[Marxism] [SUSPICIOUS MESSAGE] Ukraine reality today
jgreen at communistvoice.org
Wed Apr 8 00:40:59 MDT 2015
Roger Annis wrote:
> Joseph Green of Communist Voice says that the author of an article posted
>on New Cold War.org about the history of Crimea "presumably backed the mass
> deportation [of Crimean Tatars from the peninsula following WW2] as a good
> thing". The author expresses no such view backing the deportation, but
Pavel's presents the return of the Crimean Tatars to Crimea as a
"controversial" decision for "deporting released Nazi collaborators to the
peninsula in an attempt to speed up its re-population program".
a) presents the Crimean Tatars as "released Nazi collaborators",
b) turns truth on its head and presents the return of the Crimean Tatars to
Crimea as deportation,
c) presents the matter as a sinister repopulation with non-Russians.
It takes one's breathe away, Roger, that you can blithely ignore all this. In
effect, you say, don't read what Pavel says, just accept your assertion that
Pavel couldn't have meant anything bad. You don't even try to quote his
article. What you do is:
a) tell people on the Marxism list, who oppose the mass deportation, that of
course Pavel wouldn't dream of supporting the deportation,
b) while allowing prettification and support of mass deportation on
NewColdwar.org to spread.
> The article in question is one a now considerable collection of articles
>about Crimea compiled on the dedicated page of the
> NewCold War.org. website.
This makes my point for me. There is a considerable collection of articles
and yet you couldn't quote a single one that was upset with Pavel's stand or
refuted his lie about the return of the Tatars being a deportation of
released Nazi collaborators to Crimea. And yet this was on a "dedicated page"
to the Crimean issue.
> But we read from Joseph that a "miserable fascist standpoint" comes through
> on the website. Oh dear.
It's instructive to see how casually you take all this.
> I took this occasion to read Joseph's pro-Maidan treatise on Ukraine of August 2014...
> Joseph neglects to mention that another of the first acts of the Rada
>following the governmental overthrow was to abolish the language law of 2012
>which granted limited language rights on a localized basiss where there was
>determined to be sufficient "local language" speakers other than Ukrainian.
You apparently didn't read my article, except for a paragraph or two. As I
pointed out in another post, I did discuss the temporary repeal of the
language law, which was vetoed in a week. So Roger, you have a triple
a) My article did discuss the issue,
b) you fail to mention the fact that this repeal was vetoed in a week,
c) you falsely imply that, without this law, there were not even limited
language rights for anything but Ukrainian. This is not true. In fact, the
various Ukrainian Constitutions since independence have provided certain
guarantees for Russian and other languages, although the actual extent of
this depends on how it was implemented in practice. Ukrainian is the only
state language (in my opinion, a nationalist mistake), but the Constitution
will also say things like: "The free development, use and protection of
Russian, and other languages of national minorities of Ukraine, is
But when you repeatedly bring up the temporary repeal of the 2012 law as a
key issue about the Ukrainian government, well, that raises a significant
point. The mass deportation of the entire Tatar population living in Crimea
was not something that lasted only a week and was then vetoed. it was more
than 20 years (more than 1,000 weeks) before Tatars could even start
returning. Their deportation also involved massive death during their
transportation. So shouldn't NewColdWar.org be spending more space on
discussing the mass deportation of the Tatars than on the 2012 law? It need
not spend 1,000 times more space, but it should at least draw some
conclusions about the nature of the government that would do this to the
Tatars, and a number of other small nationalities. It should also campaign
against the widespread Russian chauvinist attitude to this. If it doesn't, it
means encouraging the steps that are being taken against the Tatars since
annexation of Crimea. It also means encouraging the Russian nationalist
attitude towards oppressive Russian governments.
> Didn't we read something in the history books about how in the early
>1930s, so many communists in Germany turned a blind eye to the rise of
>fascism? Even after Hitler assumed power in 1933, the Communist Party's
>leadership (and its mentors in Moscow) dismissed that momentous event as a
In my article, I discuss the issue of the different trends in Ukraine and the
dangers they pose. But you
* turn a blind eye to Pavel's prettification of the mass deportation of
* regard the issue of forced collectivization simply as "recklessness",
whereas what is at stake involves mass deportations of peasants, and the
class character of the Russian regime under Stalin and his successors,
* don't know where the famine of the early 1930s extended into Ukraine,
Whatever the faults of the German communists of the 1930s, they fought
fascism, while you are fighting Ukrainian independence, backing one
imperialism against another, and opposing the development of any independent
working class force. <>
More information about the Marxism