On May 7, 5:16=A0am, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> The Black Monk wrote:
> > On May 6, 10:34 am, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> The Black Monk wrote:
> >>> On May 6, 4:07 am, "J. Anderson" <anderso...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>> The Black Monk wrote:
> >>>>> The five people didn't take over the US, they took over a plane
with=
> >>>>> 92 people. =A0They established total control over it and did what
th=
ey
> >>>>> wanted with it, just as the small band of Bolsheviks established
tot=
al
> >>>>> control over Russia. =A0
> >>>> This is one of the weirdest analogies 'your side' has ever
presented =
in
> >>>> this forum (and that's saying a lot).
> >>> What do you mean, "my side."
> >> The four or five posters who spend their days in SCB mainly trying to
> >> defame the Balts and defend the Russians.
>
> > So calling the Latvian Red Rifles the monsters that they were is
> > "defaming" Balts?
>
> Look, this *is* soc.culture.baltics, but 'your side' is hanging around
> here only to criticize, provoke and disturb.
So no criticism of Balts allowed on soc.culture.baltics?
> You're not really interested in the Baltics, you don't want to learn or
un=
derstand
If I wasn't interested in the Baltics I wouldn't spend so much time
conversing about them.
> anything about the three countries -- your sole purpose is to promote
> your pro-Russian agenda, which is as stupidly simple as this: 'Russia
> right, world wrong.'
I'm just a realist - if it sometimes turns out that my agenda is pro-
Russian, then so be it. But often it is not. I've clashed with
karlamov over the Ukrainian Insurgent Army and Nachtigall and with
some Lithuanians over Wilno because their attitude towards it sank
Pilsudski's anti-Soviet federation. Unfortunately, in your irrational
hatred of Russia you see any defense of Russia as evidence of rabid
Russian nationalism.
> >>>> Here's what you are comparing:
> >>>> 1) A few armed men hijack an aircraft with less than a hundred
unarme=
d
> >>>> passengers and crew.
> >>> Already you've screwed up, sorry. =A0"Armed" with =A0boxcutters.
=A0Ho=
w do
> >>> you know none of the other 87 pocketknives, sharp scissors, or other
> >>> "weapons" comparable to those of the hijackers?
> >> A boxcutter is an excellent instrument for sla****ng throats. You only
> >> need to slit one throat to establish total control of all the others.
>
> > Yes. =A0Now apply the same correct logic to the Red Terror and its
> > effect on the Russian population.
>
> Sorry, but I can't really help if you are unable to grasp the difference
> between a Boeing-767 (with a fuselage area of some 200 sqm) and the
> Russian empire. Your analogy is halting, to put it politely.
It was just an example of a small minority imposing their will onto
the majority.
>
> >>>> The whole thing takes place in a confined space at
> >>>> an altitude of several kilometres. The purpose is to use the
aircraft=
as
> >>>> a suicide bomb. The existence of crew and passengers is irrelevant.
> >>> Only for your convenience.
> >> They were meant to die, whereas in Russia the population would have
> >> another role -- that of upholding the new regime.
>
> > So the population of Russia upheld the Bolshevik regime? =A0Hey, I
guess=
> > that until their deaths the passangers on the airplanes "upheld" the
> > hijacker's regime, too.
>
> >>>> =A0And it's all over in a matter of minutes.
> >>> That's all the time that was necessary.
> >> Yes, and how does that sup****t your analogy?
>
> > How does it not so so?
>
> >>>> 2) A few thousand insurgents
> >>> Actually a few tens of thousands.
> >> OK, let's say 50,000. The 9/11 hijackers were 5% against 95% in the
> >> aircraft. The Bol****es were 50,000 against 170,000,000 in Russia.
>
> > Reread the history of the Revolution and perhaps you won't make such
> > silly statements. =A0The Bolsheviks didn't actively fight 170,000,000
-
> > most Russians were passive, like the hijacked victims.
>
> I don't have to reread anything about Russia -- I'm reading about it all
> the time. For instance right now I'm on page 538 of Robert Service's
> Lenin biography (luckily he will die soon, Lenin, that is), so this
> period is vividly before my eyes.
>
> >> That's 0.03% against 99.97%.
>
> > The 50,000 Bolsheviks weren't spread out throughout Russia, they first
> > seized Petrograd, Moscow, etc. consolidated their rule there through
> > mass terror, and then expanded from there. =A0It was during the first
> > crucial phase where the Latvians played their major role.
>
> >>>> usurp power in the largest country on
> >>>> earth, a country with 170 million inhabitants. Having done this
they
> >>>> don't blow themselves up with the rest of the place but manage to
sta=
y
> >>>> in charge for the next 74 years.
> >>> Yes. =A0Do you have a problem with the above?
> >> I'm having a problem with your comprehension. Any sensible person
would=
> >> realize that the existence of the totalitarian Soviet state required
> >> continuing sup****t and acceptance from the Russian people. You are
> >> trying to explain away this simple fact by again and again bringing
up
> >> the riflemen.
>
> > So all totalitarian states in the world are sup****ted and accepted by
> > their people, according to your logic? =A0Or is it a uniquely Russian
> > thing.
>
> It's not a uniquely Russian phenomenon, no. And yes, most totalitarian
> regimes have at least some degree of popular sup****t -- in the beginning
> to get it established at all, and later on also as a result of
> brainwa****ng and/or terror. If you look at the first years of Soviet
> rule, =A0quite an effort was needed to throw back the White armies, the
> Czech Legion, Balts, Finns, Ukrainians, Pilsudski's Poles etc. It wasn't
> your Red Riflemen who achieved all this nor was it the intellectuals in
> Smolny or the Kremlin, it was their sup****t from Russia's workers,
> peasants, soldiers and sailors. This is something that you obviously
> want to deny, and that's why you focus on the 'Latvians'.
I'm focussing on the Latvians because the Latvian govenrment is coming
up with plans for sending a bill to Russia for Bolshevism.
With respect to popular sup****t, sure, the Bolsheviks enjoyed some
sup****t form some of Russia's workers. But a quick glance into the
Black Book of Communism tells you about the extent of this sup****t
form Russia's "workers, peasants, soldiers and sailers":
- first action of the Cheka was to break up a strike by state workers
in Petrograd
- in February 1918 all peasants were to hand in all surplus food;
those not doing so within a certain period of time were to be executed
- In May, June 1918 the Cheka recoded 70 incidents in Petrograd
(strikes, demonstrations, etc.) led by metalworkers who had sup****ted
the Bolsheviks in 1917. In response more than 800 leaders were
arrested.
- by July 1918 there were over 110 peasant insurrections in Bolshevik-
controlled lands; these were quelled with terrible violence
- June 1918, workers protesting hunger were shot down by Red Guards in
Kolopino near Petrograd; on the same time 15 workers were shot in
Ekaterinburg and martial law declared
- August 8th 1918 - in all grain-producing areas, plans were drawn up
for 25 hostages to be taken and if grain requisition goals were not
met those hostages were to be executed
- By August 1918 mass liquidations had begun. Before September 3rd,
500 hostages were executed in St. Petersburg. Another 800 would be
through the end of that month. Hundreds more were killed in Moscow's
prisons. The Latvian Chekist leader Latsis claimed that in the second
half of 1918, 4,500 people were executed. Latsis stated "if the Cheka
can be accused on anything, it isn't of being overzealous in its
executions, but rather of failure in the need to apply the supreme
punishment. An iron hand will always mean a smaller number of victims
in the long term."
- The Black Book estimates the actual number of executed in 1918 was
in the 10,000-15,000 range. In comparison, according to the Black
Book, from 1825 - 1917 the number of death sentances handed out by the
tsarist courts for political crimes (including court martials) was
6,321, with the highest number - 1,310 - recorded in 1906. Many of
those however were commuted to hard labor. "In the space of a few
weeks the Cheka alone had executed two or three times the total number
of people condemned to death by the tsarist regime over 92 years."
I don't have time to go further, but there is a long list of hostage
taking, terror etc. used to by the Bolsheviks to establish their
control over first central Russia and then into outlying provinces.
How utterly disgusting to claim that these victims wanted Bolshevik
rule, or deserved it. Does it seemfair to you that a descendent of
slaughteed Russian peasants should through his taxes pay reperations
to a descendent of Bolshevik Red Rifles for Soviet crimes against
Latvia? I guess if your hatred of Russians is suficient, it seems
pretty fair.
BM
>
>
>
|
