bukharin persisted, another politboro
member, also Bukharin's friend, threw up his hands, and walked out of
the hearing. The result was; Bukharin was determined guilty, and
sentenced to execution, because of his own words.
It's true, Stalin had final review, on sentences of execution of
politboro members and key government figures, but a high probability
existed, that Stalin may have reversed sentence in Bukharin's case. But,
then Bukharin wrote letters to Stalin, while in prison, addressed,
"Dear Kouba" and he reversed what he said at the hearing; but admitted
guilt to other things, he previously denied. Arch Getty has translations
of these letters, which he states are interesting. The fact, Bukharin
used Stalin's former pseudonym, "Kouba" indicates, he was a close friend
of Stalin, and the relationship went back to a beginning as bolsheviks,
but Stalin didn't reverse the hearing decision of execution. Why, may
never be known, but Stalin's admonishment during the hearing, that
Bukharin should not be so hard on himself, indicates that Stalin didn't
want Bukharin condemned. It can only be presumed that Stalin didn't
reverse the decision because of Bukharin's additional admissions of
guilt in the personal letters. Stalin had not overturned the hearing
decisions, in the cases of Zinoviev and Kamenev, Rykov, Yagoda, and
Toukhachevsky; so how could he reverse the hearing decision in regard to
Bukharin. And, Stalin didn't reverse the decision. But, this doesn't
make Stalin a murderer.
While a lot of unsupported allegations are made, that Stalin ordered
the purges, there's no recorded evidence, or historical testimony, that
would prove such to be true. While he was involved in the hearings,
Stalin didn't accuse any of the soviet official, to include Bukharin, of
attempting to overthrow the Russian government. And, he didn't order the
executions. This was done by majority of the hearing board, who first
condemned, based on what the accused said, and then pronounced sentence.
Consider the reality of the situation. If Stalin wished to murder his
oponents, he could've just had them assassinated, or picked up, and
shot. All six communist party officials, tried between 1936-38, were on
the politboro, and had their followings on the politboro, including
Zinoviev, Kamenev and Bukharin. Why would Stalin risk trials, that took
place over two years, that could have exhonorated his enemies, and left
them as a continuous threat. If Stalin had sufficient control of the
politboro, to ensure liquidation of his enemies, he would've taken
direct action, not "dork around" with trials. The fact of the matter, is
Stalin didn't control the politboro, and he didn't murder his enemies.
I'm not naive, about what happened in the 1930's "purge trials," and I
can read as well as anyone. I've never listen to Stalinist propaganda,
and I'm not citing it now. I can't say that all parts of the trial, were
open to the public, but I will say, that part of the trials involving
Bukharin were "wide open." If they weren't, U.S. Ambassador Davies,
wouldn't have attended the trial of Bukharin.
Karl Radek, an editorial writer on Ivestia, and a follower of Trotsky,
implicated Nikolai Bukharin in the Trotsky plot. Because of Radek's
testimony, Bukharin had been advised to flee Russia, but he wouldn't do
it. He decided to stand trial, apparently under preception that he was
personal friend to Stalin, and too high in the party to to be touched.
From what Joseph Davies said, Bukharin had not been tortured, nor was
he forced to sign any confession, as Professor Rosser claims. Ambassador
Davies said, when Bukharin arrived to testify, he walked into the room
in good health, and with confidence. Karl Radek, editorial writer on
Ivestia, and a follower of Trotsky, had implicated Bukharin, who headed
Ivestia. Because Radek worked for Bukharin on Ivestia, his testimony was
As questioning began, Bukharin was lucid, open, and alert; and he
continued to be so throughout the trial. He spoke freely, explaining his
philosophy and involvment, and even joked with questioners. As questions
were put to him, he denied specific allegations, and admitted to others,
with explanation of his actions and views. No one forced him to say
anything, or admit anything.
Bukharin admitted to meetings with Rykov, Tomsky, and even Kamenev;
denied direct contact, or any involvement, with Trotsky; but admitted
contacts with individuals who supported Trotskey. He denied being a spy,
or and all allegations of espionage. He freely admitted responsibility,
and support, for the Riutin platform, which called for liquidation of
Stalin, and replacement of the entire leadership of the communist party.
He explained his views in length, and indicated Russia needed to give up
socialism and turn to a democratic form of government, with capitalism.
While direct tie, was never made with Trotsky, Bukharin's words gave
credibility to Radek, who alleged Bukharin's involement; and which also
alleged that, Trotsky had been meeting with Germans for support, and
was willing, to make territorial concessions to Germany for such
While many believe Bukharin was not a direct conspiator in the Trotsky
plot, his own comments at the hearings, caused his conviction, and
In open trial, under no duress, Bukharin said, "In the summer of 1934
Radek told me that directions had been received from Trotsky, that
was conducting negotiations with the Germans, that Trotsky had already
promised the Germans a number of territorial concessions, including the
Ukraine .... I must say that then, at that time, I remonstrated with
Radek. Radek confirms this in his testimony, just as he confirmed at a
confrontation with me that I objected to this, that I considered it
essential that he, Radek, should write and tell Trotsky that he was
going too far in these negotiations, that he might compromise not only
himself, but all "his allies," us Right conspirators in particular, and
that this meant certain disaster for all of us. It seemed to me that
with the growth of mass patriotism, which is beyond all doubt, this
point of view of Trotsky's was politically and tactically inexpedient.
Unquote." Note: These are the exact words of Bukharin. U.S. Ambassador
Joseph Davies, who attended the trial, heard and related them. They're
not fabrication of any Stalinist propagandist!
Professor Barkley Rosser may have links with Bukharin's widow, or
others, but his information is all wet. Personally, I believe Rosser is
trying to give a "snow job" to everyone on the Marxist list who defends
Marxism, communism, socialism, or any other liberal who has ideas that
conflict with "free market capitalism."
It's my belief that Barkley Rosser and Brian Carnell are spreading a
bunch of "right wing" bull s-it, and Socio-Psycho-Babble. They are
entitled to say anything they wish, but anyone on the list, who gets
ripped up by these two "right wing" psuedo-intellectuals, should
consider the source!
In Comradship, jokoe at minot.com
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism