The Pronk Pops Show 453, April 24, 2015, Story 1: Remembering The Armenian Genocide — Genocides and Democides Past and Present — Government Kills People — Videos

Posted on April 24, 2015. Filed under: American History, Benghazi, Blogroll, Breaking News, Communications, Congress, Economics, European History, Foreign Policy, Government, Government Spending, History, Illegal Immigration, Islam, Israel, Law, Media, Middle East, News, Obama, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, Radio, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Religion, Scandals, Terror, Videos, Violence, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 453: April 24, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 452: April 23, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 451: April 22, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 450: April 21, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 449: April 20, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 448: April 17, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 447: April 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 446: April 15, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 445: April 14, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 444: April 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 443: April 9, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 442: April 8, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 441: April 6, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 440: April 2, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 439: April 1, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 438: March 31, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 437: March 30, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 436: March 27, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 435: March 26, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 434: March 25, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 433: March 24, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 432: March 23, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 431: March 20, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 430: March 19, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 429: March 18, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 428: March 17, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 427: March 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 426: March 6, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 425: March 4, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 424: March 2, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 423: February 26, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 422: February 25, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 421: February 20, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 420: February 19, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 419: February 18, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 418: February 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 417: February 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 416: February 12, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 415: February 11, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 414: February 10, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 413: February 9, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 412: February 6, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 411: February 5, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 410: February 4, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 409: February 3, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 408: February 2, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 407: January 30, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 406: January 29, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 405: January 28, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 404: January 27, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 403: January 26, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 402: January 23, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 401: January 22, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 400: January 21, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 399: January 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 398: January 15, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 397: January 14, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 396: January 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 395: January 12, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 394: January 7, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 393: January 5, 2015

Story 1: Remembering The Armenian Genocide — Genocides and Democides Past and Present — Government Kills People — Videos

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

~Edmund Burke

armenian-genocide-forget-me-notflower armeinican genocide

democide-Screen-Shot

20TH CENTURY
DEMOCIDE


IMPORTANT NOTE: Among all the democide estimates appearing on this website, and in the table on the lower right, some have been revised upward. I have changed that for Mao’s famine, 1958-1962, from zero to 38,000,000. And thus I have had to change the overall democide for the PRC (1928-1987) from 38,702,000 to 76,702,000. Details here.

I have changed my estimate for colonial democide from 870,000 to an additional 50,000,000. Details here.

Thus, the new world total: old total 1900-1999 = 174,000,000. New World total = 174,000,000 + 38,000,000 (new for China) + 50,000,000 (new for Colonies) = 262,000,000.

Just to give perspective on this incredible murder by government, if all these bodies were laid head to toe, with the average height being 5′, then they would circle the earth ten times. Also, this democide murdered 6 times more people than died in combat in all the foreign and internal wars of the century. Finally, given popular estimates of the dead in a major nuclear war, this total democide is as though such a war did occur, but with its dead spread over a century.

20th Century Democide

CONTENTS

  • Books on Democide
    • Lethal Politics: Soviet Genocides and Mass Murders 1917-1987, Rutgers, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1990: Preface, References, and all tables of estimates, calculations and sources for each historical period.
    • China’s Bloody Century: Genocide and Mass Murder Since 1900. Rutgers, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1991: Preface, Chapter 1, Methods Appendix, References, and all tables of estimates, calculations and sources for each historical period.
    • Democide: Nazi Genocide and Mass Murder. Rutgers, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1992: Preface, Chapter 1, References, and the summary overall table of estimates, calculations and sources.
    • Death by Government: Genocide and Mass Murder in the Twentieth Century, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 1994: Preface; Chapters 1, 2, and 3; References; and the summary table for each megamurderer.
    • Statistics of Democide. Center on National Security and Law, University of Virginia, 1997: entire. Republished by Lit Verlag, MŸster, Germany in 1998 and distributed in North America by Transaction Publishers.

  • Chapter: democide in totalitarian states: mortacracies and megamurderers–an annotated bibliography
  • Chapter: the Holocaust in comparative perspective

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hlAX0g5es8

Armenian President: “The 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide is “a new starting point”

Armenia: ‘Genocide’ as a word ‘exactly sho…

25 Leaders Responsible For The Worst Genocides Ever Committed

Genocide: Worse Than War | Full-length documentary | PBS

Pope Francis calls Armenian massacre ‘first genocide of 20th century’

White House avoids calling Armenian deaths ‘genocide’

[FLASHBACK] Obama: Preventing genocide is a core moral responsibility of the US”

CNN Slams Obama for Breaking Armenian Genocide Pledge

Glenn Beck Salutes Armenian Genocide Upstander – Mehmet Celal Bey

Armenian Genocide 100 Year Commemoration Short Video Documentary

CBS 60 Minutes Past Report on the Armenian Genocide

The Armenian Journey – A Story Of An Armenian Genocide

The Armenian Genocide [ The Hidden Holocaust ] 1992 Documentary

BBC Documentary: Armenian Genocide – ‘The Betrayed’ – part 1/5

BBC Documentary: Armenian Genocide – ‘The Betrayed’ – part 2/5

BBC Documentary: Armenian Genocide – ‘The Betrayed’ – part 3/5

BBC Documentary: Armenian Genocide – ‘The Betrayed’ – part 4/5

BBC Documentary: Armenian Genocide – ‘The Betrayed’ – part 5/5

Geoffrey Robertson QC Discusses the Armenian Genocide on the Charlie Rose Show

Geoffrey Robertson: Armenia and the G-Word

The Untold Genocide: The Greek Genocide

Karl Marx: Father of Modern Genocide – Genocide Mac Daddy (NWO)

A little known historical fact is that Karl Marx, Founder of Communism, was also the father of modern genocide.
Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, were all guided by the writings of Marx, the first politician to publicly declare a need for political genocide, so Marx is the Mac Daddy of modern genocide.
This is to inform people who do not know that Communism does include genocide mass murder, genocides plots are not limited to the Illuminati.

The truth about Lenin and the Bolsheviks

Lenin regarded Europeans as animals

Stalin Mass Murder Documentary Ukraine 1933 Exterminations

Communist Genocide of 150 million 1917-1985

The Path to Nazi Genocide

Genocide: Worse Than War | Full-length documentary | PBS

Mao’s Great Famine HDTV great leap foward, history of china

The Most Evil Men in History – Pol Pot

MAAFA 21 [A documentary on eugenics and genocide]

Brotherhood’s ‘Lenin’ Plotting Islamic Super-State

ex KGB Agent on Mind Control

Harvest of Despair Soviet Communism engineered Ukraine Famine Genocide 1933)

The Most Evil Men in History Josef Stalin Documentary

When is Murder Genocide?

The World At War 1973(World War II Documentary)Episode 20-Genocide(1941-1945)

BBC’s World at War- The Final Solution part 1

BBC’s World at War- The Final Solution part 2

Auschwitz The Nazis and the Final Solution complete

OBAMA’s END GAME REVEALED BY KGB – Communist Obama Socialist / Marxist / Leninist

Former Russian Agent: Public Schools Targeted!

Rwanda Genocide documentary

Rwanda genocide documentary – part II

Rwanda genocide documentary – part III

Rwanda genocide documentary – part IV

Rwanda genocide documentary – part V

Rwanda genocide documentary – part VI

Rwanda genocide documentary – part VII

Rwanda genocide documentary – part VIII

Islam’s Global War on Christianity

Persecution : Christian Genocide by Muslims spreading through the Middle East (Jul 31, 2014)

The Kelly File / Tony Perkins: Genocide Is Unfolding in Middle East

A Christian Holocaust | “Glenn Beck Program”

Christians slaughtered by ISIS Is this genocide Fox News Video

Christians Facing Genocide In Muslim World Documentary 2015

Video: ISLAMIC STATE Executes Ethiopian Christians In Libya

Prof. Ben Kiernan: Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity

A Global History of Genocide: Ben Kiernan

Judge Jeanine Pirro – Are Christians Worldwide In Danger Radical Muslims? – John Bolton

TEDxVillanovaU – Timothy Horner – Who would you kill for? The Nature in Genocide

Important: 260 Million Unarmed Civilians Killed – Democide = Death By Government

Are Mass Killings by IS Group Genocide?

How to Prevent Genocide

Preventing Genocide: Do We Have a Responsibility to Protect?

Genocides in history

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Skulls of victims of the Rwandan Genocide

Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious or national group. The term was coined in 1944 by Raphael Lemkin. It is defined in Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) of 1948 as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the groups conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”[1]

The preamble to the CPPCG states that “genocide is a crime under international law, contrary to the spirit and aims of theUnited Nations and condemned by the civilized world” and that “at all periods of history genocide has inflicted great losses on humanity”.[1]

Determining what historical events constitute a genocide and which are merely criminal or inhuman behavior is not a clear-cut matter. In nearly every case where accusations of genocide have circulated, partisans of various sides have fiercely disputed the details and interpretation of the event, often to the point of depicting wildly different versions of the facts. Alleged genocides should be understood in this context and such allegations cannot be regarded as the final word.

Alternate definitions

Legally, genocide is defined as any conflict that the International Criminal Court has so designated. Many conflicts that have been labeled genocide in the popular press have not been so designated.[2]

M. Hassan Kakar[3] argued that the definition should include political groups or any group so defined by the perpetrator. He prefers the definition Chalk and Jonassohn: “Genocide is a form of one-sided mass killing in which a state or other authority intends to destroy a group so defined by the perpetrator.”[4]

Some critics of the international definition argued that the definition was influenced by Joseph Stalin to exclude political groups.[5][6]

According to R. J. Rummel, genocide has multiple meanings. The ordinary meaning is murder by a government of people due to their national, ethnic, racial, or religious group membership. The legal meaning is defined by CCPG. This includes actions such as preventing births or forcibly transferring children to another group. Rummel created the term democide to include assaults on political groups.[7]

In this article, atrocities that have been called genocide by some reliable source are included, whether or not they match one of these definitions. The acts may involve mass killings, mass deportations, withholding of food and/or other necessities of life, death by invasive infectious disease agents or combinations of these, whether or not specific evidence documents an intent by the perpetrators to destroy a people.

Pre–World War I

According to Adam Jones, if a dominant group of people has little in common with a marginalized group of people, it is easy for the dominant group to define the other as subhuman. As a result, the marginalized group might be labeled as a threat that must be eliminated.[8] Jones continues: “The difficulty, as Frank Chalk and Kurt Jonassohn pointed out in their early study, is that such historical records as exist are ambiguous and undependable. While history today is generally written with some fealty to ‘objective’ facts, most previous accounts aimed rather to praise the writer’s patron (normally the leader) and to emphasize the superiority of one’s own gods and religious beliefs.”[9]

Chalk and Jonassohn: “Historically and anthropologically peoples have always had a name for themselves. In a great many cases, that name meant ‘the people’ to set the owners of that name off against all other people who were considered of lesser quality in some way. If the differences between the people and some other society were particularly large in terms of religion, language, manners, customs, and so on, then such others were seen as less than fully human: pagans, savages, or even animals.”[10][11]

Before 1490

Scholars of antiquity differentiate between genocide and gendercide, in which males were killed but the children (particularly the girls) and women were incorporated into the conquering group. Jones notes, “Chalk and Jonassohn provide a wide-ranging selection of historical events such as the Assyrian Empire‘s root-and branch depredations in the first half of the first millennium BCE, and the destruction of Melos by Athens during the Peloponnesian War (fifth century BCE), a gendercidal rampage described by Thucydides in his ‘Melian Dialogue‘”.[12] The Old Testament documents the destruction of the Midianites, taking place during the life ofMoses in the 2nd millenium BC. The Book of Numbers chapter 31 recounts that an army of Isrealites kill every Midianite man but capture the women and children as plunder. These are later killed at the command of Moses, with the exception of girls who have not slept with a man. The total number killed is not recorded but the number of surviving girls is recorded as thirty two thousand.

Jared Diamond suggested that genocidal violence may have caused the Neanderthals to go extinct.[13] Ronald Wright also suggested such a genocide.[14] However, several scholars have formed alternative ideas as to why the Neanderthals died off, with there being no clear consensus viewpoint in the scientific community. Some academics have theorized that the beings were overly sensitive to the massive climate changes taking place, lacking advantages against cold that humans had.[15]

Ben Kiernan, a Yale scholar, has labelled the destruction of Carthage at the end of the Third Punic War (149–146 BC) “The First Genocide”.[12]

A 2010 study suggests that a group of Anasazi in the American Southwest were killed in a genocide that took place circa 800 AD.[16][17]

Quoting Eric Margolis, Jones observes that in the 13th century the Mongol horsemen of Temüjin Genghis Khan were genocidal killers (génocidaires)[11] who were known to kill whole nations, leaving nothing but empty ruins and bones.[18] He ordered the extermination of the Tata Mongols, and all Kankalis males in Bukhara “taller than a wheel”[19] using a technique called measuring against the linchpin. Rosanne Klass referred to the Mongols’ rule of Afghanistan as “genocide”.[20]

Similarly, the Turko-Mongol conqueror Tamerlane was known for his extreme brutality and his conquests were accompanied by genocidal massacres.[21] William Rubinstein wrote: “In Assyria (1393–4) – Tamerlane got around – he killed all the Christians he could find, including everyone in the, then, Christian city of Tikrit, thus virtually destroying Christianity in Mesopotamia. Impartially, however, Tamerlane also slaughtered Shi’ite Muslims, Jews and heathens.”[22]

1490 to 1914

Africa

Zulu Kingdom
See also: Mfecane

Between 1810 and 1828, the Zulu kingdom under Shaka Zulu laid waste to large parts of present-day South Africa and Zimbabwe. Zulu armies often aimed not only at defeating enemies but at their total destruction. Those exterminated included prisoners of war, women, children and even dogs.[14] (Controversial) estimates for the death toll range from 1 million to 2 million.[23][24][25][26]

German South-West Africa

The Herero and Namaqua Genocide in German South-West Africa (present-day Namibia) occurred between 1904 and 1907.[27] Eighty percent of the Herero population and 50 percent of the Nama population were killed in a brutal scorched earth campaign led by German General Lothar von Trotha. Between 24,000 and 100,000 Herero perished along with 10,000 Nama.[28][29]

A copy of Trotha’s Extermination Order survives in the Botswana National Archives. The order states “every Herero, with or without a gun, with or without cattle, will be shot. I will no longer accept women or children, I will drive them back to their people [to die in the desert] or let them be shot at.”[30] Olusoga and Erichsen write: “It is an almost unique document: an explicit, written declaration of intent to commit genocide”.[31] These mass killings were named as the first example of a 20th-century genocide in the 1985 Whitaker Report, commissioned but never adopted by the now defunct United Nations subcommittee ECOSOC.[32]

Americas

From the 1490s when Christopher Columbus landed in the Americas to the end of the 19th century, the indigenous population of the Western Hemisphere declined, mostly from disease, to 1.8 million from around 50 million, a decline of 96%.[33] In Brazil alone, the indigenous population declined from a pre-Columbian high of an estimated 3 million to some 300,000 (1997).[34][35] Estimates of how many people were living in the Americas when Columbus arrived have varied tremendously; 20th century scholarly estimates ranged from 8.4 million to 112.5 million.[36] However, Robert Royal stated, “estimates of pre-Columbian population figures have become heavily politicized with scholars who are particularly critical of Europe and/or Western civilization often favoring wildly higher figures.”[37]

Epidemic disease was the overwhelming direct cause of the population decline of the American natives.[38][39] After first contacts with Europeans and Africans, the death of 90 to 95 percent of the native population of the New World was caused by Old World diseases such as smallpox and measles.[40] Some estimates indicate that smallpox had a 80–90% fatality rate in Native American populations.[41]

British commander Jeffery Amherst may have authorized the intentional use of disease as a biological weapon against indigenous populations during the Siege of Fort Pitt.[42][43] It was the only documented case of germ warfare and it is uncertain whether it successfully infected the target population.[44]

Some historians argue that genocide, as a crime of intent, does not describe the colonization experience. Stafford Poole, a research historian, wrote: “There are other terms to describe what happened in the Western Hemisphere, but genocide is not one of them. It is a good propaganda term in an age where slogans and shouting have replaced reflection and learning, but to use it in this context is to cheapen both the word itself and the appalling experiences of the Jews andArmenians, to mention but two of the major victims of this century.”[45] Holocaust scholar and political scientist Guenter Lewy rejects the label of genocide and views the depopulation of the Americas as “not a crime but a tragedy”.[46] Likewise, Noble David Cook writing about the Black Legend wrote “There were too few Spaniards to have killed the millions who were reported to have died in the first century after Old and New World contact.”[47]

By contrast, David Stannard argued that the destruction of the American aboriginals from 76 million down to a quarter-million over 4 centuries, in a “string of genocide campaigns”, killing “countless tens of millions”, was the most massive genocide in world history.[48] Several works on the subject were released around the year 1992 to coincide with the 500th anniversary of Columbus’ voyage.

In 2003, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez urged Latin Americans to not celebrate the Columbus Day holiday. Chavez blamed Columbus for leading to the alleged genocide.[49]

David Quammen likened colonial American practices toward Native Americans to those of Australia toward its aboriginal populations, calling both genocide.[50]

Argentina

The Conquest of the Desert was a military campaign directed mainly by General Julio Argentino Roca in the 1870s, which established Argentine dominance overPatagonia, then inhabited by indigenous peoples, killing more than 1,300.[51]

Contemporary sources indicate that it was a deliberate genocide by the Argentine government.[52] Others perceived the campaign as intending to suppress only groups of aboriginals that refused to submit to the government and carried out attacks on European settlements.[53][54]

Haiti

Jean-Jacques Dessalines, the first ruler of an independent Haiti, ordered the killing of the white population of French creoles on Haiti which culminated in the 1804 Haiti Massacre. According to Philippe Girard, “when the genocide was over, Haiti’s white population was virtually non-existent.”[55]

Mexico

The Caste War of Yucatán (approx. 1847–1901) against the population of European descent, called Yucatecos, who held political and economic control of the region. Adam Jones wrote: Genocidal atrocities on both sides cost up to 200,000 killed.”[56]

In 1835, Don Ignacio Zuniga, commander of the presidios of northern Sonora, asserted that since 1820 the Apaches had killed at least five thousand settlers. The state of Sonora then offered a bounty on Apache scalps in 1835. Beginning in 1837 Chihuahua state also offered a bounty of 100 pesos per warrior, 50 pesos per woman and 25 pesos per child.[57]

Peru

The indigenous rebellions of Túpac Amaru II and Túpac Katari against the Spanish between 1780 and 1782, cost over 100,000 colonists’ lives in Peru and Upper Peru (present-day Bolivia).”[58]

United States

Authors, such as David Cesarani, argued that United States government policies in furtherance of its so-called Manifest Destiny constituted genocide.[59]

Statistics regarding deaths due to armed conflict between Native Americans and Europeans are sparse, as in many cases there were no records kept.[22] A study by Gregory Michno concluded that of 21,586 tabulated casualties in a selected 672 battles and skirmishes, military personnel and settlers accounted for 6,596 (31%), while indigenous casualties totaled about 14,990 (69%) for the period 1850–90. Michno’s study almost exclusively uses Army estimates. His follow-up book “Forgotten Battles and Skirmishes” covers over 300 additional fights not included in these statistics.[60] According to the U.S. Bureau of the Census (1894), “The Indian wars under the government of the United States have been more than 40 in number. They have cost the lives of about 19,000 white men, women and children, including those killed in individual combats, and the lives of about 30,000 Indians. The actual number of killed and wounded Indians must be very much higher than the given… Fifty percent additional would be a safe estimate…”[61]

Chalk and Jonassohn claimed that the deportation of the Cherokee tribe along the Trail of Tears would almost certainly be considered an act of genocide today.[62]The Indian Removal Act of 1830 led to the exodus. About 17,000 Cherokees—along with approximately 2,000 Cherokee-owned black slaves—were removed from their homes.[63] The number of people who died as a result of the Trail of Tears has been variously estimated. American doctor and missionary Elizur Butler, who made the journey with one party, estimated 4,000 deaths.[64]

The native population of the United States has been difficult to pin down due to the lack of reliable source materials. Historian and Information Scientist Dr. David Henige asserts that the modern trend of high population estimates is “pseudo-scientific number-crunching.” While he does not advocate a low population estimates, he argues that the scarce and uncomprehensive nature of the evidence renders broad estimates(eg.as high as the entire population of the US at the onset of World War I) to be somewhat suspect, saying “Examining the methodologies used by “high counters” have been particularly flagrant in their misuse of sources.”[65]

Credible evidence exists that epidemic disease was the overwhelming cause of the population decline of the American natives because of their lack of immunity to new diseases brought from Europe.[66][67][68] Contemporaneous accounts of the effects of smallpox, among the native population suggest an 80% to 95% mortality rate of the entire population effected. Governor William Bradford wrote, in 1633, about the second reported outbreak (e.g. 1617, 1633) in New England: “… for it pleased God to visit these Indians with a great sickness, and such a mortality that of a 1000. above 900.and a half of them died, and many of them did rot above ground for want of burial,  …”[69][70]

Newfoundland
Main articles: Beothuk and Twillingate

The Beothuks attempted to avoid contact with Europeans in Newfoundland by moving from their traditional settlements.[71] The Beothuks were put into a position where they were forced from their traditional land and lifestyle into ecosystems that could not support them and that led to undernourishment and eventually starvation.[72] While some scholars believe that the Beothuk primarily died out due to the elements noted above, another theory is that Europeans conducted a sustained campaign of genocide against them.[73] They were officially declared “extinct” after the death of Shanawdithit in 1829 in the capital, St. John’s, where she had been taken.

Asia and Oceania

Siberia
Vietnam
Japanese colonization of Hokkaido[edit]

The Ainu are an indigenous people in Japan (Hokkaidō).[74] In a 2009 news story, Japan Today reported, “Many Ainu were forced to work, essentially as slaves, forWajin (ethnic Japanese), resulting in the breakup of families and the introduction of smallpox, measles, cholera and tuberculosis into their community. In 1869, the new Meiji government renamed Ezo Hokkaido and unilaterally incorporated it into Japan. It banned the Ainu language, took Ainu land away, and prohibited salmon fishing and deer hunting.”[75] Roy Thomas wrote: “Ill treatment of native peoples is common to all colonial powers, and, at its worst, leads to genocide. Japan’s native people, the Ainu, have, however, been the object of a particularly cruel hoax, because the Japanese have refused to accept them officially as a separate minority people.”[76] In 2004 the small Ainu community living in Russia wrote a letter to Vladimir Putin, urging him to recognize Japanese behaviour against the Ainu people as genocide, which Putin declined to do.[77]

Qing empire

The Dzungar (or Zunghar), Oirat Mongols who lived in an area that stretched from the west end of the Great Wall of China to present-day eastern Kazakhstan and from present-day northern Kyrgyzstan to southern Siberia (most of which is located in present-day Xinjiang), were the last nomadic empire to threaten China, which they did from the early 17th century through the middle of the 18th century.[78] After a series of inconclusive military conflicts that started in the 1680s, the Dzungars were subjugated by the Manchu-led Qing dynasty (1644–1911) in the late 1750s. According to Qing scholar Wei Yuan, 40 percent of the 600,000 Zunghar people were killed by smallpox, 20 percent fled to Russia or sought refuge among the Kazakh tribes and 30 percent were killed by the Qing army of Manchu Bannermenand Khalkha Mongols.[79][80] Historian Michael Edmund Clarke has argued that the Qing campaign in 1757–58 “amounted to the complete destruction of not only the Zunghar state but of the Zunghars as a people.”[81] Historian Peter Perdue has attributed the decimation of the Dzungars to a “deliberate use of massacre” and has described it as an “ethnic genocide”.[82] Mark Levene, a historian of genocide,[83] has stated that the extermination of the Dzungars was “arguably the eighteenth century genocide par excellence.”[84]

Australia

According to research published from 2009, in 1789 the British deliberately spread smallpox from the First Fleet to counter overwhelming native tribes near Sydney in New South Wales. In his book “An Indelible Stain”, Henry Reynolds described this act as genocide.[85] Many scholars disagree that the initial smallpox was the result of deliberate biological warfare and have suggested other causes.[86][87][88]

The Black War was a period of conflict between British colonists and Tasmanian Aborigines in Van Diemen’s Land (now Tasmania) in the early 19th century. The conflict, in combination with introduced diseases and other factors, had such devastating impacts on the Tasmanian Aboriginal population that it was reported the Tasmanian Aborigines had been exterminated.[89][90] Historian Geoffrey Blainey wrote that by 1830, “Disease had killed most of them but warfare and private violence had also been devastating.”[91] In the 19th century, smallpox was the principal cause of Aboriginal deaths.[92]

Lemkin and most other comparative genocide scholars present the extinction of the Tasmanian Aborigines as a textbook example of a genocide, while the majority of Australian experts are more circumspect.[93][94] Detailed studies of the events surrounding the extinction have raised questions about some of the details and interpretations in earlier histories.[95][96] Curthoys concluded, “It is time for a more robust exchange between genocide and Tasmanian historical scholarship if we are to understand better what did happen in Tasmania.”[93]

On the Australian continent during the colonial period (1788–1901), the population of 500,000–750,000 Australian Aborigines was reduced to fewer than 50,000.[97][98] Most were devastated by the introduction of alien diseases after contact with Europeans, while perhaps 20,000 were killed by massacres and fighting with colonists.[97]

New Zealand

In the early 19th Century Ngāti Mutunga and Ngāti Tama (local Māori tribes) massacred the Moriori people. The Moriori were the indigenous people of the Chatham Islands (Rekohu in Moriori, Wharekauri in Māori), east of the New Zealand archipelago in the Pacific Ocean. These people lived by a code of non-violence and passive resistance (see Nunuku-whenua), which led to their near-extinction at the hands of Taranaki Māori invaders in the 1830s.[99]

In 1835, some Ngāti Mutunga and Ngāti Tama from the Taranaki region of North Island invaded the Chathams. On 19 November 1835, the Rodney, a European ship hired by the Māori, arrived carrying 500 Māori armed with guns, clubs, and axes, followed by another ship with 400 more warriors on 5 December 1835. They proceeded to enslave some Moriori and kill and cannibalise others. “Parties of warriors armed with muskets, clubs and tomahawks, led by their chiefs, walked through Moriori tribal territories and settlements without warning, permission or greeting. If the districts were wanted by the invaders, they curtly informed the inhabitants that their land had been taken and the Moriori living there were now vassals.”[100]

A council of Moriori elders was convened at the settlement called Te Awapatiki. Despite knowing of the Māori predilection for killing and eating the conquered, and despite the admonition by some of the elder chiefs that the principle of Nunuku was not appropriate now, two chiefs—Tapata and Torea—declared that “the law of Nunuku was not a strategy for survival, to be varied as conditions changed; it was a moral imperative.”[101] A Moriori survivor recalled: “[The Maori] commenced to kill us like sheep…. [We] were terrified, fled to the bush, concealed ourselves in holes underground, and in any place to escape our enemies. It was of no avail; we were discovered and killed – men, women and children indiscriminately.” A Māori conqueror explained, “We took possession… in accordance with our customs and we caught all the people. Not one escaped…”[102]

After the invasion, Moriori were forbidden to marry Moriori, or to have children with each other. All became slaves of the invaders. Many Moriori women had children by their Maori masters. A small number of Moriori women eventually married either Maori or European men. Some were taken from the Chathams and never returned. Only 101 Moriori out of a population of about 2,000 were left alive by 1862.[103] Although the last Moriori of unmixed ancestry, Tommy Solomon,[104] died in 1933 several thousand mixed ancestry Moriori are alive today.

Europe

France
Main article: War in the Vendée

Mass shootings at Nantes, 1793

In 1986, Reynald Secher argued that the actions of the French republican government during the revolt in the Vendée (1793–1796), a popular mostly Catholic uprising against the anti-clerical Republican government during the French Revolution was the first modern genocide.[105] Secher’s claims caused a minor uproar in France and mainstream authorities rejected Secher’s claims.[106][107] Timothy Tackett countered that “the Vendée was a tragic civil war with endless horrors committed by both sides—initiated, in fact, by the rebels themselves. The Vendeans were no more blameless than were the republicans. The use of the word genocide is wholly inaccurate and inappropriate.”[108] However, historians Frank Chalk and Kurt Jonassohn consider the Vendée a case of genocide.[109] Historian Pierre Chaunu called the Vendée the first ideological genocide.[110] Adam Jones estimates 150,000 Vendeans died in what he also considers to be genocide.[111]

Ireland
War of the Three Kingdoms

Toward the end of the War of the Three Kingdoms (1639–1651) the English Rump Parliament sent the New Model Army to Ireland to subdue and take revenge on the Catholic population of the country and to prevent Royalists loyal to Charles II from using Ireland as a base to threaten England. The force was initially under the command of Oliver Cromwell and later under other parliamentary generals. The Army sought to secure the country, but also to confiscate lands of Irish families involved in the fighting. This became a continuation of the Elizabethan policy of encouraging Protestant settlement of Ireland, because the Protestant New Model army soldiers—could be paid in confiscated lands rather than in cash.[112]

During the Interregnum (1651–1660), this policy was enhanced with the passing of the Act of Settlement of Ireland in 1652. Its goal was a further transfer of land from Irish to English hands.[112] The immediate war aims and the longer term policies of the English Parliamentarians resulted in an attempt by the English to transfer the native population to the western fringes to make way for Protestant settlers. This policy was reflected in a phrase attributed to Cromwell: “To Hell or to Connaught” and has been described by historians as ethnic cleansing, if not genocide.[113]

Great Irish Famine

Great Irish Famine

Main article: Great Irish Famine

During the Irish Potato Famine (1845–1852), approximately 1 million people died and a million more emigrated from Ireland,[114]causing the island’s population to fall by between 20% and 25%.[115] The proximate cause of famine was a potato disease commonly known as potato blight.[116] Although blight ravaged potato crops throughout Europe during the 1840s, the impact and human cost in Ireland – where one-third of the population was entirely dependent on the potato for food – was exacerbated by a host of political, social, and economic factors which remain the subject of historical debate.[117][118]

During the Famine, Ireland produced enough food, flax, and wool to feed and clothe double its nine million people.[119] When Ireland had experienced a famine in 1782–83, ports were closed to keep Irish-grown food in Ireland to feed the Irish. Local food prices promptly dropped. Merchants lobbied against the export ban, but government in the 1780s overrode their protests. There was no such export ban in the 1840s.[120] Some historians[121][122] have argued that in this sense the famine was artificial, caused by the British government’s choice not to stop exports.[119]

Francis A. Boyle claimed that the government violated sections (a), (b), and (c) of Article 2 of the CPPCG and committed genocide in a formal legal opinion to the New Jersey Commission on Holocaust Education on May 2, 1996.[123][124] Charles E. Rice issued another formal opinion, also based on Article 2, alleging that the British had committed genocide.[125]

The claims were contested by Peter Gray, who concluded that UK government policy “was not a policy of deliberate genocide”, but a dogmatic refusal to admit that the policy was wrong. James S. Donnelly, Jr., split the difference, writing, “while genocide was not in fact committed, what happened … had the look of genocide to a great many Irish”.[126]

Cecil Woodham-Smith claimed that while the export policy embittered the Irish, this did not implicate the policy in genocide, but rather in excessive parsimony obtuseness, short-sightedness, and ignorance.[127]

Irish historian Cormac O’ Grada rejects the term, stating that the English exhibited no desire to exterminate the Irish and that the challenges for providing relief were enormous.[121][128]

W.D. Rubinstein also rejected the genocide claim.[22]

Russian Empire

The Russian Tsarist Empire waged war against Circassia in the Northwest Caucasus for more than one hundred years, trying to replace Circassia’s hold along theBlack Sea coast. After a century of insurgency and war and failure to end the conflict, the Tsar ordered the expulsion of most of the Muslim population of the North Caucasus. Many Circassians, Western historians, Turks and Chechens claimed that the events of the 1860s constituted one of the first modern genocides, in that a whole population was eliminated to satisfy the desires (in this case economic) of a powerful country.[citation needed]

Antero Leitzinger flagged the affair as the 19th century’s largest genocide.[129] Some estimates cite that approximately 1-1.5 million Circassians were killed and most of the Muslim population was deported. Ossete Muslims and Kabardins generally did not leave. The modern Circassians and Abazins descend from those who managed to escape the onslaught and later returned another 1.5 million Circassians and others. This effectively annihilated (or deported) 90% of the nation.[130]Tsarist documents recorded more than 400,000 Circassians killed, 497,000 forced to flee and only 80,000 were left in their native area.[131] Circassians were viewed as tools by the Ottoman government, and settled in restive areas whose populations had nationalist yearnings- Armenia, the Arab regions and the Balkans. Many more Circassians were killed by the policies of the Balkan states, primarily Serbia and Bulgaria, which became independent at that time.[citation needed] Still more Circassians were forcefully assimilated by nationalist Muslim states (Turkey, Syria, Iraq, etc.) who looked upon non-Turk/Arab ethnicity as a foreign presence and a threat.

In May 1994, the then Russian President Boris Yeltsin admitted that resistance to the tsarist forces was legitimate, but he did not recognize “the guilt of the tsarist government for the genocide.”[131] In 1997 and 1998, the leaders of Kabardino-Balkaria and of Adygea sent appeals to the Duma to reconsider the situation and to apologize, without response. In October 2006, the Adygeyan public organizations of Russia, Turkey, Israel, Jordan, Syria, the USA, Belgium, Canada and Germany sent the president of the European Parliament a letter with a request to recognize the genocide.[citation needed]

On 5 July 2005 the Circassian Congress, an organisation that unites representatives of the various Circassian peoples in the Russian Federation, called on Moscow to acknowledge and apologize for the genocide.[132]

Twentieth century (from World War I)

World War I through World War II

In 1915, during World War I, the concept of crimes against humanity was introduced into international relations for the first time when the Allied Powers sent a letter to the government of the Ottoman Empire, a member of the Central Powers, protesting massacres that were taking place within the Empire.[133]

Ottoman Empire/Turkey

On May 24, 1915, the Allied Powers (Britain, France, and Russia) jointly issued a statement that for the first time ever explicitly charged a government with committing a “crime against humanity” in reference to that regime’s persecution of its Christian minorities, including Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks.[134] Many researchers consider these events to be part of the policy of planned ethnoreligious purification of the Turkish state advanced by the Young Turks.[135][136][137][138][139]

This joint statement stated, “[i]n view of these new crimes of Turkey against humanity and civilization, the Allied Governments announce publicly to the Sublime Porte that they will hold personally responsible for these crimes all members of the Ottoman Government, as well as those of their agents who are implicated in such massacres.”[133]

Armenian

Armenian civilians, escorted by armed Ottoman soldiers, are marched through Kharpert to a prison in the nearby Mezireh district, April 1915.

The Armenian Genocide (Armenian: Հայոց Ցեղասպանություն, translit.: Hayots’ Ts’eġaspanout’youn; Turkish: Ermeni Soykırımı and Ermeni Kıyımı) refers to the deliberate and systematic destruction of the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire during and just after World War I. It was implemented through wholesale massacres and deportations, with the deportations consisting of forced marches under conditions designed to lead to the death of the deportees. The total number of resulting deaths is generally held to have been between one and one and a half million.[140]

The genocide began on April 24, 1915, when Ottoman authorities arrested some 250 Armenian intellectuals and community leaders in Constantinople. Thereafter, the Ottoman military uprooted Armenians from their homes and forced them to march for hundreds of miles, without food and water, to the desert of what is now Syria. Massacres ignored age and gender, withrape and other acts of sexual abuse being commonplace.[141] The majority of Armenian diaspora communities were founded as a result of these events. Mass killings continued under the Republic of Turkey during the Turkish–Armenian War phase of Turkish War of Independence.[142]

Modern Turkey succeeded the Ottoman Empire in 1923 and vehemently denies that a genocide took place. It has resisted calls in recent years by scholars, countries and international organizations to acknowledge the crime. It is the second most-studied case of genocide after the Holocaust. Lemkin coined “genocide” to describe these events.

Assyrian

The Assyrian Genocide (also known as Sayfo or Seyfo; Aramaic: ܩܛܠܐ ܕܥܡܐ ܐܬܘܪܝܐ or ܣܝܦܐ, Turkish: Süryani Soykırımı) was committed against the Assyrian population of the Ottoman Empire during the First World War by the Young Turks.[143] The Assyrian population of northern Mesopotamia (Tur Abdin, Hakkari, Van,Siirt region in modern-day southeastern Turkey and Urmia region in northwestern Iran) was forcibly relocated and massacred by Ottoman (Turkish and alliedKurdish) forces between 1914 and 1920.[144] This genocide paralleled the Armenian Genocide and Greek genocide.[145][146] The Assyro-Chaldean National Council stated in a December 4, 1922, memorandum that the total death toll is unknown, but it estimated that about 750,000 Assyrians died between 1914 and 1918.[147]

Greek

The Greek genocide[148] refers to the fate of the Greek population of the Ottoman Empire during and in the aftermath of World War I (1914–18). Like Armenians and Assyrians, the Greeks were subjected to various forms of persecution including massacres, expulsions, and death marches by Young Turks.[149][146] Mass killing of Greeks continued under the Turkish National Movement during the Greco-Turkish War phase of the Turkish War of Independence.[150] George W. Rendel of the British Foreign Office, among other diplomats, noted the massacres and deportations of Greeks during the post-Armistice period.[151] They killed an estimate of 348,000 Anatolian Greeks.[152]

Dersim Kurds

The Dersim Massacre refers to the depopulation of Dersim in Turkish Kurdistan, in 1937–38, in which approximately 65,000–70,000 Alevi Kurds[153] were killed and thousands more were driven into exile. A key component of the Turkification process was a policy of massive population resettlement. The main document, the1934 Law on Resettlement, was used to target the region of Dersim as one of its first test cases, with disastrous consequences for the local population.[154]

Many Kurds and some ethnic Turks consider the events that took place in Dersim to constitute genocide. A prominent proponent of this view is İsmail Beşikçi.[155]Under international laws, the actions of the Turkish authorities were arguably not genocide, because they were not aimed at the extermination of a people, but at resettlement and suppression.[156] A Turkish court ruled in 2011 that the events could not be considered genocide because they were not directed systematically against an ethnic group.[157] Scholars such as Martin van Bruinessen, have instead talked of an ethnocide directed against the local language and identity.[156]

Soviet Union

Multiple documented instances of unnatural mass death occurred in the Soviet Union. These include Union-wide famines in the early 1920s and early 1930s and deportations of ethnic minorities.

Soviet diplomatic efforts removed the extermination of political groups from the United Nations Convention on Genocide. This left many of the Soviet atrocities outside the United Nations definition of genocide, because the atrocities targeted political or economic groups rather than the ethnic, racial, religious, or national groups listed in the UN convention.

Decossackization
Main article: Decossackization

During the Russian Civil War the Bolsheviks engaged in a genocidal campaign against the Don Cossacks.[158][159][160][161][162] The most reliable estimates indicate that out of a population of three million, between 300,000 and 500,000 were killed or deported in 1919–20.[163]

Holodomor
Main article: Holodomor

Starved peasants on a street inKharkiv, 1933.

During the Soviet famine of 1932–33 that affected Ukraine, Kazakhstan and some densely populated regions of Russia, the scale of death in Ukraine is referred to as the Holodomor and is recognized as genocide by the governments of Australia, Argentina, Georgia, Estonia, Italy, Canada, Lithuania, Poland, the USA and Hungary. The famine was caused by the confiscation of the whole 1933 harvest in Ukraine, Kazakhstan, the Kuban (a densely populated Russian region), and some other parts of the Soviet Union, leaving the peasants too little to feed themselves. As a result, an estimated ten million died, including over seven million in Ukraine, one million in the North Caucasus and one million elsewhere.[164] American historian Timothy Snyder wrote of “3.3 million Soviet citizens (mostly Ukrainians) deliberately starved by their own government in Soviet Ukraine in 1932–1933”[165]

In addition to the requisitioning of crops and livestock in Ukraine, all food was confiscated by Soviet authorities. Any and all aid and food was prohibited from entering the Ukrainian republic. Ukraine’s Yuschenko administration recognised the Holodomor as an act of genocide and pushed international governments to acknowledge this.[166] This move was opposed by the Russian government and some members of the Ukrainian parliament, especially the Communists. A Ukrainian court found Joseph Stalin, Vyacheslav Molotov, Lazar Kaganovich, Stanislav Kosior, Pavel Postyshev, Vlas Chubar and Mendel Khatayevich posthumously guilty of genocide on 13 January 2010.[167][168]As of 2010, the Russian government’s official position was that the famine took place, but was not an ethnic genocide;[166] former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych supported this position.[169][170] A ruling of January 13, 2010 by Kyiv’s Court of Appeal declared the Soviet leaders guilty of ‘genocide against the Ukrainian national group in 1932–33 through the artificial creation of living conditions intended for its partial physical destruction.'”[171]

Polish Russia

A few scholars argue that the killing, on the basis of nationality and politics, of more than 120,000 ethnic Poles in the Soviet Union during 1937–38 was genocide.[172]

Chechnya

On February 26, 2004 the plenary assembly of the European Parliament recognized the deportation of Chechen people during Operation Lentil (23 February 1944), as an act of genocide, on the basis of the 1907 IV Hague Convention: The Laws and Customs of War on Land and the CPPCG.[173]

The event began on 23 February 1944, when the entire population of Checheno-Ingushetia was summoned to local party buildings where they were told they were to be deported as punishment for their alleged collaboration with the Germans. The inhabitants were rounded up and imprisoned in Studebaker trucks and sent to Siberia.[174][175]

  • Many times, resistance was met with slaughter, and in one such instance, in the aul of Khaibakh, about 700 people were locked in a barn and burned to death. By the next summer, Checheno-Ingushetia was dissolved; a number of Chechen and Ingush placenames were replaced with Russian ones; mosques and graveyards were destroyed, and a massive campaign to burn numerous historical Chechen texts was nearly complete.[176]
  • [177] Throughout the North Caucasus, about 700,000 (according to Dalkhat Ediev, 724297,[178] of which the majority, 412,548, were Chechens, along with 96,327Ingush, 104,146 Kalmyks, 39,407 Balkars and 71,869 Karachais). Many died on the trip, of exposure in Siberia’s extremely harsh environment. The NKVD, supplying the Russian perspective, gives the statistic of 144,704 killed in 1944–1948 alone (with a death rate of 23.5% for all groups). Estimates for Chechen deaths alone (excluding the NKVD statistic), range from about 170,000 to 200,000,[179][180] thus ranging from over a third of the total Chechen population to nearly half being killed (of those that were deported, not counting those killed on the spot) in those 4 years alone. Both the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria and the European Union Parliament marked it as genocide in 2004.[181]
Deportations of Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians

The mass deportations of up to 17,500 Lithuanians, 17,000 Latvians and 6,000 Estonians carried out by Stalin were allegedly the start of another genocide. Added to the killing of the Forest Brethren and the renewed Dekulakization that followed the Soviet reconquest of the Baltic states at the end of World War Two, the total number deported to Siberia was 118,559 from Lithuania, 52,541 from Latvia, and 32,540 from Estonia.[182] The high death rate of deportees during the first few years of exile, caused by the failure of Soviet authorities to provide suitable clothing and housing at the destination, led some sources to label the affair an act of genocide.[183] Based on the Martens Clause and the principles of the Nuremberg Charter, the European Court of Human Rights held that the March deportationconstituted a crime against humanity.[184][185] According to Erwin Oberlander, these deportations are a crime against humanity, rather than genocide.[186]

Lithuania began trials for genocide in 1997. Latvia and Estonia followed in 1998.[187] Latvia has since convicted four security officers and in 2003 sentenced a former KGB agent to five years. Estonia tried and convicted ten men and is investigating others. In Lithuania by 2004 23 cases were before the courts, but as of the end of the year none had been convicted.[188]

In 2007 Estonia charged Arnold Meri (then 88 years old), a former Soviet Communist Party official and highly decorated former Red Army soldier, with genocide. Shortly after the trial opened, it was suspended because of Meri’s frail health and then abandoned when he died.[189][190] A memorial in Vilnius, Lithuania, is dedicated to genocidal victims of Stalin and Hitler,[191] and the Museum of Genocide Victims in Lithuania, which opened on 14 October 1992 in the former KGB headquarters, chronicles the imprisonment and deportation of Lithuanians.[192]

Japan

During the Nanking Massacre in the period of the Second Sino-Japanese War, the Japanese engaged in mass killings against the Chinese. Bradley Campbell described the Nanking Massacre as a genocide, because the Chinese were unilaterally killed by the Japanese en masse during the aftermath, despite the successful and certain outcome of their battle.[193]

Germany and Nazi-occupied Europe

Major deportation routes to theextermination camps in Europe.

Holocaust
Year Jews killed[194]
1933–1940 under 100,000
1941 1,100,000
1942 2,700,000
1943 500,000
1944 600,000
1945 100,000

The Nazi Holocaust is universally recognized as genocide. The term appeared in the indictment of 24 German leaders. Count three of the indictment stated that all the defendants had “conducted deliberate and systematic genocide – namely, the extermination of racial and national groups…”[195]

The term “the Holocaust” (from the Greek hólos, “whole” and kaustós, “burnt”) is often used to describe the killing of approximately six million European Jews, as part of a program of deliberate extermination planned and executed by the National Socialist German Workers Party in Germany led by Adolf Hitler.[196][197] Many scholars do not include other groups in the definition of the Holocaust, reserving the term to refer only to the genocide of the Jews,[198]

  • The Holocaust: Definition and Preliminary Discussion, Yad Vashem, The Holocaust, as presented in this resource center, is defined as the sum total of all anti-Jewish actions carried out by the German regime between 1933 and 1945: from stripping the German Jews of their legal and economic status in the 1930s, to segregating and starving Jews in the various occupied countries, to the murder of close to six million Jews in Europe. The Holocaust is part of a broader aggregate of acts of oppression and murder of various ethnic and political groups in Europe by the Germans.
  • [196][199][200][201][202] or what the Germans called the “Final Solution of the Jewish Question.”

The Holocaust was accomplished in stages. Legislation to remove the Jews from civil society was enacted years before the outbreak of World War II. Concentration camps were established in which inmates were used as slave laborers until they died. Where the Third Reich conquered new territory in eastern Europe, specialized units called Einsatzgruppen murdered Jews and political opponents in mass shootings.[203] Jews and Romani were crammed into ghettos before being transported in box cars by freight train to extermination camps where, if they survived the journey, the majority were killed in gas chambers. Every arm of Germany’s bureaucracy was involved in the logistics of the mass murder, turning the country into what one Holocaust scholar has called “a genocidal nation.”[204]

Men are forced to dig their own graves before being shot by SS troops.Šiauliai, Lithuania, July 1941

The following figures from Lucy Dawidowicz show the annihilation of the Jewish population of Europe by (pre-war) country:[205]
Country Estimated
Pre-War
Jewish
population
Estimated
killed
Percent
killed
Poland 3,300,000 3,000,000 90
Baltic countries 253,000 228,000 90
Germany and Austria 240,000 210,000 90
Bohemia and Moravia 90,000 80,000 89
Slovakia 90,000 75,000 83
Greece 70,000 54,000 77
Netherlands 140,000 105,000 75
Hungary 650,000 450,000 70
Byelorussian SSR 375,000 245,000 65
Ukrainian SSR 1,500,000 900,000 60
Belgium 65,000 40,000 60
Yugoslavia 43,000 26,000 60
Romania 600,000 300,000 50
Norway 2,173 890 41
France 350,000 90,000 26
Bulgaria 64,000 14,000 22
Italy 40,000 8,000 20
Luxembourg 5,000 1,000 20
Russian SFSR 975,000 107,000 11
Denmark 8,000 52 <1
Total 8,861,800 5,933,900 67
Extermination Camp Estimate of
number killed
Ref
Auschwitz-Birkenau 1,000,000 [206][207]
Treblinka 870,000 [208]
Belzec 600,000 [209]
Majdanek 79,000–235,000 [210][211]
Chełmno 320,000 [212]
Sobibór 250,000 [213]

This gives a total of over 3.8 million; of these, 80–90% were estimated to be Jews. These seven camps thus accounted for half the total number of Jews killed in the entire Nazi Holocaust. Virtually the entire Jewish population of Poland died in these camps.[205]

Since 1945, the most commonly cited figure for the total number of Jews killed has been six million. The Yad VashemHolocaust Martyrs’ and Heroes’ Remembrance Authority in Jerusalem, writes that there is no precise figure for the number of Jews killed,[214] but has been able to find documentation of more than three million names of Jewish victims killed,[215]which it displays at its visitors center. The figure most commonly used is the six million attributed to Adolf Eichmann, a senior SS official.[216]

Members of the Sonderkommando burn corpses in the fire pits at Auschwitz II-Birkenau.[217]

There were about eight to ten million Jews in the territories controlled directly or indirectly by Germany (the uncertainty arises from the lack of knowledge about how many Jews there were in the Soviet Union). The six million killed in the Holocaust thus represent 60 to 75 percent of these Jews. Of Poland’s 3.3 million Jews, about 90 percent were killed.[218] The same proportion were killed in Latvia and Lithuania, but most of Estonia‘s Jews were evacuated in time. Of the 750,000 Jews in Germany and Austria in 1933, only about a quarter survived. Although many German Jews emigrated before 1939, the majority of these fled to Czechoslovakia, France or the Netherlands, from where they were later deported to their deaths.

In Czechoslovakia, Greece, the Netherlands, and Yugoslavia, over 70 percent were killed. 50 to 70 percent were killed in Romania, Belgium and Hungary. It is likely that a similar proportion were killed in Belarus and Ukraine, but these figures are less certain. Countries with notably lower proportions of deaths include Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Italy, and Norway. Albania was the only country occupied by Germany that had a significantly larger Jewish population in 1945 than in 1939. About two hundred native Jews and over a thousand refugees were provided with false documents, hidden when necessary, and generally treated as honored guests in a country whose population was roughly 60% Muslim.[219] Additionally, Japan, as an Axis member, had its own unique response to German policies regarding Jews; see Shanghai Ghetto.

In addition to those who died in extermination camps, at least half a million Jews died in other camps, including the major concentration camps in Germany. These were not extermination camps, but had large numbers of Jewish prisoners at various times, particularly in the last year of the war as the Nazis withdrew from Poland. About a million people died in these camps, and although the proportion of Jews is not known with certainty, it was estimated to be at least 50 percent.[citation needed] Another 800,000 to one million Jews were killed by the Einsatzgruppen in the occupied Soviet territories (an approximate figure, since the Einsatzgruppen killings were frequently undocumented).[220] Many more died through execution or of disease and malnutrition in the ghettos of Poland before they could be deported.

Jewish Holocaust death toll as a percentage of the total pre-war Jewish population

In the 1990s, the opening of government archives in Eastern Europe resulted in the adjustment of the death tolls published in the pioneering work by Hilberg, Dawidowicz and Gilbert (e.g. compare Gilbert’s estimation of two million deaths in Auschwitz-Birkenau with the updated figure of one million in the Extermination Camp data box). As pointed out above, Wolfgang Benz has been carrying out work on the more recent data. He concluded in 1999:

The goal of annihilating all of the Jews of Europe, as it was proclaimed at the conference in the villa Am Grossen Wannsee in January 1942, was not reached. Yet the six million murder victims make the holocaust a unique crime in the history of mankind. The number of victims—and with certainty the following represent the minimum number in each case—cannot express that adequately. Numbers are just too abstract. However they must be stated in order to make clear the dimension of the genocide: 165,000 Jews from Germany, 65,000 from Austria, 32,000 from France and Belgium, more than 100,000 from the Netherlands, 60,000 from Greece, the same number from Yugoslavia, more than 140,000 from Czechoslovakia, half a million from Hungary, 2.2 million from the Soviet Union, and 2.7 million from Poland. To these numbers must be added all those killed in the pogroms and massacres in Romania and Transitrien (over 200,000) and the deported and murdered Jews from Albania and Norway, Denmark and Italy, from Luxembourg and Bulgaria.

—Benz, Wolfgang The Holocaust: A German Historian Examines the Genocide[221]
Non-Jewish victims
Victims Killed Source
Jews 5.93 million [205]
Soviet POWs 2–3 million [222]
Ethnic Poles 1.8–2 million [223][224]
Disabled 270,000 [225]
Romani 90,000–220,000 [226][227]
Freemasons 80,000–200,000 [228][229]
Slovenes 20,000–25,000 [230]
Homosexuals 5,000–15,000 [231]
Jehovah’s
Witnesses
2,500–5,000 [232]
Spanish Republicans 7000 [233]

Some scholars broaden the definition to include other German killing policies during the war, including the mistreatment of Soviet POWs, crimes against ethnic Poles,euthanasia of mentally and physically disabled Germans, persecution of Jehovah’s Witnesses, the killing of Romani, and other crimes committed against ethnic and political minorities.[234] Using this definition, the total number of Holocaust victims is 11 million people. Donald Niewyk suggests that the broadest definition, including Soviet deaths due to war-related famine and disease, would produce a death toll of 17 million. Overall, about 5.7 million (78 percent) of the 7.3 million Jews in occupied Europe perished.[235] This was in contrast to the five to 11 million (1.4 percent to 3.0 percent) of the 360 million non-Jews in German-dominated Europe.[236][237]

Soviet Civilians[edit]

Men hanged as partisans somewhere in the Soviet Union.

In 1995 a paper published by M. V. Philimoshin at the Russian Academy of Scienceput the civilian death toll in the regions occupied by Germany at 13.7 million. Philimoshin cited sources from the Soviet era to support his figures, he used the terms “genocide” and “premeditated extermination” when referring to the deaths of 7.4 million civilians in the occupied USSR caused by the direct, intentional actions of violence. Civilians killed in reprisals during the Soviet partisan war account for a major part of the huge toll. The report of Philimoshin lists the deaths of civilian forced laborers in Germany as totaling 2,164,313. G. I. Krivosheev in the report on military casualties gives a total of 1,103,300 dead POWs. The total of these two figures is 3,267,613, which is in close agreement with estimates by western historians of about 3 million deaths of prisoners in German captivity. In the occupied regions Nazi Germany had a policy of forced confiscation of food that resulted in the famine deaths of an estimated 6% of the population, 4.1 million persons.[238]

Soviet civilian war dead estimated by Russian Academy of Science[239][240][241]
Deaths caused by the result of direct, intentional actions of violence 7,420,379[242]
Deaths of forced laborers in Germany 2,164,313[242]
Deaths due to famine and disease in the occupied regions 4,100,000[243]
Total 13,684,692
Croatia[

After the Nazi invasion of Yugoslavia, Nazis and fascists established the Croatian state known as the Nezavisna Država Hrvatska (Independent State of Croatia) or NDH. Immediately afterwards, the NDH began a terror campaign against Serbs, Jews and Romani people. From 1941 to 1945, when Josip Broz Tito‘s partisansliberated Croatia, the Ustaše regime killed approximately 300,000 to 350,000 people,[244] mostly Serbs and almost the entire Jewish and Romani population, many of them in the Jasenovac concentration camp. Helen Fein estimated that the Ustaše killed virtually every Romani in the country.[245] The Ustaše enacted a policy that called for a solution to the “Serbian problem” in Croatia. The solution was to “kill one-third of the Serbs, expel one-third, and convert one-third”.[246] According to the United States Holocaust Museum, 320,000–340,000 ethnic Serbs were murdered under Ustaše rule.[247] The Yad Vashem World Holocaust Museum and Research Center concludes that “more than 500,000 Serbs were murdered in horribly sadistic ways, 250,000 were expelled, and another 200,000 were forced to convert”.[248] The Ustaše killed nearly 80,000 Roma and 35,000 Jews.

Some historians consider the crimes of the Chetniks in Bosnia against non-Serbs to constitute genocide.[249][250]

Volhynia and Eastern Galicia

Massacres of Poles in Volhynia in 1943. Most Poles of Volhynia (now in Ukraine) had either been murdered or had fled the area

The massacres of Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia were part of an ethnic cleansing operation carried out by theUkrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) West in the Nazi-occupied regions of Eastern Galicia (Nazi created Distrikt Galizien inGeneral Government), and UPA North in Volhynia (in Nazi created Reichskommissariat Ukraine), from March 1943 until the end of 1944. The peak took place in July/August 1943 when a senior UPA commander, Dmytro Klyachkivsky, ordered the liquidation of the entire male Polish population between 16 and 60 years of age.[251][252] Despite this, most were women and children. The UPA killed 40,000–60,000 Polish civilians in Volhynia,[253] from 25,000[254] to 30,000–40,000 in Eastern Galicia.[253] The killings were directly linked with the policies of the Bandera fraction of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, whose goal, specified at the Second Conference of the OUN-B, was to remove non-Ukrainians from a future Ukrainian state.[255]

The massacres are recognized in Poland as ethnic cleansing with “marks of genocide.”[256] According to IPN prosecutor Piotr Zając, the crimes have a “character of genocide”.[257] However, according to Katchanovski, the actions in Volhynia lacked evidence of an intent to eliminate all or part of the Polish population, and the anti-Polish action was mostly limited to a small region.

Romani people
Main article: Porajmos

Map of persecution of the Roma

The treatment of the Romani was not consistent in the different areas that Nazi Germany conquered. In some areas (e.g. Luxembourg and the Baltic countries), the Nazis killed virtually the entire Romani population. In other areas (e.g. Denmark, Greece), there is no record of Romanis being subjected to mass killings.[258]

Donald Niewyk and Frances Nicosia write that the death toll was at least 130,000 of the nearly one million Romani in Nazi-controlled Europe.[259] Michael Berenbaum writes that serious scholarly estimates lie between 90,000 and 220,000.[260] A study by Sybil Milton, senior historian at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, calculated a death toll of at least 220,000 and possibly closer to 500,000, but this study explicitly excluded the Independent State of Croatia where the genocide of Romanies was intense.[226][261] Martin Gilbert estimates a total of more than 220,000 of the 700,000 Romani in Europe.[262] Ian Hancock, Director of the Program of Romani Studies and the Romani Archives and Documentation Center at the University of Texas at Austin, has argued in favour of a much higher figure of between 500,000 and 1,500,000, claiming the Romani toll proportionally equaled or exceeded that of Jewish victims.[227][263]

Disabled and mentally ill

Our starting-point is not the individual, and we do not subscribe to the view that one should feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty or clothe the naked—those are not our objectives. Our objectives are entirely different. They can be put most crisply in the sentence: we must have a healthy people in order to prevail in the world.

Between 1939 and 1941, 80,000 to 100,000 mentally ill adults in institutions were killed; 5,000 children in institutions; and 1,000 Jews in institutions.[265] Outside the mental health institutions, the figures are estimated to number 20,000 (according to Dr. Georg Renno, the deputy director of Schloss Hartheim, one of the euthanasia centers) or 400,000 (according to Franz Ziereis, the commandant of Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp).[265] Another 300,000 were forcibly sterilized.[266] Overall it has been estimated that over 270,000 individuals[225] with mental disorders of all kinds were put to death, although their mass murder has received relatively little historical attention. Along with the physically disabled, people suffering from dwarfism were persecuted as well. Many were put on display in cages and experimented on by the Nazis.[267] Despite not being formally ordered to take part, psychiatrists and psychiatric institutions were at the center of justifying, planning and carrying out the atrocities at every stage, and “constituted the connection” to the later annihilation of Jews and other “undesirables” in the Holocaust.[268] After strong protests by the German Catholic and Protestant churches on 24 August 1941 Hitler ordered the cancellation of the T4 program.[269]

The program was named after Tiergartenstraße 4, the address of a villa in the Berlin borough of Tiergarten, the headquarters of the General Foundation for Welfare and Institutional Care,[270] led by Philipp Bouhler, head of Hitler’s private chancellery (Kanzlei des Führer der NSDAP) and Karl Brandt, Hitler’s personal physician.

Brandt was tried in December 1946 at Nuremberg, along with 22 others, in a case known as United States of America vs. Karl Brandt et al., also known as theDoctors’ Trial. He was hanged at Landsberg Prison on 2 June 1948.

Expulsion of Germans

After WWII ended at least 12 million[271][272][273] Germans fled or were expelled from Germany’s former eastern provinces or migrated from other countries to what remained of Germany, the largest transfer of a single ethnic population in modern history.[271][272] Estimates of the total number of dead range from 500,000 to 2,000,000, where the higher figures include “unsolved cases” of persons reported as missing and presumed dead. Many German civilians were sent to internment and labor camps, where they died. Rummel estimated that 1,585,000 Germans were killed in Poland and 197,000 were killed in Czechoslovakia.[274] The German-Czech Historians Commission, on the other hand, established a death toll for Czechoslovakia of 15-30,000.[275] The events are usually classified as population transfer,[276][277] or as ethnic cleansing.[278][279][280][281] Felix Ermacora, among a minority of legal scholars, equated ethnic cleansing with genocide,[282][283] and stated that the expulsion of the Sudeten Germans therefore constituted genocide.[284]

Dominican Republic

In 1937, Dominican dictator Rafael Trujillo ordered the execution of Haitians living in the Dominican Republic. The Parsley Massacre, known in the Dominican Republic as “El Corte” (the Cutting), lasted approximately five days. Trujillo had his soldiers show parsley to suspected Haitians and ask, “What is this?” Spanish-speaking Dominicans would be able to pronounce the Spanish word for parsley (“perejil”) perfectly. In Haitian Creole, the word for parsley is “persil”. Those who mispronounced “perejil” were assumed to be Haitian and slaughtered. The program resulted in the deaths of 20,000 to 30,000 people.[285]

Republic of China and Tibet

The Kuomintang‘s Republic of China government supported Muslim warlord Ma Bufang when he launched seven expeditions into Golog, causing the deaths of thousands of Tibetans.[286] Uradyn Erden Bulag called the events that followed genocidal, while David Goodman called them ethnic cleansing. One Tibetan counted the number of times Ma attacked him, remembering the seventh attack that made life impossible.[287] Ma was anti-communist and he and his army wiped out many Tibetans in northeast and eastern Qinghai and destroyed Tibetan Buddhist Temples.[288][289] Ma also patronized the Panchen Lama, who was exiled from Tibet by the Dalai Lama‘s government.

1951 to 2000

The CPPCG was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 9 December 1948 and came into effect on 12 January 1951 (Resolution 260 (III)). After the necessary 20 countries became parties to the Convention, it came into force as international law on 12 January 1951. At that time however, only two of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (UNSC) were parties to the treaty, which caused the Convention to languish for over four decades.

Australia 1900–1969

Sir Ronald Wilson was once the president of Australia’s Human Rights Commission. He stated that Australia’s program in which 20-25,000 Aboriginal children were forcibly separated from their natural families[290] was genocide, because it was intended to cause the Aboriginal people to die out. The program ran from 1900 to 1969.[291] The nature and extent of the removals have been disputed within Australia, with opponents questioning the findings contained in the Commission report and asserting that the size of the Stolen Generation had been exaggerated. The intent and effects of the government policy were also disputed.[290]

Zanzibar

In 1964, towards the end of the Zanzibar Revolution—which led to the overthrow of the Sultan of Zanzibar and his mainly Arab government by local African revolutionaries—John Okello claimed in radio speeches to have killed or imprisoned tens of thousands of the Sultan’s “enemies and stooges,”[292] but estimates of the number of deaths vary greatly, from “hundreds” to 20,000. The New York Times and other Western newspapers gave figures of 2-4,000;[293][294] the higher numbers possibly were inflated by Okello’s own broadcasts and exaggerated media reports.[292][295][296] The killing of Arab prisoners and their burial in mass graveswas documented by an Italian film crew, filming from a helicopter, in Africa Addio.[297] Many Arabs fled to safety in Oman[295] and by Okello’s order no Europeans were harmed.[298] The violence did not spread to Pemba.[296] Leo Kuper described the killing of Arabs in Zanzibar as genocide.[299]

Guatemala 1981–1983

Main article: Guatemalan civil war

During the Guatemalan civil war, some thousands of people died and more than one million fled their homes and hundreds of villages were destroyed. The officially chartered Historical Clarification Commission attributed more than 93% of all documented human rights violations to Guatemala’s military government; and estimated that Maya Indians accounted for 83% of the victims.[300] Although the war lasted from 1960 to 1996, the Historical Clarification Commission concluded that genocide might have occurred between 1981 and 1983, when the government and guerrilla had the fiercest and bloodiest combats and strategies, especially in the oil-rich area of Ixcán on the northern part of Quiché[disambiguation needed].[301] The total numbers of mortal victims was estimated to be around 200,000, although this is an extrapolation that was done by the Historical Clarification Commission based on the cases that they documented, and there were no more than 50,000.[302]

In 1999, Nobel peace prize winner Rigoberta Menchú brought a case against the military leadership in a Spanish Court. Six officials, among them Efraín Ríos Monttand Óscar Humberto Mejía Victores, were formally charged on 7 July 2006 to appear in the Spanish National Court after Spain’s Constitutional Court ruled in 2005 that Spanish courts could exercise universal jurisdiction over war crimes committed during the Guatemalan Civil War.[303] In May 2013, Rios Montt was found guilty of genocide for killing 1,700 indigenous Ixil Mayans during 1982–83 by a Guatemalan court and sentenced to 80 years in prison.[304] However, on May 20, 2013, theConstitutional Court of Guatemala overturned the conviction, voiding all proceedings back to April 19 and ordering that the trial be “reset” to that point, pending a dispute over the recusal of judges.[305][306] Officials have said that Ríos Montt’s trial will resume in January 2015.[307]

Pakistan (Bangladesh War of 1971)

An academic consensus holds that the events that took place during the Bangladesh Liberation War constituted genocide.[308] During the nine-month-long conflict an estimated 300,000 to 3 million people were killed and that Pakistani armed forces raped between 200-400,000 Bangladeshi women and girls in an act ofgenocidal rape.[309]

According to Sarmila Bose, 50-100,000 combatants and civilians were killed by both sides.[310][unreliable source?] Bose’s work and methodology were heavily critiqued.[311] A 2008 study estimated that up to 269,000 civilians died in the conflict; the authors noted that this is far higher than two earlier estimates.[312]According to Serajur Rahman, the official Bangladeshi estimate of “3 lahks” (300,000) was wrongly translated into English as 3 million.[313][unreliable source?]

A case was filed in the Federal Court of Australia on 20 September 2006 for alleged war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide during 1971 by the Pakistani Armed Forces and its collaborators:[314]

We are glad to announce that a case has been filed in the Federal Magistrate’s Court of Australia today under the Genocide Conventions Act 1949 and War Crimes Act. This is the first time in history that someone is attending a court proceeding in relation to the [alleged] crimes of Genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity during 1971 by the Pakistani Armed Forces and its collaborators. The Proceeding number is SYG 2672 of 2006. On 25 October 2006, a direction hearing will take place in the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia, Sydney registry before Federal Magistrate His Honor Nicholls.

On 21 May 2007, at the request of the applicant the case was discontinued.[315]

Burundi 1972 and 1993

Main article: Burundi genocide

After Burundi‘s independence in 1962, two events were called genocide. The 1972 mass-killings of Hutu by the Tutsi army[316] and the 1993 killing of Tutsi by the Hutu population that is recognised as an act of genocide in the final report of the International Commission of Inquiry for Burundi presented to the United Nations Security Council in 2002.[317]

North Korea

Several million in North Korea have died of starvation since the mid-1990s, with aid groups and human rights NGOs stating often that North Korea has systematically and deliberately prevented food aid from reaching the areas most devastated by food shortages.[318] A further one million have died in North Korea’s political prison camps that detain dissidents and their entire families, including children, for perceived political offences.[319]

In 2004, Yad Vashem called on the international community to investigate “political genocide” in North Korea.[319]

In September 2011, a Harvard International Review article argued that North Korea was violating the UN Genocide Convention by its systematic killing of half-Chinese babies and members of religious groups.[320] North Korea’s Christian population, which included 25–30% of the inhabitants of Pyongyang and was considered to be the center of Christianity in East Asia in 1945, has been systematically massacred and persecuted; as of 2012 50,000–70,000 Christians were imprisoned in North Korea’s concentration camps.[321]

Equatorial Guinea

Francisco Macías Nguema was the first President of Equatorial Guinea, from 1968 until his overthrow in 1979.[322] During his presidency, his country was nicknamed “the Auschwitz of Africa”. Nguema’s regime was characterized by its abandonment of all government functions except internal security, which was accomplished by terror; he acted as chief judge and sentenced thousands to death. This led to the death or exile of up to 1/3 of the country’s population. From a population of 300,000, an estimated 80,000 had been killed, in particular those of the Bubi ethnic minority on Bioko associated with relative wealth and education.[323] Uneasy around educated people, he had killed everyone who wore spectacles. All schools were ordered closed in 1975. The economy collapsed and skilled citizens and foreigners emigrated.[324]

On August 3, 1979, he was overthrown by Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo.[325] Macías Nguema was captured and tried for genocide and other crimes along with 10 others. All were found guilty, four received terms of imprisonment and Nguema and the other six were executed on September 29.[326]

John B. Quigley noted at Macías Nguema’s trial that Equatorial Guinea had not ratified the Genocide convention and that records of the court proceedings show that there was some confusion over whether Nguema and his co-defendants were tried under the laws of Spain (the former colonial government) or whether the trial was justified on the claim that the Genocide Convention was part of customary international law. Quigley stated, “The Macias case stands out as the most confusing of domestic genocide prosecutions from the standpoint of the applicable law. The Macias conviction is also problematic from the standpoint of the identity of the protected group.”[327]

Indonesia

East Timor

East Timor was occupied by Indonesia from 1975 to 1999 as an annexed territory with provincial status. A detailed statistical report prepared for the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation in East Timor cited a lower range of 102,800 conflict-related deaths in the period 1974–1999, namely, approximately 18,600 killings and 84,200 excess deaths from hunger and illness, including the Indonesian military using “starvation as a weapon to exterminate the East Timorese”,[328]most of which occurred during the Indonesian occupation.[329][330] Earlier estimates of deaths during the occupation ranged from 60,000 to 200,000.[331]

According to Sian Powell a UN report confirmed that the Indonesian military used starvation as a weapon and employed Napalm and chemical weapons, which poisoned the food and water supply.[330] Ben Kiernan wrote:

the crimes committed … in East Timor, with a toll of 150,000 in a population of 650,000, clearly meet a range of sociological definitions of genocide …[with] both political and ethnic groups as possible victims of genocide. The victims in East Timor included not only that substantial ‘part’ of the Timorese ‘national group’ targeted for destruction because of their resistance to Indonesian annexation…but also most members of the twenty-thousand strong ethnic Chinese minority.[332]

West New Guinea/West Papua

An estimated 100,000+ Papuans have died since Indonesia took control of West New Guinea from the Dutch Government in 1963.[333] An academic report alleged that “contemporary evidence set out [in this report] suggests that the Indonesian government has committed proscribed acts with the intent to destroy the West Papuans as such, in violation of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the customary international law prohibition this Convention embodies”.[334]

Laos

The communist Pathet Lao overthrew the royalist government of Laos in December 1975, establishing the Lao People’s Democratic Republic.[335] The conflict between Hmong rebels and the Pathet Lao continued in isolated pockets. The Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization accused the government of Laos in collaboration with Vietnam of committing genocide against the Hmong,[336] with up to 100,000 killed out of a population of 400,000.[337] [338]

Argentina

Commemoration in Argentina

In September 2006, Miguel Osvaldo Etchecolatz, who had been the police commissioner of the province of Buenos Airesduring the Dirty War (1976–1983), was found guilty of six counts of murder, six counts of unlawful imprisonment and seven counts of torture in a federal court. The judge who presided over the case, Carlos Rozanski, described the offences as part of a systematic attack that was intended to destroy parts of society that the victims represented and as such was genocide. Rozanski noted that CPPCG does not include the elimination of political groups (because that group was removed at the behest of Stalin), but instead based his findings on 11 December 1946 United Nations General Assembly Resolution 96barring acts of genocide “when racial, religious, political and other groups have been destroyed, entirely or in part” (which passed unanimously), because he considered the original UN definition to be more legitimate than the politically compromised CPPCG definition.[339]

Ethiopia

Ethiopia‘s former Soviet-backed Marxist dictator Mengistu Haile Mariam was tried in an Ethiopian court, in absentia, for his role in mass killings. Mengistu’s charge sheet and evidence list covered 8,000 pages. The evidence against him included signed execution orders, videos of torture sessions and personal testimonies.[340]The trial began in 1994 and on 12 December 2006 Mengistu was found guilty of genocide and other offences. He was sentenced to life in prison in January 2007.[341][342] Ethiopian law includes attempts to annihilate political groups in its definition of genocide.[343] 106 Derg officials were accused of genocide during the trials, but only 36 of them were present. Several former Derg members have been sentenced to death.[344] Zimbabwe refused to respond to Ethiopia’s extradition request for Mengistu, which permitted him to avoid a life sentence. Mengistu supported Robert Mugabe, the long-standing President of Zimbabwe, during his leadership of Ethiopia.[345]

Michael Clough, a US attorney and longtime Ethiopia observer told Voice of America in a statement released on December 13, 2006,[346]

“The biggest problem with prosecuting Mengistu for genocide is that his actions did not necessarily target a particular group. They were directed against anybody who was opposing his government, and they were generally much more political than based on any ethnic targeting. In contrast, the irony is the Ethiopian government itself has been accused of genocide based on atrocities committed in Gambella. I’m not sure that they qualify as genocide either. But in Gambella, the incidents, which were well documented in a human rights report of about 2 years ago, were clearly directed at a particular group, the tribal group, the Anuak.”

An estimated 150,000 university students, intellectuals and politicians were killed during Mengistu’s rule.[347] Amnesty International estimates that up to 500,000 people were killed during the Ethiopian Red Terror[348] Human Rights Watch described the Red Terror as “one of the most systematic uses of mass murder by a state ever witnessed in Africa.”[340] During his reign it was not uncommon to see students, suspected government critics or rebel sympathisers hanging from lampposts. Mengistu himself is alleged to have murdered opponents by garroting or shooting them, saying that he was leading by example.[349]

Iraq

On December 23, 2005 a Dutch court ruled in a case brought against Frans van Anraat for supplying chemicals to Iraq, that “[it] thinks and considers it legally and convincingly proven that the Kurdish population meets the requirement under the genocide conventions as an ethnic group. The court has no other conclusion than that these attacks were committed with the intent to destroy the Kurdish population of Iraq.” Because van Anraat supplied the chemicals before 16 March 1988, the date of the Halabja poison gas attack he was guilty of a war crime but not guilty of complicity in genocide.[350][351]

Tibet

On 5 June 1959 Shri Purshottam Trikamdas, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India, presented a report on Tibet to the International Commission of Jurists (anNGO). The press conference address on the report states in paragraph 26:

From the facts stated above the following conclusions may be drawn: … (e) To examine all such evidence obtained by this Committee and from other sources and to take appropriate action thereon and in particular to determine whether the crime of Genocide – for which already there is strong presumption – is established and, in that case, to initiate such action as envisaged by the Genocide Convention of 1948 and by the Charter of the United Nations for suppression of these acts and appropriate redress;[352]

The report of the International Commission of Jurists (1960) claimed that there was ‘only’ “cultural” genocide. ICJ Report (1960) page 346: “The committee found that acts of genocide had been committed in Tibet in an attempt to destroy the Tibetans as a religious group, and that such acts are acts of genocide independently of any conventional obligation. The committee did not find that there was sufficient proof of the destruction of Tibetans as a race, nation or ethnic group as such by methods that can be regarded as genocide in international law”.

However cultural genocide is also contested by academics such as Barry Sautman.[353] Tibetan is the everyday language of the Tibetan people.[354]

The Central Tibetan Administration and other Tibetan in exile media claimed that approximately 1.2 million Tibetans have died of starvation, violence, or other indirect causes since 1950.[355] White states “In all, over one million Tibetans, a fifth of the population, had died as a result of Chinese occupation up until the end of the Cultural Revolution.”[356] This figure has been denied by Patrick French, the former Director of the Free Tibet Campaign in London.[357]

Jones argued that the struggle sessions after the 1959 Tibetan uprising may be considered genocide, based on the claim that the conflict resulted in 92,000 deaths.[358] However, according to tibetologist Tom Grunfeld, “the veracity of such a claim is difficult to verify.”[359]

In 2013 Spain’s top criminal court decided to hear a case brought by Tibetan rights activists who allege that China’s former President Hu Jintao committed genocide in Tibet.[360] Spain’s High Court dropped this case in June 2014.[361]

Brazil

The Helmet Massacre of the Tikuna people took place in 1988 and was initially treated as homicide. During the massacre four people died, nineteen were wounded, and ten disappeared. Since 1994 the episode has been treated by Brazilian courts as genocide. Thirteen men were convicted of genocide in 2001. In November 2004, after an appeal was filed before Brazil’s federal court, the man initially found guilty of hiring men to carry out the genocide was acquitted, and the killers had their initial sentences of 15–25 years reduced to 12 years.[362]

In November 2005 during an investigation code-named Operation Rio Pardo, Mario Lucio Avelar, a Brazilian public prosecutor in Cuiabá, told Survival Internationalthat he believed that there were sufficient grounds to prosecute for genocide of the Rio Pardo Indians. In November 2006 twenty-nine people were arrested with others implicated, such as a former police commander and the governor of Mato Grosso state.[363]

In 2006 the [Brazilian] Supreme Federal Court (STF) unanimously reaffirmed that the crime known as the Haximu Massacre [perpetrated on the Yanomami Indians in 1993][364] was a genocide and that the decision of a federal court to sentence miners to 19 years in prison for genocide in connection with other offenses, such as smuggling and illegal mining, was valid.[364][365]

Democratic Republic of Congo

During the Congo Civil War (1998–2003), Pygmies were hunted down and eaten by both sides in the conflict, who regarded them as subhuman.[366] Sinafasi Makelo, a representative of Mbuti pygmies, asked the UN Security Council to recognize cannibalism as a crime against humanity and also as an act of genocide.[367]Minority Rights Group International reported evidence of mass killings, cannibalism and rape. The report, which labeled these events as a campaign of extermination, linked the violence to beliefs about special powers held by the Bambuti.[368] In Ituri district, rebel forces ran an operation code-named “Effacer le tableau” (to wipe the slate clean). The aim of the operation, according to witnesses, was to rid the forest of pygmies.[369]

Hutu[edit]

In 2010 a report accused Rwanda‘s Tutsi-led army of committing genocide against ethnic Hutus. The report accused the Rwandan Army and allied Congolese rebels of killing tens of thousands of ethnic Hutu refugees from Rwanda and locals in systematic attacks between 1996 and 1997. The government of Rwanda rejected the accusation.[370]

Somalia[edit]

In 2007 attacks on Somalia’s Bantu population and Jubba Valley dwellers from 1991 onwards were reported, noting that “Somalia is a rare case in which genocidal acts were carried out by militias in the utter absence of a governing state structure.”[371]

Sri Lanka[edit]

Bodies of Female minors killed in an Sri Lankan air raid on an orphanage

The Sri Lankan military were accused of human rights violations during Sri Lanka‘s 26-year civil war.[372] A United Nation’s Panel of Experts looking into these alleged violations found “credible allegations, which if proven, indicate that serious violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law were committed both by the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE, some of which would amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity“.[373] Some activists and politicians also accused the Sri Lankan government of carrying out genocide against the minority Sri Lankan Tamil peopleduring and after the war.

Bruce Fein alleged that Sri Lanka’s leaders committed genocide,[374] along with Tamil Parliamentarian Suresh Premachandran.[375] Refugees escaping Sri Lanka also stated that they fled from genocide,[376] and various Sri Lankan Tamil diaspora groups echoed these accusations.[377]

In 2009 thousands of Tamils protested in cities all over the world against the atrocities.[378] Various diaspora activists formed a group called Tamils Against Genocide to continue the protest.[379] Legal action against Sri Lankan leaders for alleged genocide has been initiated. Norwegian human rights lawyer Harald Stabell filed a case in Norwegian courts against Sri Lankan President Rajapaksa and others officials.[380]

Politicians in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu also made genocide accusations.[381] In 2008 and 2009 the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu M. Karunanidhi repeatedly appealed to the Indian government to intervene to “stop the genocide of Tamils”,[382] while his successor J. Jayalalithaa called on the Indian government to bring Rajapaksa before international courts for genocide.[383] The women’s wing of the Communist Party of India, passed a resolution in August 2012 finding that “Systematic sexual violence against Tamil women” by Sri Lankan forces constituted genocide, calling for an “independent international investigation”.[384]

In January 2010 a Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal (PPT) held in Dublin, Ireland found Sri Lanka guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity, but found insufficient evidence to justify the charge of genocide.[385][386] The tribunal requested a thorough investigation as some of the evidence indicated “possible acts of genocide”.[385] Its panel found Sri Lanka guilty of genocide at its December 7–10, 2013 hearings in Berman, Germany. It also found that the US and UK were guilty of complicity. A decision on whether India, and other states, had also acted in complicity was withheld. PPT reported that LTTE could not be accurately characterized as “terrorist”, stating that movements classified as “terrorist” because of their rebellion against a state, can become political entities recognized by the international community.[387][388] The International Commission of Jurists stated that the camps used to intern nearly 300,000 Tamils after the war’s end may have breached the convention against genocide.[389]

In 2015, Sri Lankan Tamil majority Sri Lanka’s Northern Provincial Council (NPC) “passed a strongly worded resolution accusing successive governments in the island nation of committing ‘genocide’ against Tamils.” [390] The resolution asserts that “Tamils across Sri Lanka, particularly in the historical Tamil homeland of the NorthEast, have been subject to gross and systematic human rights violations, culminating in the mass atrocities committed in 2009. Sri Lanka’s historic violations include over 60 years of state sponsored anti-Tamil pogroms, massacres, sexual violence, and acts of cultural and linguistic destruction perpetrated by the state. These atrocities have been perpetrated with the intent to destroy the Tamil people, and therefore constitute genocide.”[391]

The Sri Lankan government denied the allegations of genocide and war crimes.[392]

International prosecution

Ad hoc tribunals

In 1951 only two of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (UNSC) were parties to the CPPCG: France and the Republic of China. The CPPCG was ratified by the Soviet Union in 1954, the United Kingdom in 1970, the People’s Republic of China in 1983 (having replaced the Taiwan-based Republic of China on the UNSC in 1971), and the United States in 1988. In the 1990s the international law on the crime of genocide began to be enforced.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Male mourners at the reburial ceremony for an exhumed victim of the Srebrenica massacre.

In July 1995 Serbian forces killed more than 8,000[393][394] Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims), mainly men and boys, in and around the town of Srebrenica during the Bosnian War. The killing was perpetrated by units of the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS)under the command of General Ratko Mladić. The Secretary-General of the United Nations described the mass murder as the worst crime on European soil since the Second World War.[395][396] A paramilitary unit from Serbia known as theScorpions, officially part of the Serbian Interior Ministry until 1991, participated in the massacre,[397][398] along with several hundred Russian and Greek volunteers.[399]

In 2001 the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) delivered its first conviction for the crime of genocide, against General Krstić for his role in the 1994 Srebrenica massacre (on appeal he was found not guilty of genocide but guilty of aiding and abetting genocide).[400]

In February 2007 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) returned a judgement in the Bosnian Genocide Case. It upheld by the findings by the ICTY that genocide had been committed in and around Srebrenica but did not find that genocide had been committed on the wider territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina during the war. The ICJ also ruled that Serbia was not responsible for the genocide nor for “aiding and abetting it”, although it ruled that Serbia could have done more to prevent the genocide and that Serbia failed to punish the perpetrators.[401] Before this ruling the term Bosnian Genocide had been used by some academics[402] and human rights officials.[403]

In 2010, Vujadin Popović, Lieutenant Colonel and the Chief of Security of the Drina Corps of the Bosnian Serb Army, and Ljubiša Beara, Colonel and Chief of Security of the same army, were convicted of genocide, extermination, murder and persecution by the ICTY for their role in the Srebrenice massacre and sentenced to a life in prison.[404]

German courts handed down convictions for genocide during the Bosnian War. Novislav Djajic was indicted for participation in genocide, but the Higher Regional Court failed to find that there was sufficient certainty for a criminal conviction for genocide. Nevertheless Djajic was found guilty of 14 cases of murder and one case of attempted murder.[405] At Djajic’s appeal on 23 May 1997, the Bavarian Appeals Chamber found that acts of genocide were committed in June 1992, confined within the administrative district of Foca.[406] The Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht) of Düsseldorf, in September 1997, handed down a genocide conviction against Nikola Jorgic, a Bosnian Serb from the Doboj region who was the leader of a paramilitary group located in the Doboj region. He was sentenced to four terms of life imprisonment for his involvement in genocidal actions that took place in regions of Bosnia and Herzegovina, other than Srebrenica;[407] and “On 29 November 1999, the Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht) of Düsseldorf condemned Maksim Sokolovic to 9 years in prison for aiding and abetting the crime of genocide and for grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions”.[408]

Rwanda

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) is a court under the auspices of the United Nations for the prosecution of offenses committed in Rwandaduring the genocide that occurred there during April and May 1994, commencing on April 6. The ICTR was created on November 8, 1994 by the UN Security Council to resolve claims in Rwanda, or by Rwandan citizens in nearby states, between January 1 and December 31, 1994. Over the course of approximately 100 days from the assassination of President Juvénal Habyarimana on April 6 through mid-July, at least 800,000 people were killed, according to a Human Rights Watch estimate.

As of mid-2011, the ICTR had convicted 57 people and acquitted 8. Another ten persons were still on trial while one is awaiting trial. Nine remain at large.[409] The first trial, of Jean-Paul Akayesu, ended in 1998 with his conviction for genocide and crimes against humanity.[410] This was the world’s first conviction for genocide, as defined by the 1948 Convention. Jean Kambanda, interim Prime Minister during the genocide, pled guilty.

Cambodia

Skulls at Choeung Ek memorial in Cambodia

The Khmer Rouge, led by Pol Pot, Ta Mok and other leaders, organized the mass killing of ideologically suspect groups, ethnic minorities such as ethnic Vietnamese, Chinese (or Sino-Khmers), Chams and Thais, former civil servants, former government soldiers, Buddhist monks, secular intellectuals and professionals, and former city dwellers. Khmer Rouge cadres defeated in factional struggles were also liquidated in purges. Man-made famine and slave labor resulted in many hundreds of thousands of deaths.[411] Craig Etcheson suggested that the death toll was between 2 and 2.5 million, with a “most likely” figure of 2.2 million. After 5 years of researching 20,000 grave sites, he concluded that “these mass graves contain the remains of 1,386,734 victims of execution.”[412] However, some scholars argued that the Khmer Rouge were not racist and had no intention of exterminating ethnic minorities or the Cambodian people; in this view, their brutality was the product of an extreme version of communist ideology.[413]

On 6 June 2003 the Cambodian government and the United Nations reached an agreement to set up the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) which would focus exclusively on crimes committed by the most senior Khmer Rouge officials during the period ofKhmer Rouge rule from 1975 to 1979.[414] The judges were sworn in in early July 2006.[415]

The investigating judges were presented with the names of five possible suspects by the prosecution on 18 July 2007.[415][416]

Khieu Samphan at a public hearing before the Pre-Trial Cambodia Tribunalon 3 July 2009.

  • Kang Kek Iew was formally charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity and detained by the Tribunal on 31 July 2007. He was indicted on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity on 12 August 2008.[417] His appeal was rejected on 3 February 2012, and he continued serving a sentence of life imprisonment.[418]
  • Nuon Chea, a former prime minister, was indicted on charges of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and several other crimes under Cambodian law on 15 September 2010. He was transferred into the custody of the ECCC on 19 September 2007. His trial began on 27 June 2011.[419][420]
  • Khieu Samphan, a former head of state, was indicted on charges of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and several other crimes under Cambodian law on 15 September 2010. He was transferred into the custody of the ECCC on 19 September 2007. His trial also began on 27 June 2011.[419][420]
  • Ieng Sary, a former foreign minister, was indicted on charges of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and several other crimes under Cambodian law on 15 September 2010. He was transferred into the custody of the ECCC on 12 November 2007. His trial began on 27 June 2011.[419][420] He died in March 2013.
  • Ieng Thirith, wife of Ieng Sary and a former minister for social affairs, was indicted on charges of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and several other crimes under Cambodian law on 15 September 2010. She was transferred into the custody of the ECCC on 12 November 2007. Proceedings against her have been suspended pending a health evaluation.[420][421]

Some of the international jurists and the Cambodian government disagreed over whether any other people should be tried by the Tribunal.[416]

International Criminal Court

The ICC can prosecute only crimes committed on or after 1 July 2002.[422]

Darfur, Sudan

Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, wanted by the ICC

The ongoing racial[423][424] conflict in Darfur, Sudan, which started in 2003, was declared genocide by United States Secretary of State Colin Powell on September 9, 2004 in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.[425]Since that time however, no other permanent member of the UN Security Council has followed suit. In January 2005, anInternational Commission of Inquiry on Darfur, authorized by UN Security Council Resolution 1564 of 2004, issued a report to the Secretary-General stating that “the Government of the Sudan has not pursued a policy of genocide.”[426]Nevertheless, the Commission cautioned that “The conclusion that no genocidal policy has been pursued and implemented in Darfur by the Government authorities, directly or through the militias under their control, should not be taken in any way as detracting from the gravity of the crimes perpetrated in that region. International offences such as the crimes against humanity and war crimes that have been committed in Darfur may be no less serious and heinous than genocide.”[426]

In March 2005, the Security Council formally referred the situation in Darfur to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), taking into account the Commission report but without mentioning any specific crimes.[427] Two permanent members of the Security Council, the United States and China, abstained from the vote on the referral resolution.[428] As of his fourth report to the Security Council, the Prosecutor found “reasonable grounds to believe that the individuals identified [in the UN Security Council Resolution 1593] have committed crimes against humanity and war crimes”, but did not find sufficient evidence to prosecute for genocide.[429]

In April 2007, the Judges of the ICC issued arrest warrants against the former Minister of State for the Interior, Ahmad Harun, and a Militia Janjaweed leader, Ali Kushayb, for crimes against humanity and war crimes.[430]

On July 14, 2008, ICC prosecutors filed ten charges of war crimes against Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir, three counts of genocide, five of crimes against humanity and two of murder. The prosecutors claimed that al-Bashir “masterminded and implemented a plan to destroy in substantial part” three tribal groups in Darfur because of their ethnicity.[431] On 4 March 2009 the ICC issued a warrant for al-Bashir’s arrest for crimes against humanity and war crimes, but not genocide. This is the first warrant issued by the ICC against a sitting head of state.[432]

See also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history

List of genocides by death toll

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This list of genocides by death toll includes death toll estimates of all deaths that are either directly or indirectly caused by genocide.

The United NationsConvention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) defines genocide in part as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”. Determining what historical events constitute a genocide and which are merely criminal or inhuman behavior is not a clear-cut matter. Some of accounts below may include ancillary causes of death such as malnutrition and disease, which may or may not have been intentionally inflicted.

Lowest
estimate
Highest
estimate
% Event Location From To Notes
5,000,000[1] 11,000,000
[2][3][4][5]
78% of Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe Holocaust Europe 1933 1945 The Holocaust was the systematic, bureaucratic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of approximately six million Jews by the Nazi regime and its collaborators. It was initially carried out in German-occupied Europe by Einsatzgruppenparamilitary death squads, later the primary method of extermination was gassing in extermination camps.Donald Niewyk and Francis Nicosia write in The Columbia Guide to the Holocaust that the term is commonly defined as the mass murder of more than five million European Jews by the Nazi regime.[1] They further state that ‘Not everyone finds this a fully satisfactory definition.’[6][7]According to British historian Martin Gilbert, the total number of victims is just under six million—around 78 percent of the 7.3 million Jews in occupied Europe at the time.[8]The War Against the Jewswritten by Lucy Dawidowicz provides detailed listings by country of the number of Jews killed in World War II. Dawidowicz researched birth and death records in many cities of prewar Europe to come up with a death toll of 5,933,900 Jews. The higher figure of 11 million is a broader definition of the Holocaust, including the victims of the Romani Genocide, Soviet POWs, Poles, Germany’s eugenics program, Communists, and Homosexuals.
800,000 1,500,000 50% ofArmeniansin the Ottoman Empire Armenian Genocide Anatolia 1915 1923 Between 1915-1923, an estimated 800,000 to 1.5 million Armenians, approximately half the Armenian population living in the Ottoman Empire, were killed in massacres or died as a consequence of military deportations, forced marches and mass starvations carried out by the Young Turks. The extermination of the Armenians coined the word “genocide”. The Armenian Genocide occurred alongside the Greek and Assyrian genocides. The State of Turkeydenies that a genocide occurred.
1,000,000[9] 3,000,000[9] Cambodian Genocide  Cambodia 1975 1979 On 7 August 2014, Nuon Chea, second in command to Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot, received a life sentence for crimes against humanity, alongside another top-tier Khmer Rouge leader,Khieu Samphan.[10]
30,000 500,000[11] Red Terror (Ethiopia)  Ethiopia 1977 1978 The Ethiopian Red Terror was a violent political campaign in Ethiopia and Eritrea that most visibly took place after Communist Mengistu Haile Mariam achieved control of the Derg, the military junta, on 3 February 1977. In December 2006, Mengistu Haile Mariam was convicted in absentia for his role in the Red Terror while leader of Ethiopia. He remains in hiding today under the protection of Zimbabwe.
2,400,000[12][13][14] 7,500,000[15][16][17] Holodomor (andSoviet famine of 1932–1933)  Ukrainian SSR 1932 1933 Holodomor was a famine in Ukraine caused by the government of Joseph Stalin, a part of the Soviet famine of 1932–1933. Holodomor is claimed by the contemporary Ukrainian government to be a genocide of the Ukrainians.As of March 2008, Ukraine and nineteen other governments[18] have recognized the actions of the Soviet government as an act of genocide. The joint statement at the United Nations in 2003 has defined the famine as the result of cruel actions and policies of the totalitarian regime that caused the deaths of millions of Ukrainians, Russians, Kazakhs and other nationalities in the USSR. On 23 October 2008 theEuropean Parliament adopted a resolution[19] that recognized the Holodomor as a crime against humanity.[20]On January 12, 2010, the court of appeals in Kievopened hearings into the “fact of genocide-famine Holodomor in Ukraine in 1932–33”, in May 2009 theSecurity Service of Ukraine had started a criminal case “in relation to the genocide in Ukraine in 1932–33”.[21] In a ruling on January 13, 2010 the court found Stalin and other Bolshevik leaders guilty of genocide against the Ukrainians.[22]
1,000,000 3,000,000 Nigerian Civil War  Nigeria 1967 1970 Since the independence of Nigeria in 1960 the 3 ethnic groups, the Hausa, Yoruba, and Igbo, had always been fighting over control in the political realm. The Igbos seemed to have control over most of Nigeria’s politics until the assassination of the then Igbo president Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi by Hausa general Yakubu Gowon. With this the Igbos seceded from Nigeria and created the Republic of Biafra. The Igbos had the upper hand until late 1967 when food supplies were cut off. By mid-1968 50% of Igbos were starving and thousands more were being slaughtered by Hausa and Yoruba soldiers. In 1970 the Igbos surrendered to the Nigerians and by then anywhere from 1 to 3 million Igbos had either starved or been killed.
500,000[23] 1,000,000[23] Rwandan genocide  Rwanda 1994 1994 Some 50 perpetrators of the genocide have been found guilty by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, but most others have not been charged due to no witness accounts. Another 120,000 were arrested by Rwanda; of these, 60,000 were tried and convicted in the gacaca court system. Genocidaires who fled into Zaire (Democratic Republic of the Congo) were used as a justification when Rwanda and Uganda invaded Zaire (First and Second Congo Wars).
500,000[24] 3,000,000[25] Expulsion of Germans after World War II Europe 1945 1950 With at least 12 million[26][27][28] Germans directly involved, it was the largest movement or transfer of any single ethnic population in modern history[27]and largest among the post-war expulsions inCentral and Eastern Europe (which displaced more than twenty million people in total).[26] The events are generally classified as population transfer,[29] or as ethnic cleansing.[30] Martin Shaw (2007) and W.D. Rubinstein (2004) describe the expulsions as genocide.[31]Felix Ermacora writing in 1991, (in line with a minority of legal scholars) considered ethnic cleansing to be genocide, though it doesn’t meet the legal definition as adopted by the UN Genocide Convention.
480,000[32] 600,000[32] 80% of 600,000 ZungharianOirats Zunghar Genocide in theZunghar Khanate Western Mongolia,
 Kazakhstan, northern
 Kyrgyzstan, southern
 Siberia
1755 1758 The Qing dynastyQianlong emperor moved the remaining Zunghar people to the mainland and ordered the generals to kill all the men in Barkol orSuzhou, and divided their wives and children to Qing soldiers.[33][34] The Qing soldiers who massacred the Zunghars were Manchu Bannermen and Khalkha Mongols. In an account of the war, Wei Yuan wrote that about 40% of the Zunghar households were killed by smallpox, 20% fled toRussia or the Kazakh Khanate, and 30% were killed by the army, leaving no yurts in an area of several thousands of li except those of the surrendered.[32][35][36] Clarke wrote 80%, or between 480,000 and 600,000 people, were killed between 1755 and 1758 in what “amounted to the complete destruction of not only the Zunghar state but of the Zunghars as a people.”[32][37] HistorianPeter Perdue has shown that the decimation of the Dzungars was the result of an explicit policy of extermination launched by Qianlong.[32] Although this “deliberate use of massacre” has been largely ignored by modern scholars,[32] Mark Levene, a historian whose recent research interests focus on genocide, has stated that the extermination of the Dzungars was “arguably the eighteenth century genocide par excellence.”[38]
400,000[39] 1,500,000[39] Circassian Genocide Circassia 1817 1867 Although there is no legal continuity between the Russian Empire and the modern Russian Federation, and the concept of genocide was only adopted in international law in the 20th century, on 5 July 2005 the Circassian Congress, an organization that unites representatives of the various Circassian peoples in the Russian Federation, called on Moscow first to acknowledge and then to apologize for Tsarist policies that Circassians say constituted a genocide. Their appeal pointed out that “according to the official tsarist documents more than 400,000 Circassians were killed, 497,000 were forced to flee abroad to Turkey, and only 80,000 were left alive in their native area.” Other sources give much higher numbers, totaling 1 million- 1.5 million deported and/or killed.[39] See also: Circassian Genocide
300,000[40] 500,000[40] Decossackization Don Riverarea,  Soviet Union 1919 1920 In the Russian Civil War that followed the October Revolution, the Cossacks found themselves on both sides of the conflict. Many officers and experienced Cossacks fought for the White Army, and some for the Red Army. Following the defeat of the White Army, a policy of Decossackization(Raskazachivaniye) took place on the surviving Cossacks and their homelands since they were viewed as a potential threat to the new regime. This mostly involved dividing their territory amongst other divisions and giving it to new autonomous republics of minorities, and then actively encouraging settlement of these territories with those peoples. This was especially true for the Terek Cossacksland. According to Michael Kort, “During 1919 and 1920, out of a population of approximately 3 million, the Bolshevik regime killed or deported an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 Cossacks”.[40]
275,000[41] 750,000[41] Assyrian genocide Anatolia 1915 1918 Disputed by Turkey, but considered a genocide.
270,000[42] 955,000[43] Ustashagenocide  Croatia 1941 1945 Genocide during period of Independent State of Croatia and Yugoslavia, with official policy of extermination similar to that of Nazi Germany. See also The Holocaust in Croatia.
200,000[44] 1,000,000[44] Greek genocide Anatolia 1915 1918 Disputed by Turkey, but considered a genocide.
400,000[45][46] War in Darfur  Sudan 2003 2010 See International response to the War in Darfur
110,000[47] 250,000[48] Massacres ofPolish peoples  Soviet Union 1937 1938 The operation from 1937-38 to eliminate the Polish minority in the Soviet Union. The crime is considered genocide.[49][50]
100,000[51] 200,000[52] Massacres ofMaya peoples  Guatemala 1962 1996 Massacres of Maya during the Guatemalan Civil War was a genocide according to the Historical Clarification Commission.[53][54]
78,500[55] 500,000[56] Post 30 September Movement  Indonesia 1965 1966 Strictly prohibited to publish by Indonesian Government (Orde Baru).  [57]
60,000 200,000 Volhynia massacre  Poland 1943 1944 Massacre of Poles by Ukrainian formations OUN,UPA and SS Galizien in eastern Polish territories Volhynia and Eastern Lesser Poland (now Ukraine)
50,000[58] 200,000[59] Al-Anfal Campaign  Iraq 1986 1989 The al-Anfal Campaign (Arabic: حملة الأنفال‎), also known as the Kurdish Genocide,[60] was agenocidal[61] campaign against the Kurdish people(and other non-Arab populations) in northern Iraq, led by the Ba’athist Iraqi President Saddam Husseinand headed by Ali Hassan al-Majid in the final stages of Iran–Iraq War. The campaign takes its name from Suratal-Anfal in the Qur’an, which was used as a code name by the former Iraqi Baathistgovernment for a series of systematic attacks against the Kurdish population of northern Iraq, conducted between 1986 and 1989 and culminating in 1988. The campaign also targeted other minority communities in Iraq including Assyrians, Shabaks,Iraqi Turkmens, Yazidis, Jews, Mandeans, and many villages belonging to these ethnic groups were also destroyed. As many as 180,000 Kurds were murdered.[62][63]
50,000[64] 100,000[64] Massacres of Hutus  Burundi 1972 1972 Tutsi government massacres of Hutu, part of theBurundi genocide
275,000[65] 450,000[65] Nanking Massacre Nanking 1937 1938 Mass murder and mass rape committed by Japanese troops against Nanking (current official spelling: Nanjing) during the Second Sino-Japanese War. During this period, hundreds of thousands of Chinese civilians and disarmed combatants were murdered by soldiers of the Imperial Japanese Army. Widespread rape and looting also occurred.
3,000,000 10,000,000 Congo Free State Congo 1885 1908 A reduction of the population of the Congo is noted by all who have compared the country at the beginning of Leopold’s control with the beginning of Belgian state rule in 1908, but estimates of the deaths toll vary considerably. Estimates of contemporary observers suggest that the population decreased by half during this period and these are supported by some modern scholars such as Jan Vansina.[66] Others dispute this. Scholars at the Royal Museum for Central Africa argue that a decrease of 15% over the first forty years of colonial rule (up to the census of 1924).[citation needed] This depopulation had four main causes: “indiscriminate war”, starvation, reduction of births and diseases.[67]Sleeping sickness was also a major cause of fatality at the time. Opponents of Leopold’s rule argue, however, that the administration itself was to be considered responsible for the spreading of the epidemic.[68] In the absence of a census providing even an initial idea of the size of population of the region at the inception of the Congo Free State (the first was taken in 1924),[69] it is impossible to quantify population changes in the period.[70]Estimates of the death toll vary considerably, but the figure of 10 million deaths was obtained by estimating a 50% decline in the total population during the Congo Free State and applying it to the total population of 10 million in 1924.[67] Assuming the validity of these estimates, it is controversial whether the depopulation would be considered genocide. While the crimes against humanity which occurred under the forced labour system of the Congo Free State are well documented, it is not considered by mainstream scholars to constitute a genocide under the legal definition.
26,000[71] 3,000,000[71] 1971 Bangladesh atrocities  Bangladesh 1971 1971 Massacres, killings, rape, arson and systematic elimination of religious minorities (particularly Hindus), political dissidents and the members of the liberation forces of Bangladesh were conducted by the Pakistan Army with support from paramilitary militias—the Razakars, Al-Badr and Al-Shams—formed by the radical Islamist Jamaat-e-Islamiparty.
24,000[72] 75,000[73] Herero and Namaqua genocide  Namibia 1904 1908 Generally accepted. See also Imperial Germany
20,000[74] 80,000[75] Dictatorship and political repression inEquatorial Guinea  Equatorial Guinea 1969 1979 Francisco Macías Nguema led a brutal dictatorship in his country, most notably against the minorityBubi. It is estimated that his regime killed at least 20,000 people, while around 100,000 (one third of the population) fled the country.[74] At his trial, Nguema was found guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity. He was executed in 1979.[76]
13,160[77] 70,000[78] Dersim Massacre Dersim,
 Turkey
1937 1938 Tens of thousands of Kurds were killed and thousands more forced into exile, depopulating the province.
8,000[79] 8,500[80] Srebrenica massacre Srebrenica,
 Bosnia
1995 1995 A genocidal massacre according to the ICTY. The Srebrenica massacre is the most recent genocide committed in Europe. On 31 March 2010, theSerbian Parliament passed a resolution condemning the Srebrenica massacre and apologizing to the families of Srebrenica for the deaths of Bosniaks.[81] See also: War in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosnian genocide.
2,000[82] 70,000[83] Persecution of Falun Gong  China 1999 ongoing A campaign by the Chinese government against theFalun Gong spiritual practice.[84] It is estimated that since 1999, at least 2,000 Falun Gong adherents have died as a result of the suppression.[82] Some courts[85][86][87] and observers have likened the crackdown to genocide.[88][89]
5,000 Persecution of Yazidis by ISIL  Kurdistan 2015- ongoing The genocidal persecution of the Yazidi people of Iraq by the terrorist group ISIL—including massacres, abductions and rape of Yazidis, expulsions, and forced conversion, is considered by the UN to amount to attempted genocide.[90]
100,000 Rintfleisch massacres  Austria Germany 1298 1303 During the civil war between Adolph of Nassau andAlbrecht of Austria, German knight Rintfleischclaims to have received a mission from heaven to exterminate “the accursed race of the Jews”. Under his leadership, the mob goes from town to town destroying Jewish communities and massacring about 100,000 Jews, often by mass burning at stake. Among 146 localities in Franconia, Bavaria and Austria are Röttingen (20 April), Würzburg (24 July), Nuremberg (1 August).[91][92]

See also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll

Democide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Democide is a term revived and redefined by the political scientist R. J. Rummel as “the murder of any person or people by their government, including genocide, politicide and mass murder.” Rummel created the term as an extended concept to include forms of government murder that are not covered by the term genocide, and it has become accepted among other scholars.[1][2][3] According to Rummel, democide passed war as the leading cause of non-natural death in the 20th century.[4][5]

Definition

Democide is the murder of any person or people by their government, including genocide, politicide and mass murder. Democide is not necessarily the elimination of entire cultural groups but rather groups within the country that the government feels need to be eradicated for political reasons and due to claimed future threats. According to Rummel, genocide has three different meanings. The ordinary meaning is murder by government of people due to their national, ethnic, racial or religious group membership. The legal meaning of genocide refers to the international treaty on genocide, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This also includes nonlethal acts that in the end eliminate or greatly hinder the group. Looking back on history, one can see the different variations of democides that have occurred, but it still consists of acts of killing or mass murder. A generalized meaning of genocide is similar to the ordinary meaning but also includes government killings of political opponents or otherwise intentional murder. In order to avoid confusion over which meaning is intended, Rummel created the term democide for the third meaning.[6]

The objectives of such a plan of democide include the disintegration of the political and social institutions of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups; the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity; and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups.[7]

Rummel defines democide as “the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder”. For example, government-sponsored killings for political reasons would be considered democide. Democide can also include deaths arising from “intentionally or knowingly reckless and depraved disregard for life”; this brings into account many deaths arising through various neglects and abuses, such as forced mass starvation. Rummel explicitly excludes battle deaths in his definition. Capital punishment, actions taken against armed civilians during mob action or riot, and the deaths of noncombatants killed during attacks on military targets so long as the primary target is military, are not considered democide.[8]

He has further stated: “I use the civil definition of murder, where someone can be guilty of murder if they are responsible in a reckless and wanton way for the loss of life, as in incarcerating people in camps where they may soon die of malnutrition, unattended disease, and forced labor, or deporting them into wastelands where they may die rapidly from exposure and disease.”

Some examples of democide cited by Rummel include the Great Purges carried out by Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union, the deaths from the colonial policy in theCongo Free State, and Mao Zedong‘s Great Leap Forward, which resulted in a famine killing millions of people. According to Rummel, these were not cases of genocide because those who were killed were not selected on the basis of their race, but were killed in large numbers as a result of government policies. Famine is classified by Rummel as democide if it fits the definition above.

For instance, Rummel re-classified Mao Zedong‘s Great Leap Forward as democide in 2005. He had believed that Mao’s policies were largely responsible for the famine, but that Mao was misled about it, and finally when he found out, he stopped it and changed his policies. Therefore, thought Rummel, it was not an intentional famine and thus not a democide. However, claims from Jung Chang and Jon Halliday‘s controversial Mao: the Unknown Story allege that Mao knew about the famine from the beginning but didn’t care, and eventually Mao had to be stopped by a meeting of 7,000 top Communist Party members. Based on the book’s claims, Rummel now views the famine as intentional and a democide. Taking this into account, the total for Chinese Communist Party democide is 77 million, more than the Soviet Union (62 million), Nazi Germany (21 million), or any other regime in the 20th century.[9]

Research on democide

Rummel’s sources include scholarly works, refugee reports, memoirs, biographies, historical analyses, actual exhumed-body counts and records kept by the murderers themselves. He estimates the death-toll for each country over the course of a century, along with a low- and a high-end estimate to account for uncertainty. These high-end estimates might be considered absurd estimates by others.

Rummel’s counts 43 million deaths due to democide inside and outside the Soviet Union during Stalin’s regime.[citation needed] This is much higher than an often quoted figure of 20 million. Rummel has responded that the 20 million estimate is based on a figure from Robert Conquest‘s 1968 book The Great Terror, and that Conquest’s qualifier “almost certainly too low” is usually forgotten. Conquest’s calculations excluded camp deaths before 1936 and after 1950, executions from 1939–1953, the vast deportation of the people of captive nations into the camps and their deaths 1939–1953, the massive deportation within the Soviet Union of minorities 1941–1944 and their deaths, and those the Soviet Red Army and secret police executed throughout Eastern Europe after their conquest during 1944–1945. Moreover, the Holodomor that killed 5 million in 1932–1934 is also not included.[citation needed]

His research shows that the death toll from democide is far greater than the death toll from war. After studying over 8,000 reports of government-caused deaths, Rummel estimates that there have been 262 million victims of democide in the last century. According to his figures, six times as many people have died from the actions of people working for governments than have died in battle.

One of his main findings is that liberal democracies have much less democide than authoritarian regimes.[10] He argues that there is a relation between political power and democide. Political mass murder grows increasingly common as political power becomes unconstrained. At the other end of the scale, where power is diffuse, checked, and balanced, political violence is a rarity. According to Rummel, “The more power a regime has, the more likely people will be killed. This is a major reason for promoting freedom.” Rummel concludes that “concentrated political power is the most dangerous thing on earth.”

Several other researchers have found similar results. “Numerous researchers point out that democratic norms and political structures constrain elite decisions about the use of repression against their citizens whereas autocratic elites are not so constrained. Once in place, democratic institutions — even partial ones — reduce the likelihood of armed conflict and all but eliminate the risk that it will lead to geno/politicide.”[11]

For books, articles, data, and analyses regarding democide, see Rummel’s website. In particular, he has an extensive FAQ. He has also made his many sources and the calculations used, from a pre-publisher manuscript of his book Statistics of Democide, available online.

Researchers often give widely different estimates of mass murder. They use different definitions, methodology, and sources. For example, some include battle deaths in their calculations. Matthew White has compiled some of these different estimates.

See also

References

  1. Jump up^ Encountering Evil: Live Options in Theodicy, Stephen Thane Davis, Westminster John Knox Press, 2001, ISBN 0-664-22251-X Google Books
  2. Jump up^ Understanding and Preventing Violence: The Psychology of Human Destructiveness, Leighton C. Whitaker, CRC Press, 2000, ISBN 0-8493-2265-0 Google Books
  3. Jump up^ Contemporary Responses to the Holocaust, Konrad Kwiet, Jürgen Matthäus, Praeger/Greenwood, 2004, ISBN 0-275-97466-9 Google Books
  4. Jump up^ R. J. Rummel (Feb 1, 2005). “Democide Vs. Other Causes of Death”.
  5. Jump up^ R. J. Rummel (1998). Statistics of Democide: Genocide and Mass Murder since 1900. LIT Verlag. ISBN 978-3825840105.
  6. Jump up^ Genocide.
  7. Jump up^ (Lemkin, Raphael. “Axis Rule in Occupied Europe,” 1944.)
  8. Jump up^ Rummel’s definition.
  9. Jump up^ R.J. Rummel (2005-11-30). “Getting My Reestimate Of Mao’s Democide Out”. Retrieved 2007-04-09.
  10. Jump up^ Miracle.
  11. Jump up^ Genocide.

External links

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hlAX0g5es8

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

~ MARTIN NIEMÖLLER

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 447-453

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 439-446

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 431-438

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 422-430

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 414-421

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 408-413

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 400-407

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 391-399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 383-390

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 376-382

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 369-375

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 360-368

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 354-359

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 346-353

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Pronk Pops Show 451, April 22, 2015, Story 1: American Watermelons — Green On The Outside Red on The Inside Celebrate Earth Day and Lenin’s Birthday — Videos

Posted on April 22, 2015. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Breaking News, Business, College, Communications, Congress, Consitutional Law, Corruption, Crime, Economics, Education, Elections, European History, Food, Genocide, Government, Government Dependency, Government Spending, History, Investments, Law, Media, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, President Barack Obama, Radio, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Success, Taxes, Technology, Videos, Violence, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 451: April 22, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 450: April 21, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 449: April 20, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 448: April 17, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 447: April 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 446: April 15, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 445: April 14, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 444: April 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 443: April 9, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 442: April 8, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 441: April 6, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 440: April 2, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 439: April 1, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 438: March 31, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 437: March 30, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 436: March 27, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 435: March 26, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 434: March 25, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 433: March 24, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 432: March 23, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 431: March 20, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 430: March 19, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 429: March 18, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 428: March 17, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 427: March 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 426: March 6, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 425: March 4, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 424: March 2, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 423: February 26, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 422: February 25, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 421: February 20, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 420: February 19, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 419: February 18, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 418: February 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 417: February 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 416: February 12, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 415: February 11, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 414: February 10, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 413: February 9, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 412: February 6, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 411: February 5, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 410: February 4, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 409: February 3, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 408: February 2, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 407: January 30, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 406: January 29, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 405: January 28, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 404: January 27, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 403: January 26, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 402: January 23, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 401: January 22, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 400: January 21, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 399: January 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 398: January 15, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 397: January 14, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 396: January 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 395: January 12, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 394: January 7, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 393: January 5, 2015

Story 1: American Watermelons — Green On The Outside Red on The Inside Celebrate Earth Day and Lenin’s Birthday — Videos

George Carlin: Earth Day

Obama Visits Everglades National Park On Earth Day To Discuss Climate ChangeEarthdayPresident-Obamas-Earth-Day-Speech

George Carlin Stupid People

earth_day_xlargebloody-history-of-Earth-day


Happy Earth Day Comrade

EarthDayLenin Earth_Day_Protection_Racket

Happy birthday comrade V.L Lenin-a great bolshevik

Tactics for socialist takeover of nations 1of2: Fabianism & Leninism

Tactics for socialist takeover of nations 2 of 2: Fabianism & Leninism

Communist Genocide of 150 million 1917-1985

The Bloody History of Communism Full

OBAMA’s END GAME REVEALED BY KGB – Communist Obama Socialist / Marxist / Leninist

Yuri Bezmenov: Sleepers Emerge and Messiah Appears

Yuri Bezmenov: Deception Was My Job (Complete)

Yuri Bezmenov: Psychological Warfare Subversion & Control of Western Society (Complete)

John Stossel – How Culture Kills Communism

White House avoids calling Armenian deaths ‘genocide’

CNN Slams Obama for Breaking Armenian Genocide Pledge

Glenn Beck Salutes Armenian Genocide Upstander – Mehmet Celal Bey

Armenian Genocide 100 Year Commemoration Short Video Documentary

CBS 60 Minutes Past Report on the Armenian Genocide

The Armenian Journey – A Story Of An Armenian Genocide

The Armenian Genocide [ The Hidden Holocaust ] 1992 Documentary

BBC Documentary: Armenian Genocide – ‘The Betrayed’ – part 1/5

BBC Documentary: Armenian Genocide – ‘The Betrayed’ – part 2/5

BBC Documentary: Armenian Genocide – ‘The Betrayed’ – part 3/5

BBC Documentary: Armenian Genocide – ‘The Betrayed’ – part 4/5

BBC Documentary: Armenian Genocide – ‘The Betrayed’ – part 5/5

James Delingpole Talks New Book “Watermelons: The Green Movement’s True Colors”

The Geological Timescale

The 6 Craziest Extinctions Ever

Nova: Permian Extinction

Clues to the End-Permian Extinction

The Mother of Mass Extinctions: How Life on Earth Nearly Ended 250 Million Years Ago

Activism 2.0 – Rebirth of the Environmental Movement: Emily Hunter at TEDxUTSC

Earth Hour 2015 Official Video

Earth Hour 2015 Highlights

Climate Change in 12 Minutes – The Skeptic’s Case

What Earth Day(/Lenin’s Birthday) Is Really All About (Limbaugh)

SHOCKING! Uncanny 1958 Prediction coming true; America’s Destruction from Inside

George Carlin Politicians

Leninism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Russian revolutionary and later Soviet premier Lenin (Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov) c. 1920.

Leninism codified: the intellectual György Lukács, thephilosopher of Leninism, c. 1952.

In Marxist philosophy, Leninism is the body of political theory for the democratic organisation of a revolutionary vanguard party, and the achievement of a dictatorship of the proletariat, as political prelude to the establishment of socialism. Developed by, and named for, the Russian revolutionary and later Soviet premier Vladimir Lenin, Leninism comprises political and socialist economic theories, developed from Marxism, as well as Lenin’s interpretations of Marxist theory for practical application to the socio-political conditions of the agrarian early-20th-century Russian Empire. In February 1917, for five years, Leninism was the Russian application of Marxist economics and political philosophy, effected and realised by the Bolshevik party, the vanguard party who led the fight for the political independence of the working class.

Functionally, the Leninist vanguard party provided to the working class the political consciousness (education and organisation), and the revolutionary leadership necessary to depose capitalism in Imperial Russia. After the October Revolution of 1917, Leninism was the dominant version of Marxism in Russia; in fact, the Bolsheviks considered it the only legitimate form and persecuted non-Leninist Marxists such as Mensheviks and some factions of Socialist Revolutionaries. The Russian Civil Warthus included various left-wing uprisings against the Bolsheviks, but they were overpowered, and Leninism became the official state ideology of Soviet democracy (by workers’ council) in the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic (RSFSR), before its unitary amalgamation into the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in 1922.[1] In 1925–29 post-Lenin Russia, Joseph Stalin reinforced the assertion that Leninism was the only legitimate form of Marxism by recasting them as one indivisible entity called Marxism–Leninism, which then became the state ideology of the Soviet Union.

As a political-science term, Leninism entered common usage in 1922, after infirmity ended Lenin’s participation in governing the Russian Communist Party. Two years later, in July 1924, at the fifth congress of the Communist International, Grigory Zinovievpopularized the term to denote “vanguard-party revolution”. Leninism was composed as and for revolutionary praxis, and originally was neither a rigorously proper philosophy nor discrete political theory. After the Russian Revolution, in History and Class Consciousness (1923), György Lukács ideologically developed and organised Lenin’s pragmatic revolutionary practices into the formal philosophy of vanguard-party revolution (Leninism). As a work of political science and philosophy, History and Class Consciousness illustrated Lenin’s 1915 dictum about the commitment to the cause of the revolutionary man, and said of Lukács:

One cannot be a revolutionary Social–Democrat without participating, according to one’s powers, in developing this theory [Marxism], and adapting it to changed conditions.

Lenin and the Russian Revolution (1971) p. 35.[2]

Historical background

In the 19th century, The Communist Manifesto (1848), by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, called for the international political unification of the European working classes in order to achieve a Communist revolution; and proposed that, because the socio-economic organization of communism was of a higher form than that of capitalism, a workers’ revolution would first occur in the economically advanced, industrialized countries. Yet, in the early 20th century, the socio-economic backwardness of Imperial Russia (uneven and combined economic development) facilitated rapid and intensive industrialization, which produced a united, working-class proletariat in a predominantly rural, agrarian peasant society.

Moreover, because the industrialization was financed mostly with foreign capital, Imperial Russia (1721–1917) did not possess a revolutionary bourgeoisie with political and economic influence upon the workers and the peasants (as occurred in the French Revolution, 1789). So, although Russia’s political economyprincipally was agrarian and semi-feudal, the task of democratic revolution therefore fell to the urban, industrial working class, as the only social class capable of effecting land reform and democratization, in view that the Russian propertied classes would attempt to suppress any revolution, in town and country. In April 1917, Lenin published the April Theses, the strategy of the October Revolution, which proposed that the Russian revolution was not an isolated national event, but a fundamentally international event — the first world socialist revolution. Thus, Lenin’s practical application of Marxism and working-class urban revolution to the social, political, and economic conditions of the agrarian peasant society that was Tsarist Russia sparked the “revolutionary nationalism of the poor” to depose theabsolute monarchy of the three-hundred-year Romanov dynasty (1613–1917).[3]

Imperialism

In the course of developing the Russian application of Marxism, the pamphlet Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (1916) presented Lenin’s analysis of an economic development predicted by Karl Marx: that capitalism would become a global financial system, wherein advanced industrial countries export financial capital to their colonial countries, to finance the exploitation of their natural resources and the labour of the native populations. Such superexploitation of the poor (undeveloped) countries allows the wealthy (developed) countries to maintain some homeland workers politically content with a slightly higher standard of living, and so ensure peaceful labour–capital relations in the capitalist homeland. (see: labour aristocracy, globalization) Hence, a proletarian revolution of workers and peasants could not occur in the developed capitalist countries, while the imperialist global-finance system remained intact; thus an underdeveloped country would feature the first proletarian revolution; and, in the early 20th century, Imperial Russia was the politically weakest country in the capitalist global-finance system.[4] In the United States of Europe Slogan (1915), Lenin said:

Workers of the world, unite! — Uneven economic and political development is an absolute law of capitalism. Hence the victory of socialism is possible, first in several, or even in one capitalist country taken separately. The victorious proletariat of that country, having expropriated the capitalists and organised its own socialist production, would stand up against the rest of the world, the capitalist world.

Collected Works, vol. 18, p. 232.[5]

The more powerful enemy can be vanquished only by exerting the utmost effort, and by the most thorough, careful, attentive, skilful and obligatory use of any, even the smallest, rift between the enemies, any conflict of interests among the bourgeoisie of the various countries and among the various groups or types of bourgeoisie within the various countries, and also by taking advantage of any, even the smallest, opportunity of winning a mass ally, even though this ally is temporary, vacillating, unstable, unreliable and conditional. Those who do not understand this reveal a failure to understand even the smallest grain of Marxism, of modern scientific socialism in general. Those who have not proved in practice, over a fairly considerable period of time and in fairly varied political situations, their ability to apply this truth in practice have not yet learned to help the revolutionary class in its struggle to emancipate all toiling humanity from the exploiters. And this applies equally to the period before and after the proletariat has won political power.

Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile Disorder (1920)[6]

Leninist theory

The vanguard party

In Chapter II: “Proletarians and Communists” of The Communist Manifesto (1848), Engels and Marx presented the idea of the vanguard party as solely qualified to politically lead the proletariat in revolution:

The Communists, therefore, are, on the one hand, practically the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the lines of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement. The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: Formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat.

Hence, the purpose of the Leninist vanguard party is to establish a democratic dictatorship of the proletariat; supported by the working class, the vanguard party would lead the revolution to depose the incumbent Tsarist government, and then transfer power of government to the working class, which change of ruling class — from bourgeoisie to proletariat — makes possible the full development of socialism.[7] In the pamphlet What is to be Done? (1902), Lenin proposed that a revolutionary vanguard party, mostly recruited from the working class, should lead the political campaign, because it was the only way that the proletariat could successfully achieve a revolution; unlike the economist campaign of trade-union-struggle advocated by other socialist political parties; and later by the anarcho-syndicalists. Like Karl Marx, Lenin distinguished between the aspects of a revolution, the “economic campaign” (labour strikes for increased wages and work concessions), which featured diffused plural leadership; and the “political campaign” (socialist changes to society), which required the decisive revolutionary leadership of the Bolshevik vanguard party.

Democratic centralism

As epitomised in the slogan “Freedom in Discussion, Unity in Action”, Lenin followed the example of the First International (IWA, International Workingmen’s Association, 1864–1876), and organised the Bolsheviks as a democratically centralised vanguard party, wherein free political-speech was recognised legitimate until policy consensus; afterwards, every member of the Party would be expected to uphold the official policy established in consensus. In the pamphlet Freedom to Criticise and Unity of Action (1905), Lenin said:

Of course, the application of this principle in practice will sometimes give rise to disputes and misunderstandings; but only on the basis of this principle can all disputes and all misunderstandings be settled honourably for the Party…. The principle of democratic centralism and autonomy for local Party organisations implies universal and full freedom to criticise, so long as this does not disturb the unity of a definite action; it rules out all criticism which disrupts or makes difficult the unity of an action decided on by the Party.[8]

Full, inner-party democratic debate was Bolshevik Party practice under Lenin, even after the banning of party factions in 1921. Although a guiding influence in policy, Lenin did not exercise absolute power, and continually debated and discussed to have his point of view accepted. Under Stalin, the inner-party practice of democratic free debate did not continue after the death of Lenin in 1924.

Revolution

Before the Revolution, despite supporting political reform (including Bolsheviks elected to the Duma, when opportune), Lenin proposed that capitalism could ultimately only be overthrown with revolution, not with gradual reforms — from within (Fabianism) and from without (social democracy) — which would fail, because the ruling capitalist social class, who hold economic power (the means of production), determine the nature of political power in a bourgeois society.[9] As epitomised in the slogan, “For a Democratic Dictatorship of the Proletariat and Peasantry”, a revolution in underdeveloped Tsarist Russia required an allied proletariat of town and country (urban workers and peasants), because the urban workers would be too few to successfully assume power in the cities on their own. Moreover, owing to the middle-class aspirations of much of the peasantry, Leon Trotsky proposed that the proletariat should lead the revolution, as the only way for it to be truly socialist and democratic; although Lenin initially disagreed with Trotsky’s formulation, he adopted it before the Russian Revolution in October 1917.

Dictatorship of the proletariat

In the Russian socialist society, government by direct democracy was effected by elected soviets (workers’ councils), which “soviet government” form Lenin described as the manifestation of the Marxist ‘democratic dictatorship of the proletariat’.[10] As political organisations, the soviets would comprise representatives of factory workers’ and trade union committees, but would exclude capitalists, as a social class, in order to ensure the establishment of a proletarian government, by and for the working class and the peasants. About the political disenfranchisement of the Russian capitalist social classes, Lenin said that ‘depriving the exploiters of the franchise is a purely Russian question, and not a question of the dictatorship of the proletariat, in general…. In which countries… democracy for the exploiters will be, in one or another form, restricted… is a question of the specific national features of this or that capitalism’.[11] In chapter five of The State and Revolution(1917) Lenin describes:

…the dictatorship of the proletariat — i.e. the organisation of the vanguard of the oppressed as the ruling class for the purpose of crushing the oppressors…. An immense expansion of democracy, which for the first time becomes democracy for the poor, democracy for the people, and not democracy for the rich:… and suppression by force, i.e. exclusion from democracy, for the exploiters and oppressors of the people — this is the change which democracy undergoes during the ‘transition’ from capitalism to communism.[12]

Soviet constitutionalism was the collective government form of the Russian dictatorship of the proletariat, the opposite of the government form of the dictatorship of capital (privately owned means of production) practised in bourgeois democracies. In the soviet political system, the (Leninist) vanguard party would be one of many political parties competing for elected power.[1][10][13] Nevertheless, the circumstances of the Red vs. White Russian Civil War, and terrorism by the opposing political parties, and in aid of the White Armies’ counter-revolution, led to the Bolshevik government banning other parties; thus, the vanguard party became the sole, legal political party in Russia. Lenin did not regard such political suppression as philosophically inherent to the dictatorship of the proletariat; yet the Stalinists retrospectively claimed that such factional suppression was original to Leninism.[14][15][16]

Democracy for the vast majority of the people, and suppression by force, i.e. exclusion from democracy, of the exploiters and oppressors of the people — this is the change democracy undergoes during the transition from capitalism to communism.

— Lenin, The State and Revolution. Collected Works, Vol. 25, pp.461–462.[17]

Economics

Soviet democracy nationalised industry and established a foreign-trade monopoly to allow the productive co-ordination of the national economy, and so prevent Russian national industries from competing against each other. To feed the populaces of town and country, Lenin instituted War Communism (1918–21) as a necessary condition — adequate supplies of food and weapons — for fighting the Russian Civil War (1917–23).[13] Later, in March 1921, he established the New Economic Policy (NEP, 1921–29), which allowed measures of private commerce, internal free trade, and replaced grain requisitions with an agricultural tax, under the management of State banks. The purpose of the NEP was to resolve food-shortage riots among the peasantry, and allowed measures of private enterprise, wherein the profit motive encouraged the peasants to harvest the crops required to feed the people of town and country; and to economically re-establish the urban working class, who had lost many men (workers) to the counter-revolutionary Civil War.[18][19] With the NEP, the socialist nationalisation of the economy could then be developed to industrialise Russia, strengthen the working class, and raise standards of living; thus the NEP would advance socialism against capitalism. Lenin regarded the appearance of new socialist states in the developed countries as necessary to the strengthening Russia’s economy, and the eventual development of socialism. In that, he was encouraged by the German Revolution of 1918–1919, the Italian insurrection and general strikes of 1920, and industrial unrest in Britain, France, and the U.S.

National self-determination

Lenin recognized and accepted the existence of nationalism among oppressed peoples, advocated their national rights to self-determination, and opposed the ethnic chauvinism of “Greater Russia” because such ethnocentrism was a cultural obstacle to establishing the proletarian dictatorship in the territories of the deposed Tsarist Russian Empire (1721–1917).[20][21] In The Right of Nations to Self-determination (1914), Lenin said:

We fight against the privileges and violence of the oppressor nation, and do not in any way condone strivings for privileges on the part of the oppressed nation…. The bourgeois nationalism of any oppressed nation has a general democratic content that is directed against oppression, and it is this content that we unconditionally support. At the same time, we strictly distinguish it from the tendency towards national exclusiveness…. Can a nation be free if it oppresses other nations? It cannot.[22]

The internationalist philosophies of Bolshevism and of Marxism are based upon class struggle transcending nationalism, ethnocentrism, and religion, which areintellectual obstacles to class consciousness, because the bourgeois ruling classes manipulated said cultural status quo to politically divide the proletarian working classes. To overcome the political barrier of nationalism, Lenin said it was necessary to acknowledge the existence of nationalism among oppressed peoples, and to guarantee their national independence, as the right of secession; and that, based upon national self-determination, it was natural for socialist states to transcend nationalism and form a federation.[23] In The Question of Nationalities, or “Autonomisation” (1923), Lenin said:

…nothing holds up the development and strengthening of proletarian class solidarity so much as national injustice; “offended” nationals are not sensitive to anything, so much as to the feeling of equality, and the violation of this equality, if only through negligence or jest — to the violation of that equality by their proletarian comrades.[24]

Socialist culture

The role of the Marxist vanguard party was to politically educate the workers and peasants to dispel the societal false consciousness of religion and nationalism that constitute the cultural status quo taught by the bourgeoisie to the proletariat to facilitate their economic exploitation of peasant and worker. Influenced by Lenin, the Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party stated that the development of the socialist workers’ culture should not be ‘hamstrung from above’, and opposed theProletkult (1917–25) organisational control of the national culture.[25]

Leninism after 1924

Leon Trotsky (ca. 1929)

In post–Revolutionary Russia, Stalinism (Socialism in one country) and Trotskyism (Permanent world revolution) were the principal philosophies of Communism that claimed legitimate ideological descent from Leninism’ thus, within the Communist Party, each ideological faction denied the political legitimacy of the opposing faction.[26]

Lenin vs. Stalin

Until shortly before his death, Lenin worked to counter the disproportionate political influence of Joseph Stalin in the Communist Party and in the bureaucracy of the soviet government, partly because of abuses he had committed against the populace of Georgia, and partly because the autocratic Stalin had accumulated administrative power disproportionate to his office of General Secretary of the Communist Party.[27][28] The counter-action against Stalin aligned with Lenin’s advocacy of the right of self-determination for the national and ethnic groups of the former Tsarist Empire, which was a key theoretic concept of Leninism.[28] Lenin warned that Stalin has “unlimited authority concentrated in his hands, and I am not sure whether he will always be capable of using that authority with sufficient caution”, and formed a factional bloc with Leon Trotsky to remove Stalin as the General Secretary of the Communist Party.[16][29] To that end followed proposals reducing the administrative powers of Party posts, in order to reduce bureaucratic influence upon the policies of the Communist Party. Lenin advised Trotsky to emphasize Stalin’s recent bureaucratic alignment in such matters (e.g. undermining the anti-bureaucratic Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspection), and argued to depose Stalin as General Secretary. Despite advice to refuse “any rotten compromise”, Trotsky did not heed Lenin’s advice, and General Secretary Stalin retained power over the Communist Party and the bureaucracy of the soviet government.[16]

Trotskyism vs. Stalinism

After Lenin’s death (21 January 1924), Trotsky ideologically battled the influence of Stalin, who formed ruling blocs within the Russian Communist Party (withGrigory Zinoviev and Lev Kamenev, then with Nikolai Bukharin, and then by himself) and so determined soviet government policy from 1924 onwards. The ruling blocs continually denied Stalin’s opponents the right to organise as an opposition faction within the Party — thus, the re-instatement of democratic centralism and free speech within the Communist Party were key arguments of Trotsky’s Left Opposition, and the later Joint Opposition.[16][30]

In the course of instituting government policy, Stalin promoted the doctrine of Socialism in One Country (adopted 1925), wherein the USSR would establishsocialism upon Russia’s economic foundations (and support socialist revolutions elsewhere). Conversely, Trotsky held that socialism in one country would economically constrain the industrial development of the USSR, and thus required assistance from the new socialist countries that had arisen in the developed world, which was essential for maintaining Soviet democracy, in 1924 much undermined by civil war and counter-revolution. Furthermore, Trotsky’s theory ofPermanent Revolution proposed that socialist revolutions in underdeveloped countries would go further towards dismantling feudal régimes, and establish socialist democracies that would not pass through a capitalist stage of development and government. Hence, revolutionary workers should politically ally with peasant political organisations, but not with capitalist political parties. In contrast, Stalin and allies proposed that alliances with capitalist political parties were essential to realising a revolution where Communists were too few; said Stalinist practice failed, especially in the Northern Expedition portion of the Chinese Revolution (1925–1927), wherein it resulted in the right-wing Kuomintang’s massacre of the Chinese Communist Party; nonetheless, despite the failure, Stalin’s policy of mixed-ideology political alliances, became Comintern policy.

The Oppositionists

Until exiled from Russia in 1929, Leon Trotsky helped develop and led the Left Opposition (and the later Joint Opposition) with members of the Workers’ Opposition, the Decembrists, and (later) the Zinovievists.[16] Trotskyism ideologically predominated the political platform of the Left Opposition, which demanded the restoration of soviet democracy, the expansion of democratic centralism in the Communist Party, national industrialisation, international permanent revolution, and socialist internationalism. The Trotskyist demands countered Stalin’s political dominance of the Russian Communist Party, which was officially characterised by the ‘cult of Lenin’, the rejection of permanent revolution, and the doctrine of Socialism in One Country. The Stalinist economic policy vacillated between appeasing capitalistkulak interests in the countryside, and destroying them. Initially, the Stalinists also rejected the national industrialisation of Russia, but then pursued it in full, sometimes brutally. In both cases, the Left Opposition denounced the regressive nature of the policy towards the kulak social class of wealthy peasants, and the brutality of forced industrialisation. Trotsky described the vacillating Stalinist policy as a symptom of the undemocratic nature of a ruling bureaucracy.[31]

During the 1920s and the 1930s, Stalin fought and defeated the political influence of Leon Trotsky and of the Trotskyists in Russia, by means of slander, anti-Semitism, programmed censorship, expulsions, exile (internal and external), and imprisonment. The anti–Trotsky campaign culminated in the executions (official and unofficial) of the Moscow Trials (1936–38), which were part of the Great Purge of Old Bolsheviks (who had led the Revolution).[16][32] Once established as ruler of the USSR, General Secretary Stalin re-titled the official Socialism in One Country doctrine as “Marxism-Leninism”, to establish ideologic continuity with Leninism, whilst opponents continued calling it “Stalinism”.

Philosophic successors

In political practice, Leninism (vanguard-party revolution), despite its origin as Communist revolutionary praxis, was adopted throughout the political spectrum.

  • The People’s Action Party (PAP) of Singapore was originally organized on Leninist lines, with internal democracy, and initiated a legacy of single-party dominance over the government that continues to the present.[34]

In turn, Maoism became the theoretical basis of some third world revolutionary vanguard parties, such as the Communist Party of Peru – Red Fatherland and others.[35]

Criticism

In several works, including an essay written from jail and published posthumously by her last companion, Paul Levi (publication of which precipitated his expulsion from the Third International) titled “The Russian Revolution”,[36] the Marxist Rosa Luxemburg sharply criticized some Bolshevik policies, such as their suppression of the Constituent Assembly in January 1918, their support for the partition of the old feudal estates to the peasant communes, and their policy of supporting the purported right of all national peoples to “self-determination.” According to Luxemburg, the Bolsheviks’ strategic mistakes created tremendous dangers for the Revolution, such as its bureaucratisation.

Left communism is the range of communist viewpoints held by the communist left, which criticizes the political ideas of the Bolsheviks at certain periods, from a position that is asserted to be more authentically Marxist and proletarian than the views of Leninism held by the Communist International after its first and during its second congress. Proponents of left communism have included Amadeo Bordiga, Herman Gorter, Anton Pannekoek, Otto Rühle, Sylvia Pankhurst and Paul Mattick.[37] “Left-Wing” Communism: An Infantile Disorder is a work by Vladimir Lenin attacking assorted critics of the Bolsheviks who claimed positions to their left.

Critics of Lenin, such as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Noam Chomsky, have argued that Stalinism (i.e., a political system which includes forced collectivization, apolice state, a totalitarian political ideology, forced labor camps and mass executions) was not a deviation from Lenin’s policies, but merely a logical extension of them.[38][39]

“The “call-up of 1937” was very loquacious, and having access to the press and radio created the “legend of 1937”, a legend consisting of two points: 1) If they arrested people at all under the Soviet government, it was only in 1937, and it is necessary to speak out and be indignant only about 1937; 2) In 1937 they were the only ones arrested. Here’s what they write: “That terrible year when they arrested the most devout Communist executives: Secretaries of the Central Committees of the Union Republics, Secretaries of the Provincial Party Committees, Chairmen of the Provincial Executive Committees; all the commanders of the military districts, marshals and generals; provincial prosecutors; Secretaries of District Party Committees…” At the very beginning of our book, we gave a conspectus of the waves pouring into the Archipelago [labor camps] during the two decades up to 1937. How long all that dragged on! And how many millions there were! But the future call-up of 1937 didn’t bat an eye and found it all normal…. And for a long time after, as they became convinced of the irrevocability of their fate, they sighed and groaned, “If only Lenin were alive, this would never have happened!” What did they mean by this? Was it not precisely this that had happened to the others before them?” Aleksander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago, Vol. 2, p. 328

See also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leninism

Vladimir Lenin

“Lenin” redirects here. For other uses, see Lenin (disambiguation).
This name uses Eastern Slavic naming customs; the patronymic is Ilyich and the family name is Ulyanov.
Vladimir Lenin

Владимир Ленин
Lenin.jpg
Lenin in 1920
Chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars of the Soviet Union(Premier of the Soviet Union)
In office30 December 1922 – 21 January 1924
Preceded by Position created
Succeeded by Alexei Rykov
Chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars of the Russian SFSR
In office8 November 1917 – 21 January 1924
Preceded by Position created
Succeeded by Alexei Rykov
Full member of the Politburo
In office10 October 1917 – 21 January 1924
Legislature 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th,12th
Full member of the Central Committee
In office3 August 1917 – 21 January 1924
Committee 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th,12th
In office27 April 1905 – 19 May 1907
Committee 3rd
Personal details
Born Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Владимир Ильич Ульянов)22 April 1870

Simbirsk, Russian Empire

Died 21 January 1924 (aged 53)Gorki, Russian SFSR, Soviet Union
Resting place Lenin’s Mausoleum, Moscow,Russian Federation
Nationality SovietRussian
Political party Socialist Revolutionary Party(1893–1898)

Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks)

(1898–1912)

Russian Communist Party

(1912–1924)

Spouse(s) Nadezhda Krupskaya(married 1898–1924)
Occupation Revolutionary, politician
Profession Lawyer
Religion None
Other names Lenin, Nikolai, N. Lenin, V. I. Lenin, Peterburzhets, Starik, Ilyin, Frei, Petrov, Maier, Iordanov, Jacob Richter, Karpov, Mueller, Tulin[1]
Signature

Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Russian: Влади́мир Ильи́ч Улья́нов; IPA: [vlɐˈdʲimʲɪr ɪˈlʲitɕ ʊˈlʲanəf]), alias Lenin(/ˈlɛnɪn/;[2]Russian: Ле́нин; IPA: [ˈlʲenʲɪn]) (22 April [O.S. 10 April] 1870 – 21 January 1924) was a Russian communistrevolutionary, politician and political theorist. He served as head of government of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic from 1917, and of the Soviet Union from 1922 until his death. Under his administration, the Russian Empire was replaced by the Soviet Union; all wealth including land, industry and business was nationalized. Based inMarxism, his political theories are known as Leninism.

Born to a wealthy middle-class family in Simbirsk, Lenin gained an interest in revolutionary leftist politics following the execution of his brother Aleksandr in 1887. Expelled from Kazan State University for participating in anti-Tsarist protests, he devoted the following years to a law degree and to radical politics, becoming a Marxist. In 1893 he moved to Saint Petersburg, and became a senior figure in the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP). Arrested for sedition and exiled to Siberia for three years, he married Nadezhda Krupskaya, and fled to Western Europe, where he became known as a prominent party theorist. In 1903, he took a key role in the RSDLP schism, leading the Bolshevikfaction against Julius Martov‘s Mensheviks. Briefly returning to Russia during the Revolution of 1905, he encouraged violent insurrection and later campaigned for the First World War to be transformed into a Europe-wide proletariat revolution. After the 1917 February Revolution ousted the Tsar, he returned to Russia.

Lenin, along with Leon Trotsky, played a senior role in orchestrating the October Revolution in 1917, which led to the overthrow of the Provisional Government and the establishment of the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic. Lenin was elected to the position of the head of government by the All-Russian Congress of Soviets.[3] Under Lenin’s leadership the new government nationalized the estates and crown lands. Homosexuality and abortion were legalized;[4] Lenin’s Russia was the first country in the world to establish both of these rights.[5] Free access was being given to both abortion and birth control.[6] No-fault divorce was also legalized, along with universal free healthcare[7]and free education being established.[8] The Bolsheviks fought in the Russian Civil War during which Lenin’s government carried out the Red Terror. The civil war resulted in millions of deaths. Lenin supported world revolutionand immediate peace with the Central Powers, agreeing to a punitive treaty that turned over a significant portion of the former Russian Empire to Germany. The treaty was voided after the Allies won the war. In 1921 Lenin proposed theNew Economic Policy, a mixed economic system of state capitalism that started the process of industrialisation and recovery from the Civil War. In 1922, the Russian SFSR joined former territories of the Russian Empire in becoming the Soviet Union, with Lenin as its head of government. Only 13 months later, after being incapacitated by a series of strokes, Lenin died at his home in Gorki.

After his death, there was a struggle for power in the Soviet Union between two major factions, namely Stalin‘s and theLeft Opposition (with Trotsky as de facto leader). Eventually, Stalin, whom Lenin distrusted and wanted removed,[9]came to power and eliminated any opposition.

Lenin remains a controversial and highly divisive world figure.[10] Lenin had a significant influence on the international Communist movement and was one of the most influential and controversial figures of the 20th century. Admirers view him as a champion of working people’s rights and welfare whilst critics see him as a dictator who carried out mass human rights abuses. Historian J. Arch Getty has remarked that “Lenin deserves a lot of credit for the notion that the meek can inherit the earth, that there can be a political movement based on social justice and equality”, while one of his biographers, Robert Service, says he “laid the foundations of dictatorship and lawlessness. Lenin had consolidated the principle of state penetration of the whole society, its economy and its culture. Lenin had practised terror and advocated revolutionary amoralism.”[11]Time magazine named Lenin one of the 100 most important people of the 20th century,[12] and one of their top 25 political icons of all time; remarking that “for decades, Marxist–Leninist rebellions shook the world while Lenin’s embalmed corpse lay in repose in the Red Square“.[13] Following the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, reverence for Lenin declined among the post-Soviet generations, yet he remains an important historical figure for the Soviet-era generations.[14]

Early life

Childhood: 1870–87

“Volodya”, aged four.

Lenin’s father, Ilya Nikolayevich Ulyanov, born to a Chuvash family,[15] came from a serf background but had studied physics and maths at Kazan State University, going to teach at the Penza Institute for the Nobility.[16] Lenin’s great-grandfather was a serf, and he married Anna Alexeevna Smirnova, a baptized Kalmyk.[17] He was introduced to Maria Alexandrovna Blank; they married in the summer of 1863.[18] Hailing from a relatively prosperous background, Maria was the daughter of a Russian Jewish physician, Alexander Dmitrievich Blank, and his GermanSwedish wife, Anna Ivanovna Grosschopf. Dr. Blank had insisted on providing his children with a good education, ensuring that Maria learned Russian, German, English and French, and that she was well versed inRussian literature.[19] Soon after their wedding, Ilya obtained a job in Nizhni Novgorod, rising to become Director of Primary Schools in the Simbirsk district six years later. Five years after that, he was promoted to Director of Public Schools for the province, overseeing the foundation of over 450 schools as a part of the government’s plans for modernisation. Awarded the Order of St. Vladimir, he became a hereditary nobleman.[20]

The couple, now nobility, had two children, Anna (born 1864) and Alexander (born 1868), before Vladimir “Volodya” Ilyich was born on 10 April 1870, and baptised in St. Nicholas Cathedral several days later. They would be followed by three more children, Olga (born 1871), Dmitry (born 1874) and Maria (born 1878). Another brother, Nikolai, had died in infancy in 1873.[21] Ilya was a devout member of the Russian Orthodox Church and baptised his children into it, although Maria – a Lutheran – was largely indifferent to Christianity, a view that influenced her children.[22] Both parents were monarchists and liberal conservatives, being committed to the emancipation reform of 1861 introduced by the reformist Tsar Alexander II; they avoided political radicals and there is no evidence that the police ever put them under surveillance for subversive thought.[23]

Every summer they holidayed at a rural manor in Kokushkino.[24] Among his siblings, Vladimir was closest to his sister Olga, whom he bossed around, having an extremely competitive nature; he could be destructive, but usually admitted his misbehaviour.[25] A keen sportsman, he spent much of his free time outdoors or playing chess, and excelled at school, the disciplinarian and conservative Simbirsk Classical Gimnazia.[26]

Ilya Ulyanov died of a brain haemorrhage in January 1886, when Vladimir was 16.[27] Vladimir’s behaviour became erratic and confrontational, and shortly thereafter he renounced his belief in God.[28] At the time, Vladimir’s elder brother Aleksandr (Sacha) Ulyanov was studying at Saint Petersburg University. Involved in political agitation against the absolute monarchy of reactionary Tsar Alexander III which governed the Russian Empire, he studied the writings of banned leftists like Dmitry Pisarev, Nikolay Dobrolyubov, Nikolay Chernyshevsky and Karl Marx. Organising protests against the government, he joined a socialist revolutionary cell bent on assassinating the Tsar and was selected to construct a bomb. Before the attack commenced, the conspirators were arrested and tried. On 25 April 1887, Sacha was sentenced to death by hanging, and executed on 8 May.[29] Despite the emotional trauma brought on by his father and brother’s deaths, Vladimir continued studying, leaving school with a gold medal for his exceptional performance, and decided to study law at Kazan University.[30]

University and political radicalism: 1887–93

Lenin, c. 1887.

Entering Kazan University in August 1887, Vladimir and his mother moved into a flat, renting out their Simbirsk home.[31] Interested in his late brother’s radical ideas, he joined an agrarian-socialist revolutionary cell intent on reviving the People’s Freedom Party(Narodnaya Volya). Joining the university’s illegal Samara-Simbirsk zemlyachestvo, he was elected as its representative for the university’s zemlyachestvo council.[32] In December he took part in a demonstration demanding the abolition of the 1884 statute and the re-legalisation of student societies, but was arrested by the police. Accused of being a ringleader, the university expelled him and the Ministry of Internal Affairs placed him under surveillance, exiling him to his Kokushkino estate.[33] Here, he read voraciously, becoming enamoured with Chernyshevsky’s 1863 novel What is to be Done?.[34] Disliking his radicalism, in September 1888 his mother persuaded him to write to the Interior Ministry to request permission for studying abroad; they refused, but allowed him to return to Kazan, where he settled on the Pervaya Gora with his mother and brother Dmitry.[35]

In Kazan, he joined another revolutionary circle, through which he discovered Karl Marx’s Das Kapital (1867). It exerted a strong influence on him, and he grew increasingly interested in Marxism.[36] Wary of his political views, his mother bought an estate in Alakaevka village, Samara Oblast – made famous in the work of poet Gleb Uspensky, of whom Lenin was a great fan – in the hope that her son would turn his attention to agriculture. Here, he studied peasant life and the poverty they faced, but remained unpopular as locals stole his farm equipment and livestock, causing his mother to sell the farm.[37]

In September 1889, the Ulyanovs moved to Samara for the winter. Here, Vladimir contacted exiled dissidents and joined Alexei P. Skliarenko‘s discussion circle. Both Vladimir and Skliarenko adopted Marxism, with Vladimir translating Marx and Friedrich Engels‘ 1848 political pamphlet, The Communist Manifesto, into Russian. He began to read the works of the Russian Marxist Georgi Plekhanov, a founder of the Black Repartition movement, concurring with Plekhanov’s argument that Russia was moving from feudalism to capitalism. Becoming increasingly sceptical of the effectiveness of militant attacks and assassinations, he argued against such tactics in a December 1889 debate with M.V. Sabunaev, an advocate of the People’s Freedom Party. Despite disagreeing on tactics, he made friends among the Party, in particular with Apollon Shukht, who asked Vladimir to be his daughter’s godfather in 1893.[38]

In May 1890, Mariya convinced the authorities to allow Vladimir to undertake his exams externally at a university of his choice. Choosing the University of St Petersburg and obtaining the equivalent of a first-class degree with honours, celebrations were marred when his sister Olga died of typhoid.[39] Vladimir remained in Samara for several years, in January 1892 being employed as a legal assistant for a regional court, before gaining a job with a local lawyer. Embroiled primarily in disputes between peasants and artisans, he devoted much time to radical politics, remaining active in Skylarenko’s group and formulating ideas about Marxism’s applicability to Russia. Inspired by Plekhanov’s work, Vladimir collected data on Russian society, using it to support a Marxist interpretation of societal development and increasingly rejecting the claims of the People’s Freedom Party.[40] In the spring of 1893, Lenin wrote a paper, “New Economic Developments in Peasant Life”; submitted to the liberal journal Russian Thought, it was rejected and only published in 1927.[41] In the autumn of 1893, Lenin wrote another article, “On the So-Called Market Question”, a critique of Russian economist G. B. Krasin.[42]

Revolutionary activities

Early activism and imprisonment: 1893–1900

In autumn 1893, Lenin moved to Saint Petersburg.[43] There, he worked as a barrister’s assistant to M.F.Wolkenstein [44] and rose to a senior position in a Marxist revolutionary cell who called themselves the “Social Democrats” after the Marxist Social Democratic Party of Germany.[45] Publicly championing Marxism among the socialist movement,[46] he encouraged the foundation of revolutionary cells in Russia’s industrial centres.[47] He befriended Russian Jewish Marxist Julius Martov,[48]and began a relationship with Marxist schoolteacher Nadezhda “Nadya” Krupskaya.[49] By autumn 1894 he was leading a Marxist workers’ circle, and was meticulous in covering his tracks, knowing that police spies were trying to infiltrate the revolutionary movement.[50]

Lenin (left) in December 1895 and his wife Nadezhda.

Although he was influenced by agrarian-socialist Pëtr Tkachëvi,[51] Lenin’s Social-Democrats clashed with theNarodnik agrarian-socialist platform of the Socialist–Revolutionary Party (SR). The SR saw the peasantry as the main force of revolutionary change, whereas the Marxists believed peasants to be sympathetic to private ownership, instead emphasising the revolutionary role of the proletariat.[52] He dealt with some of these issues in his first political tract, What the “Friends of the People” Are and How They Fight the Social-Democrats; based largely on his experiences in Samara, around 200 copies were illegally printed.[53]

Lenin hoped to cement connections between his Social-Democrats and the Swiss-based Emancipation of Labour group of Russian Marxist emigres like Pleckhanov, travelling to Geneva to meet the latter,[54] before heading to Zurich, where he befriended another member, Pavel Axelrod.[55] Proceeding to Paris, France, Vladimir met Paul Lafargue and researched the Paris Commune of 1871, which he saw as an early prototype for a proletarian government.[56] Financed by his mother, he stayed in a Swiss health spa before traveling to Berlin, Germany, where he studied for six weeks at the Staatsbibliothek and met Wilhelm Liebknecht.[57]Returning to Russia with a stash of illegal revolutionary publications, he traveled to various cities distributing literature to striking workers in Saint Petersburg.[58] Involved in producing a news sheet, The Workers’ Cause, he was among 40 activists arrested and charged with sedition.[59]

Imprisoned and refused legal representation, Vladimir denied all charges. He was refused bail and remained imprisoned for a year before sentencing.[60] He spent the time theorising and writing, focusing his attention on the revolutionary potential of the working-class; believing that the rise of industrial capitalism had led large numbers of peasants to move to the cities, he argued that they became proletariat and gained class consciousness, which would lead them to violently overthrowTsarism, the aristocracy, and the bourgeoisie.[60]

In February 1897, he was sentenced without trial to 3 years exile in eastern Siberia, although given a few days in Saint Petersburg to put his affairs in order; he met with the Social-Democrats, who had been renamed the League of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class.[61] His journey to eastern Siberia took 11 weeks, for much of which he was accompanied by his mother and sisters. Considered a minor threat, Vladimir was exiled to Shushenskoye in the Minusinsky District. Renting a room in a peasant’s hut, he remained under police surveillance, but corresponded with other subversives, many of whom visited him, and also went on trips to hunt duck and snipe and to swim in the Yenisei River.[62]

In May 1898, Nadya joined him in exile, having been arrested in August 1896 for organising a strike. Although initially posted to Ufa, she convinced the authorities to move her to Shushenskoye, claiming that she and Vladimir were engaged; they married in a church on 10 July 1898.[63] Settling into a family life with Nadya’s mother Elizaveta Vasilyevna, the couple translated English socialist literature into Russian.[64] Keen to keep abreast of the developments in German Marxism – where there had been an ideological split, with revisionists like Eduard Bernstein advocating a peaceful, electoral path to socialism – Vladimir remained devoted to violent revolution, attacking revisionist arguments in A Protest by Russian Social-Democrats.[65] Vladimir also finished The Development of Capitalism in Russia(1899), his longest book to date, which offered a well-researched and polemical attack on the Social-Revolutionaries and promoting a Marxist analysis of Russian economic development. Published under the pseudonym of “Vladimir Ilin”, it received predominantly poor reviews upon publication.[66]

Munich, London and Geneva: 1900–05

The first issue of Iskra (“Spark”), official organ of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party. Edited by Lenin from his base in Geneva, Switzerland, copies would be smuggled into Russia, where it would prove successful in winning support for the Marxist revolutionary cause.

His exile over, Vladimir settled in Pskov,[67] and began raising funds for a newspaper, Iskra (The Spark), a new organ of the Russian Marxist movement, now calling itself the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party(RSDLP). In July 1900, Vladimir left Russia for Western Europe; in Switzerland he met other Russian Marxists, and at a Corsier conference they agreed to launch the paper from Munich, where Lenin relocated in September.[68]Iskra was smuggled into Russia illegally, becoming the most successful underground publication for 50 years, and containing contributions from prominent European Marxists Rosa Luxemburg, Karl Kautsky, and Leon Trotsky.[69] Vladimir adopted the nom de guerre of “Lenin” in December 1901, possibly taking theRiver Lena as a basis,.[70]

He published a political pamphlet What Is to Be Done? under the “Lenin” pseudonym in 1902. His most influential publication to date, it dealt with Lenin’s thoughts on the need for a vanguard party to lead the proletariat to revolution.[71]Lars Lih, who has a totally different reading, says that historians interpreting the pamphlet typically follow “three mutually reinforcing strands”:

The first is that the essence of Lenin’s outlook is his loss of confidence in the workers and his fear of their “spontaneity” (“stikhiinost”). Lenin’s hard-eyed realism about the incapacity of the workers, combined with his own fanatical will to revolution, gave birth to the idea of a party based on “professional revolutionaries” from the intelligentsia. Second, Lenin’s outlook is a profound revision of orthodox Marxism. “Lenin is quite ready to reinterpret Marx, while claiming, of course, that he is merely following the letter of the doctrine.” Third, the book where this profound innovation is set forth “What Is to Be Done?” is the founding document of Bolshevism.[72]

Nadya joined Lenin in Munich, becoming his personal secretary.[73] They continued their political agitation, with Lenin writing for Iskra and drafting the RSDLP program, attacking ideological dissenters and external critics, particularly the SR.[74] Despite remaining an orthodox Marxist, he came to accept the SR’s views on the revolutionary power of the Russian peasantry, penning the 1903 pamphlet To the Village Poor.[75] To evade Bavarian police, Lenin relocated to London withIskra in April 1902.[76] Here he became good friends with Trotsky, who also arrived in the city.[77] While in London, Lenin fell ill with erysipelas and was unable to take such a leading role on the Iskra editorial board; in his absence the board moved the base of operations to Switzerland.[78]

The 2nd RSDLP Congress was held in London in July.[79] At the conference, a schism emerged between Lenin’s supporters and those of Julius Martov. Martov argued that party members should be able to express themselves independently of the party leadership; Lenin disagreed, emphasising the need for a strong leadership with complete control.[80] Lenin’s supporters were in the majority, and Lenin termed them the “majoritarians” (bol’sheviki in Russian; thus Bolsheviks); in response, Martov termed his followers the minoritarians (men’sheviki in Russian; thus Mensheviks).[81] Arguments between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks continued after the conference. The Bolsheviks accused their rivals of being opportunists and reformists who lacked any discipline, while the Mensheviks accused Lenin of being a despot and autocrat.[82] Enraged at the Mensheviks, Lenin resigned from the Iskra editorial board and in May 1904 published the anti-Menshevik tract One Step Forward, Two Steps Back.[83] The stress made Lenin ill,[84] and he escaped on a rural climbing holiday.[85] The Bolshevik faction grew in strength; by the spring, the whole RSDLP Central Committee was Bolshevik,[86] and in December, they founded the newspaper Vperëd (Forward).[87]

The 1905 Revolution: 1905–07

“The uprising has begun. Force against Force. Street fighting is raging, barricades are being thrown up, rifles are cracking, guns are booming. Rivers of blood are flowing, the civil war for freedom is blazing up. Moscow and the South, the Caucasus and Poland are ready to join the proletariat of St. Petersburg. The slogan of the workers has become: Death or Freedom!”

Lenin, 1905[88]

In January 1905, the Bloody Sunday massacre of protesters in St. Petersburg sparking a spate of civil unrest known as the Revolution of 1905.[89] Lenin urged Bolsheviks to take a greater role in the unrest, encouraging violent insurrection.[90] He insisted that the Bolsheviks split completely with the Mensheviks, although many Bolsheviks refused, and both groups attended the 3rd RSDLP Congress, held in London in April 1905.[91] Lenin presented many of his ideas in the pamphlet Two Tactics of Social Democracy in the Democratic Revolution, published in August 1905. Here, he predicted that the liberal bourgeoisie would be sated by a constitutional monarchy and thus betray the revolution; instead he argued that the proletariat would have to build an alliance with the peasantry to overthrow the Tsarist regime and establish the “provisional revolutionary democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry”.[92] He used many SR slogans – “armed insurrection”, “mass terror”, and “the expropriation of gentry land” – further shocking the Mensheviks, who believed he had departed from orthodox Marxism.[93]

After Tsar Nicholas II accepted a series of liberal reforms in his October Manifesto, Lenin believed it safer to return to St. Petersburg, arriving incognito.[94] Joining the editorial board of Novaya Zhizn (New Life), a radical legal newspaper run by Maxim Gorky‘s wife Maria Andreyeva, he used it to discuss issues facing the RSDLP.[95] He encouraged the party to seek out a much wider membership, and advocated the continual escalation of violent confrontation, believing both to be necessary for the revolution to succeed.[96] Although he briefly began to support the idea of reconciliation between Bolsheviks and Mensheviks,[97] at the 4th Party Congress in Stockholm, Sweden in April 1906 the Mensheviks condemned Lenin for supporting bank robberies and encouraging violence.[98]

Lenin’s factionalism led him to split with Julius Martov (left) and the Mensheviks, and thenAlexander Bogdanov (right) within the Bolshevik faction

A Bolshevik Centre was set up in Kuokkala, Grand Duchy of Finland, which was then a semi-autonomous part of the Empire,[99] before the 5th RSDLP Congress was held in London in May 1907, where the Bolsheviks regained dominance within the party.[100] However, as the Tsarist government disbanded the Second Duma and the Okhrana cracked down on revolutionaries, Lenin decided to flee Finland for Sweden, undertaking much of the journey by foot. From there, he made it to Switzerland.[101]Alexander Bogdanov and other prominent Bolsheviks decided to relocate the Bolshevik Centre to Paris, France; although Lenin disagreed, he moved to the city in December 1908.[102] Lenin disliked Paris, lambasting it as “a foul hole”, and sued a motorist who knocked him off his bike while there.[103]

Here, Lenin revived his polemics against the Mensheviks,[104] who objected to his advocacy of violent expropriations and thefts such as the 1907 Tiflis bank robbery, which the Bolsheviks were using to fund their activities.[105] Lenin also became heavily critical of Bogdanov and his supporters; Bogdanov believed that a socialist-oriented culture had to be developed among Russia’s proletariat for them to become a successful revolutionary vehicle, whereas Lenin favoured a vanguard of socialist intelligentsia who could lead the working-classes in revolution. Furthermore, Bogdanov – influenced by Ernest Mach – believed that all concepts of the world were relative, whereas Lenin stuck to the orthodox Marxist view that there was an objective reality to the world, independent of human observation.[106]Although Bogdanov and Lenin went on a holiday together to Gorky’s villa in Capri, Italy, in April 1908,[107] on returning to Paris, Lenin encouraged a split within the Bolshevik faction between his and Bogdanov’s followers, accusing the latter of deviating from Marxism.[108]

He lived briefly in London in May 1908, where he used the British Museum library to write Materialism and Empirio-criticism, an attack on Bogdanov’s relativist perspective, which he lambasted as a “bourgeois-reactionary falsehood”.[109] Increasing numbers of Bolsheviks, including close Lenin supporters Alexei Rykov andLev Kamenev, were becoming angry with Lenin’s factionalism.[110] The Okhrana recognised Lenin’s factionalist attitude and deemed it damaging to the RSDLP, thereby sending a spy, Roman Malinovsky, to become a vocal supporter and ally of Lenin within the party. It is possible that Lenin was aware of Malinowsky’s allegiance, and used him to feed false information to the Okhrana, and many Bolsheviks had expressed their suspicions that he was a spy to Lenin. However, he informed Gorky many years later that “I never saw through that scoundrel Malinowsky.”[111]

In August 1910 Lenin attended the 8th Congress of the Second International in Copenhagen, where he represented the RSDLP on the International Bureau, before going to Stockholm, where he holidayed with his mother; the last time that he would see her alive.[112] Lenin moved with his wife and sisters to Bombon in Seine-et-Marne, although 5 weeks later moved back to Paris, settling in the Rue Marie-Rose.[113] In France, Lenin became friends with the French Bolshevik Inessa Armand; they remained close from 1910 through to 1912, and some biographers believe that they had an extra-marital affair, although this remains unproven.[114] He also set up a RSDLP school at Longjumeau where he lectured Russian recruits on a variety of topics in May 1911.[115] Meanwhile, at a Paris meeting in June 1911 the RSDLP Central Committee decided to draw the focus of operations from Paris and back to Russia; they ordered the closure of the Bolshevik Centre and its newspaper, Proletari.[116] Seeking to rebuild his influence in the party, Lenin arranged for a party conference to be held in Prague in January 1912, aided by his supporter Sergo Ordzhonikidze. 16 of the 18 attendants were Bolsheviks, but they heavily criticised Lenin for his factionalism, and lost much personal authority.[117]

Desiring to be closer to Russia as the emigrant community were becoming decreasingly influential, Lenin moved to Krakow in the Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria, a culturally Polish part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. He liked the city, and used the library at Jagellonian University to conduct his ongoing research.[118] From here, he was able to stay in close contact with the RSDLP operating in the Russian Empire, with members often visiting him, and he convinced the Bolshevik members of the Duma to split from their alliance with Menshevik members.[119] In January 1913, Stalin – whom Lenin referred to as the “wonderful Georgian” – came to visit, with the pair discussing the future of non-Russian ethnic groups in the Empire.[120] Due to the ailing health of both Lenin and his wife, they moved to the rural area of Biały Dunajec.[121] Nadya required surgery on her goiter, with Lenin taking her to Bern, Switzerland, to have it undertaken by the expensive specialist Theodor Kocher.[122]

First World War: 1914–17

“The [First World] war is being waged for the division of colonies and the robbery of foreign territory; thieves have fallen out–and to refer to the defeats at a given moment of one of the thieves in order to identify the interests of all thieves with the interests of the nation or the fatherland is an unconscionable bourgeois lie.”

Lenin[123]

Lenin was back in Galicia when the First World War broke out.[124] The war pitted the Russian Empire against the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and due to his Russian citizenship, Lenin was arrested and briefly imprisoned until his anti-tsarist credentials were explained.[125] Lenin and his wife moved to Bern, Switzerland,[126] relocating to Zurich in February 1916.[127] Lenin was angry that the German Social-Democratic Party had supported the German war effort, thereby contravening the Stuttgart resolution of the Second International that socialist parties would oppose the conflict. As a result, Lenin saw the Second International as defunct.[128] Lenin attended the Zimmerwald Conference in September 1915, and the Kiental conference in April 1916,[129] urging socialists across the continent to convert the “imperialist war” into a continent-wide “civil war” with the proletariat against the bourgeoisie and aristocracy.[130] He hoped the German army would greatly weaken the Tsarist regime in Russia, thereby allowing the proletariat revolution to succeed.[131]

Lenin with Swedish socialists Ture Nerman and Carl Lindhagen in Stockholm, March 1917

Lenin wrote Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, in which he argued that imperialism was a product of monopoly capitalism, as capitalists sought to increase their profits by extending into new territories where wages were lower and raw materials cheaper. He believed that competition and conflict would increase and that war between the imperialist powers would continue until they were overthrown by proletariat revolution and socialism established. It would be published in September 1917.[132]

Lenin devoted much time to reading the works of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Ludwig Feuerbach, and Aristotle, all of whom had been key influences on Marx.[133] In doing so he rejected his earlier interpretations of Marxism; whereas he had once believed that policies could be developed on the basis of predetermined scientific principles, he now believed that the only test of whether a practice was right or not was through practice.[134] Although still perceiving himself as an orthodox Marxist, he began to divert from some of Marx’s predictions regarding societal development; whereas Marx had believed that a “bourgeoisie-democratic revolution” of the middle-classes had to take place before a “socialist revolution” of the proletariat, Lenin believed that in Russia, the proletariat could overthrow the Tsarist regime without the intermediate revolution.[135] In July 1916, Lenin’s mother died, although he was unable to attend her funeral.[136] Her death deeply affected him, and he became depressed, fearing that he would not live long enough to witness the socialist revolution.[137]

Consolidating power

February Revolution

Main article: February Revolution

Vilén, Lenin bewigged and clean shaven, Finland, 11 August 1917

In February 1917 popular demonstrations in Russia provoked by the hardship of war forced Tsar Nicholas II to abdicate. The monarchy was replaced by an uneasy political relationship between, on the one hand, a Provisional Government of parliamentary figures and, on the other, an array of “Soviets” (most prominently the Petrograd Soviet): revolutionary councils directly elected by workers, soldiers and peasants. Lenin was still in exile in Zurich.

Lenin was preparing to go to the Altstadt library after lunch on 15 March when a fellow exile, the Pole Mieczyslav Bronski, burst in to exclaim: “Haven’t you heard the news? There’s a revolution in Russia!” The next day Lenin wrote to Alexandra Kollontai in Stockholm, insisting on “revolutionary propaganda, agitation and struggle with the aim of an international proletarian revolution and for the conquest of power by the Soviets of Workers’ Deputies”. The next day: “Spread out! Rouse new sections! Awaken fresh initiative, form new organisations in every stratum and prove to them that peace can come only with the armed Soviet of Workers’ Deputies in power.”[138]

Lenin was determined to return to Russia at once. But that was not an easy task in the middle of World War I. Switzerland was surrounded by the warring countries of France, Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy, and the seas were dominated by Russia’s ally Britain. Air travel was suggested, but no suitable aircraft existed with the capability of long-range flight without having to refuel in an occupied area. Lenin also considered crossing Germany with a Swedish passport, but Krupskaya joked that he would give himself away by swearing at Mensheviks in Russian in his sleep.[138] More realistically, neither Lenin nor Krupskaya could speak any Swedish.

Negotiations with the Provisional Government to obtain passage through Germany for the Russian exiles in return for German and Austro-Hungarian prisoners of war dragged on. Eventually, bypassing the Provisional Government, on 31 March the Swiss Communist Fritz Platten obtained permission from the German Foreign Minister through his ambassador in Switzerland, Baron Gisbert von Romberg, for Lenin and other Russian exiles to travel through Germany to Russia in a sealed one-carriage train. At Lenin’s request the carriage would be protected from interference by a special grant of extraterritorial status. There is much evidence of German financial commitment to the mission of Lenin.[139] The aim was to disintegrate Russian resistance in the First World War by spreading revolutionary unrest. Weeks says, “Well after April 1917, the Germans continued to subsidize the subversive Lenin as well as his subsequent Bolshevik regime in to 1918.”[140] In July 1917, the Provisional Government, after discovering German funding for the Bolsheviks, outlawed the party and issued an arrest warrant for Lenin.[141]

A report from a German secret agent to Russia informing about Lenin’s arrival to Petrograd and his actions being fully in line with German expectations

On 9 April Lenin and Krupskaya met their fellow exiles in Bern, a group eventually numbering thirty boarded a train that took them to Zurich. From there they travelled to the specially arranged train that was waiting at Gottmadingen, just short of the official German crossing station at Singen. Accompanied by two German Army officers, who sat at the rear of the single carriage behind a chalked line, the exiles travelled through Frankfurt and Berlin to Sassnitz (arriving 12 April), where a ferry took them to Trelleborg. Krupskaya noted how, looking out of the carriage window as they passed through wartime Germany, the exiles were “struck by the total absence of grown-up men. Only women, teenagers and children could be seen at the wayside stations, on the fields, and in the streets of the towns.”[138] Once in Sweden the group travelled by train to Stockholm, over the border at Haparanda and thence back to Russia.

Just before midnight on 16 April [O.S. 3 April] 1917, Lenin’s train arrived at the Finland Station in Petrograd. He was greeted, to the sound of La Marseillaise, by a crowd of workers, sailors and soldiers bearing red flags: by now a ritual in revolutionary Russia for welcoming home political exiles.[142] Lenin was formally welcomed by Chkheidze, the Menshevik Chairman of the Petrograd Soviet. But Lenin pointedly turned to the crowd instead to address it on the international importance of the Russian Revolution:

The piratical imperialist war is the beginning of civil war throughout Europe … The world-wide Socialist revolution has already dawned … Germany is seething … Any day now the whole of European capitalism may crash … Sailors, comrades, we have to fight for a socialist revolution, to fight until the proletariat wins full victory! Long live the worldwide socialist revolution![143]

April Theses

Main article: April Theses

On the train from Switzerland, Lenin had composed his famous April Theses: his programme for the Bolshevik Party. In the Theses, Lenin argued that the Bolsheviks should not rest content, like almost all other Russian socialists, with the “bourgeois” February Revolution. Instead, the Bolsheviks should press ahead to a socialist revolution of the workers and poorest peasants:

2) The specific feature of the present situation in Russia is that the country is passing from the first stage of the revolution—which, owing to the insufficient class-consciousness and organisation of the proletariat, placed power in the hands of the bourgeoisie—to its second stage, which must place power in the hands of the proletariat and the poorest sections of the peasants.[144]

Lenin argued that this socialist revolution would be achieved by the Soviets taking power from the parliamentary Provisional Government: “No support for the Provisional Government … Not a parliamentary republic – to return to a parliamentary republic from the Soviets of Workers’ Deputies would be a retrograde step – but a republic of Soviets of Workers’, Agricultural Labourers’ and Peasants’ Deputies throughout the country, from top to bottom.”[144]

To achieve this, Lenin argued, the Bolsheviks’ immediate task was to campaign diligently among the Russian people to persuade them of the need for Soviet power:

4) Recognition of the fact that in most of the Soviets of Workers’ Deputies our Party is in a minority, so far a small minority, … and that therefore our task is, as long as this government yields to the influence of the bourgeoisie, to present a patient, systematic, and persistent explanation of the errors of their tactics, an explanation especially adapted to the practical needs of the masses.[144]

The April Theses were more radical than virtually anything Lenin’s fellow revolutionaries had heard. Previous Bolshevik policy had been like that of the Mensheviks in this respect: that Russia was ready only for bourgeois, not socialist, revolution. Joseph Stalin and Lev Kamenev, who had returned from exile in Siberia in mid-March and taken control of the Bolshevik newspaper Pravda, had been campaigning for support for the Provisional Government. When Lenin presented his Theses to a joint Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP) meeting, he was booed by the Mensheviks. Boris Bogdanov called them “the ravings of a madman”. Of the Bolsheviks, only Kollontai at first supported the Theses.[145]

Lenin arrived at the revolutionary April Theses thanks to his work in exile on the theory of imperialism. Through his study of worldwide politics and economics, Lenin came to view Russian politics in international perspective. In the conditions of the First World War, Lenin believed that, although Russian capitalism was underdeveloped, a socialist revolution in Russia could spark revolution in the more advanced nations of Europe, which could then help Russia achieve economic and social development. A. J. P. Taylor argued: “Lenin made his revolution for the sake of Europe, not for the sake of Russia, and he expected Russia’s preliminary revolution to be eclipsed when the international revolution took place. Lenin did not invent the iron curtain. On the contrary it was invented against him by the anti-revolutionary Powers of Europe. Then it was called the cordon sanitaire.[146]

In this way, Lenin moved away from the previous Bolshevik policy of pursuing only bourgeois revolution in Russia, and towards the position of his fellow Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky and his theory of permanent revolution, which may have influenced Lenin at this time.[147]

Controversial as it was in April 1917, the programme of the April Theses made the Bolshevik party a political refuge for Russians disillusioned with the Provisional Government and the war.[148][149]

October Revolution

Main article: October Revolution

Painting of Lenin in front of theSmolny Institute by Isaak Brodsky

In Petrograd dissatisfaction with the regime culminated in the spontaneous July Days riots, by industrial workers and soldiers.[150] After being suppressed, these riots were blamed by the government on Lenin and the Bolsheviks.[151]Aleksandr Kerensky, Grigory Aleksinsky, and other opponents, also accused the Bolsheviks, especially Lenin—of being Imperial German agents provocateurs; on 17 July, Leon Trotsky defended them:[152]

An intolerable atmosphere has been created, in which you, as well as we, are choking. They are throwing dirty accusations at Lenin and Zinoviev. Lenin has fought thirty years for the revolution. I have fought [for] twenty years against the oppression of the people. And we cannot but cherish a hatred for German militarism . . . I have been sentenced by a German court to eight months’ imprisonment for my struggle against German militarism. This everybody knows. Let nobody in this hall say that we are hirelings of Germany.[153]

In the event, the Provisional Government arrested the Bolsheviks and outlawed their Party, prompting Lenin to go into hiding and flee to Finland. In exile again, reflecting on the July Days and its aftermath, Lenin determined that, to prevent the triumph of counter-revolutionary forces, the Provisional Government must be overthrown by an armed uprising.[154]Meanwhile, he published State and Revolution (1917) proposing government by the soviets (worker-, soldier- and peasant-elected councils) rather than by a parliamentary body.[155]

In late August 1917, while Lenin was in hiding in Finland, the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Army General Lavr Kornilov sent troops from the front to Petrograd in what appeared to be a military coup attempt against the Provisional Government. Kerensky panicked and turned to the Petrograd Soviet for help, allowing the revolutionaries to organise workers as Red Guards to defend Petrograd. The coup petered out before it reached Petrograd thanks to the industrial action of the Petrograd workers and the soldiers’ increasing unwillingness to obey their officers.[156]

However, faith in the Provisional Government had been severely shaken. Lenin’s slogan since the April Theses – “All power to the soviets!” – became more plausible the more the Provisional Government was discredited in public eyes. The Bolsheviks won a majority in the Petrograd Soviet on 31 August and in the Moscow Soviet on 5 September.[157]

In October Lenin returned from Finland. From the Smolny Institute for girls, Lenin directed the Provisional Government’s deposition (6–8 November 1917, 24–26 October O.S.), and the storming (7–8 November) of the Winter Palace to realise the Kerensky capitulation that established Bolshevik government in Russia.

Forming a government

Lenin working in the Kremlin, 1918

Lenin had argued in a newspaper article in September 1917:

The peaceful development of any revolution is, generally speaking, extremely rare and difficult … but … a peaceful development of the revolution is possible and probable if all power is transferred to the Soviets. The struggle of parties for power within the Soviets may proceed peacefully, if the Soviets are made fully democratic[158]

The October Revolution had been relatively peaceful. The revolutionary forces already had de facto control of the capital thanks to the defection of the city garrison. Few troops had stayed to defend the Provisional Government in the Winter Palace.[159] Most citizens had simply continued about their daily business while the Provisional Government was actually overthrown.[156]

It thus appeared that all power had been transferred to the Soviets relatively peacefully. On the evening of the October Revolution, the Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets met, with a Bolshevik-Left SR majority, in the Smolny Institute in Petrograd. When the left-wing Menshevik Martov proposed an all-party Soviet government, the Bolshevik Lunacharsky stated that his party did not oppose the idea. The Bolshevik delegates voted unanimously in favour of the proposal.[160]

However, not all Russian socialists supported transferring all power to the Soviets. The Right SRs and Mensheviks walked out of this very first session of the Congress of Soviets in protest at the overthrow of the Provisional Government, of which their parties had been members.[161]

The next day, on the evening of 26 October O.S., Lenin attended the Congress of Soviets: undisguised in public for the first time since the July Days, although not yet having regrown his trademark beard. The American journalist John Reed described the man who appeared at about 8:40 pm to “a thundering wave of cheers”:

A short, stocky figure, with a big head set down in his shoulders, bald and bulging. Little eyes, a snubbish nose, wide, generous mouth, and heavy chin; clean-shaven now, but already beginning to bristle with the well-known beard of his past and future. Dressed in shabby clothes, his trousers much too long for him. Unimpressive, to be the idol of a mob, loved and revered as perhaps few leaders in history have been. A strange popular leader—a leader purely by virtue of intellect; colourless, humourless, uncompromising and detached, without picturesque idiosyncrasies—but with the power of explaining profound ideas in simple terms, of analysing a concrete situation. And combined with shrewdness, the greatest intellectual audacity.[162]

Lenin and Sverdlov looking over Marx and Engels monument, 1918

According to Reed, Lenin waited for the applause to subside before declaring simply: “We shall now proceed to construct the Socialist order!” Lenin proceeded to propose to the Congress a Decree on Peace, calling on “all the belligerent peoples and to their Governments to begin immediately negotiations for a just and democratic peace”, and a Decree on Land, transferring ownership of all “land-owners’ estates, and all lands belonging to the Crown, [and] to monasteries” to the Peasants’ Soviets. The Congress passed the Decree on Peace unanimously, and the Decree on Land faced only one vote in opposition.[163]

Having approved these key Bolshevik policies, the Congress of Soviets proceeded to elect the Bolsheviks into power as theCouncil of People’s Commissars by “an enormous majority”.[164] The Bolsheviks offered posts in the Council to the Left SRs: an offer that the Left SRs at first refused,[165] but later accepted, joining the Bolsheviks in coalition on 12 December O.S.[166]Lenin had suggested that Trotsky take the position of Chairman of the Council—the head of the Soviet government—but Trotsky refused on the grounds that his Jewishness would be controversial, and he took the post of Commissar for Foreign Affairs instead.[165] Thus, Lenin became the head of government in Russia.

Trotsky announced the composition of the new Soviet Central Executive Committee: with a Bolshevik majority, but with places reserved for the representatives of the other parties, including the seceded Right SRs and Mensheviks. Trotsky concluded the Congress: “We welcome into the Government all parties and groups which will adopt our programme.”[164]

Lenin declared in 1920 that “Communism is Soviet power plus the electrification of the entire country” in modernising Russia into a 20th-century country:[167]

We must show the peasants that the organisation of industry on the basis of modern, advanced technology, on electrification, which will provide a link between town and country, will put an end to the division between town and country, will make it possible to raise the level of culture in the countryside and to overcome, even in the most remote corners of land, backwardness, ignorance, poverty, disease, and barbarism.[168]

Yet the Bolshevik Government had to first withdraw Russia from the First World War (1914–18). Facing continuing Imperial German eastward advance, Lenin proposed immediate Russian withdrawal from the West European war; yet, other, doctrinaire Bolshevik leaders (e.g. Nikolai Bukharin) advocated continuing in the war to foment revolution in Germany. Lead peace treaty negotiator Leon Trotsky proposed No War, No Peace, an intermediate-stance Russo–German treaty conditional upon neither belligerent annexing conquered lands; the negotiations collapsed, and the Germans renewed their attack, conquering much of the (agricultural) territory of west Russia. As a result, Lenin’s withdrawal proposal then gained majority support, and, on 3 March 1918, Russia withdrew from the First World War via the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, losing much of its European territory. Because of the German threat, Lenin moved the Soviet Government from Petrograd to Moscow on 10–11 March 1918.[169][170]

On 19 January 1918, relying upon the soviets, the Bolsheviks, allied with anarchists and the Socialist Revolutionaries, dissolved the Russian Constituent Assemblythereby consolidating the Bolshevik Government’s political power. Yet, that left-wing coalition collapsed consequent to the Social Revolutionaries opposing the territorially expensive Brest-Litovsk treaty the Bolsheviks reached an accord with Imperial Germany. The anarchists and the Socialist Revolutionaries then joined other political parties in attempting to depose the Bolshevik Government, who defended themselves with persecution and jail for the anti-Bolsheviks.

To initiate the Russian economic recovery, on 21 February 1920, he launched the GOELRO plan, the State Commission for Electrification of Russia(Государственная комиссия по электрификации России), and also established free universal health care, free education systems, promulgated the politico-civilrights of women.[171] and also legalised homosexuality, being the first country in the modern age to do this.[172]

Establishing the Cheka

Main article: Cheka

On 20 December 1917, “The Whole-Russian Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-Revolution and Sabotage”, the Cheka (Chrezvychaynaya Komissiya – Extraordinary Commission) was created by a decree issued by Lenin to defend the Russian Revolution.[173] The establishment of the Cheka, secret service, headed by Felix Dzerzhinsky, formally consolidated the censorship established earlier, when on “17 November, the Central Executive Committee passed a decree giving the Bolsheviks control over all newsprint and wide powers of closing down newspapers critical of the régime. . . .”;[174] non-Bolshevik soviets were disbanded; anti-soviet newspapers were closed until Pravda (Truth) and Izvestia (The News) established their communications monopoly. According to Leonard Schapiro the Bolshevik “refusal to come to terms with the [Revolutionary] socialists, and the dispersal of the Constituent assembly, led to the logical result thatrevolutionary terror would now be directed, not only against traditional enemies, such as the bourgeoisie or right-wing opponents, but against anyone, be he socialist, worker, or peasant, who opposed Bolshevik rule”.[175] On 19 December 1918, a year after its creation, a resolution was adopted at Lenin’s behest that forbade the Bolshevik’s own press from publishing “defamatory articles” about the Cheka.[176] As Lenin put it: “A Good Communist is also a good Chekist.”[176]

Failed assassinations

Lenin survived two serious assassination attempts. The first occasion was on 14 January 1918 in Petrograd, when assassins ambushed Lenin in his automobile after a speech. He and Fritz Platten were in the back seat when assassins began shooting, and “Platten grabbed Lenin by the head and pushed him down… Platten’s hand was covered in blood, having been grazed by a bullet as he was shielding Lenin”.[177]

The second event was on 30 August 1918, when the Socialist RevolutionaryFanya Kaplan approached Lenin at his automobile after a speech; he was resting a foot on the running board as he spoke with a woman. Kaplan called to Lenin, and when he turned to face her she shot at him three times. The first bullet struck his arm, the second bullet his jaw and neck, and the third missed him, wounding the woman with whom he was speaking; the wounds felled him and he became unconscious.[178] Kaplan said during her interrogation that she considered Lenin to be “a traitor to the Revolution” for dissolving the Constituent Assembly and for outlawing other leftist parties.[179]

Pravda publicly ridiculed Fanya Kaplan as a failed assassin, a latter-day Charlotte Corday (the murderess of Jean-Paul Marat) who could not derail the Russian Revolution, reassuring readers that, immediately after surviving the assassination: “Lenin, shot through twice, with pierced lungs spilling blood, refuses help and goes on his own. The next morning, still threatened with death, he reads papers, listens, learns, and observes to see that the engine of the locomotive that carries us towards global revolution has not stopped working…”; despite unharmed lungs, the neck wound did spill blood into a lung.[180]

Historian Richard Pipes reports that “the impression one gains … is that the Bolsheviks deliberately underplayed the event to convince the public that, whatever happened to Lenin, they were firmly in control”. Moreover, in a letter to his wife (7 September 1918), Leonid Borisovich Krasin, a Tsarist and Soviet régime diplomat, describes the public atmosphere and social response to the failed assassination attempt on 30 August and to Lenin’s survival:

As it happens, the attempt to kill Lenin has made him much more popular than he was. One hears a great many people, who are far from having any sympathy with the Bolsheviks, saying that it would be an absolute disaster if Lenin had succumbed to his wounds, as it was first thought he would. And they are quite right, for, in the midst of all this chaos and confusion, he is the backbone of the new body politic, the main support on which everything rests.[181]

Red Terror

Main article: Red Terror

Bolshevik propaganda poster from 1920, showing Lenin sweeping away monarchists and capitalists; the caption reads, “Comrade Lenin Cleanses the Earth of Filth”

The Bolsheviks instructed Felix Dzerzhinsky to commence a Red Terror, an organized program of arrests, imprisonments, and killings.[182] At Moscow, execution lists signed by Lenin authorised the shooting of 25 former ministers, civil servants, and 765 White Guards in September 1918.[183]

Earlier, in October, Lev Kamenev and cohort, had warned the Party that terrorist rule was inevitable[184] In late 1918, when he andNikolai Bukharin tried curbing Chekist excesses, Lenin overruled them; in 1921, via the Politburo, he expanded the Cheka’s discretionary death-penalty powers.[185][186]

The White Russian counter-revolution failed for want of popular support and bad coordination among its disparate units. Meanwhile, Lenin put the Terror under a centralized secret police (“Cheka”) in summer 1918.[187] By May 1919, there were some 16,000“enemies of the people” imprisoned in the Cheka’s katorgalabour camps; by September 1921 the prisoner populace exceeded 70,000.[188][189][190][191][192][193]

During the Civil War both the Red and White Russians committed atrocities[clarify][citation needed]. The Red Terror was Lenin’s policy (e.g. Decossackisation i.e. repressions against the Kuban and Don Cossacks) against given social classes, while the counter-revolutionary White Terror was racial and political, against Jews, anti-monarchists, and Communists, (cf. White Movement).[194] Such numbers are recorded in cities controlled by the Bolsheviks:

In Kharkov there were between 2,000 and 3,000 executions in February–June 1919, and another 1,000–2,000 when the town was taken again in December of that year; in Rostov-on-Don, approximately 1,000 in January 1920; in Odessa, 2,200 in May–August 1919, then 1,500–3,000 between February 1920 and February 1921; in Kiev, at least 3,000 in February–August 1919; in Ekaterinodar, at least 3,000 between August 1920 and February 1921; In Armavir, a small town in Kuban, between 2,000 and 3,000 in August–October 1920. The list could go on and on.[195]

White Russian anti-Bolshevik propaganda poster

Professor Christopher Read states that though terror was employed at the height of the Civil War fighting, “from 1920 onwards the resort to terror was much reduced and disappeared from Lenin’s mainstream discourses and practices”.[196]

While the Russian famine of 1921, which left six million dead, was going on, the Bolsheviks planned to capture church property and use its value to relieve the victims.[197][198][199] About the resistance to this, Lenin said: “we must precisely now smash the Black Hundreds clergy most decisively and ruthlessly and put down all resistance with such brutality that they will not forget it for several decades.” He also said: “At this meeting pass a secret resolution of the congress that the removal of property of value, especially from the very richest lauras, monasteries, and churches, must be carried out with ruthless resolution, leaving nothing in doubt, and in the very shortest time. The greater the number of representatives of the reactionary clergy and the reactionary bourgeoisie that we succeed in shooting on this occasion, the better”[200] HistorianOrlando Figes has cited an estimate of perhaps 8,000 priests and laymen being executed as a result of this letter.[201]

According to historian Michael Kort, “During 1919 and 1920, out of a population of approximately 1.5 million Don Cossacks, the Bolshevik regime killed or deported an estimated 300,000 to 500,000″.[202] And the crushing of the revolts in Kronstadt and Tambov in southern Russia in 1921 resulted in tens of thousands[clarify][quantify] of executions.[203] Estimates for the total number of people killed in the Red Terror range from 50,000 to over a million.[204][204][205][206][207][208][209][210]

Trotsky, Lenin and Kamenev at the II Party Congress in 1919

Civil War

Main article: Russian Civil War

In 1917, as an anti-imperialist, Lenin said that oppressed peoples had the unconditional right to secede from the Russian Empire; however, at end of the Civil War, the USSR annexed Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan.[211] Lenin defended the annexations as, “geopolitical protection against capitalist imperial depredations.”[212]

To maintain the war-isolated cities, keep the armies fed, and to avoid economic collapse, the Bolshevik government established war communism, via prodrazvyorstka, food requisitioning from the peasantry, for little payment, which peasants resisted with reduced harvests. The Bolsheviks blamed the kulaks’ withholding grain to increase profits; but statistics indicate most such business occurred in the black market economy.[213][214] Nonetheless, the prodrazvyorstka resulted in armed confrontations, which the Cheka and Red Army suppressed with shooting hostages, poison gas, and labour-camp deportation; yet Lenin increased the requisitioning.[215][216][217]

1920–22

Lenin in 1920.

After the March 1921 left-wing Kronstadt Rebellion mutiny, Lenin abolished war communism with its food requisitioning, and tight control over industry with a much more liberal New Economic Policy (NEP), which allowed private enterprise. The NEP successfully stabilised the economy and stimulated industry and agriculture by means of a market economy where the government did not set prices and wages. The NEP was his pragmatic recognition of the political and economic realities, despite being a tactical, ideological retreat from the socialist ideal.[218] Politically, Robert Service claims that Lenin “advocated the final eradication of all remaining threats, real or potential, to his state. For Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks he demanded the staging of show trials followed by exemplary severe punishment.”[219]

In international terms Lenin spoke of world revolution. The stalemate in the war with Poland and the failures of Communist uprisings in Central Europe brought the realisation that the revolution would come slowly. To get it on track Lenin in 1919 set up the Third International, or Comintern.[220][221]

Decline and death

During Lenin’s sickness (1922–23), Stalin used this fake photograph (it was a composite of two shots) as part of his claim to be Lenin’s successor.[222]

The mental strains of leading a revolution, governing, and fighting a civil war aggravated the physical debilitation consequent to the wounds from the attempted assassinations; Lenin retained a bullet in his neck, until a German surgeon removed it on 24 April 1922.[223] When in good health Lenin worked fourteen to sixteen hours daily, occupied with minor, major, and routine matters. Around the time of Lenin’s death, Volkogonov said:

Lenin was involved in the challenges of delivering fuel into Ivanovo-Vosnesensk… the provision of clothing for miners, he was solving the question of dynamo construction, drafted dozens of routine documents, orders, trade agreements, was engaged in the allocation of rations, edited books and pamphlets at the request of his comrades, held hearings on the applications of peat, assisted in improving the workings at the “Novii Lessner” factory, clarified in correspondence with the engineer P. A. Kozmin the feasibility of using wind turbines for the electrification of villages… all the while serving as an adviser to party functionaries almost continuously.[224]

In March 1922 physicians prescribed rest for his fatigue and headaches. Upon returning to Petrograd in May 1922, Lenin suffered the first of three strokes, which left him unable to speak for weeks, and severely hampered motion in his right side. By June, he had substantially recovered; by August he resumed limited duties, delivering three long speeches in November. In December 1922, he suffered the second stroke that partly paralysed his right side, he then withdrew from active politics.

In March 1923, he suffered a third stroke; it ended his career. Lenin was mute and bed-ridden until his death but officially remained the leader of the Communist Party.

Persistent stories mark syphilis as the cause of Lenin’s death. A “retrospective diagnosis” published in The European Journal of Neurology in 2004 strengthens these suspicions.[225]

Lenin in 1923

After the first stroke, Lenin dictated government papers to Nadezhda; among them was Lenin’s Testament (changing the structure of the soviets), a document partly inspired by the 1922 Georgian Affair, which was a conflict about the way in which social and political transformation within a constituent republic was to be achieved. It criticised high-rank Communists, including Joseph Stalin,Grigory Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev, Nikolai Bukharin, and Leon Trotsky. About the Communist Party’s General Secretary (since 1922), Joseph Stalin, Lenin reported that the “unlimited authority” concentrated in him was unacceptable, and suggested that “comrades think about a way of removing Stalin from that post.” His phrasing, “Сталин слишком груб”, implies “personal rudeness, unnecessary roughness, lack of finesse”, flaws “intolerable in a Secretary-General”.

At Lenin’s death, Nadezhda mailed his testament to the central committee, to be read aloud to the 13th Party Congress in May 1924. However, to remain in power, the ruling troika—Stalin, Kamenev, Zinoviev—suppressed Lenin’s Testament; it was not published until 1925, in the United States, by the American intellectualMax Eastman. In that year, Trotsky published an article minimising the importance of Lenin’s Testament, saying that Lenin’s notes should not be perceived as a will, that it had been neither concealed, nor violated;[226] yet he did invoke it in later anti-Stalin polemics.[227][228]

Lenin died at 18.50 hrs, Moscow time, on 21 January 1924, aged 53, at his estate at Gorki settlement (later renamed Gorki Leninskiye). In the four days that the Bolshevik Leader Vladimir Ilyich Lenin lay in state, more than 900,000 mourners viewed his body in the Hall of Columns; among the statesmen who expressed condolences to the Soviet Union was Chinese premier Sun Yat-sen, who said:

Through the ages of world history, thousands of leaders and scholars appeared who spoke eloquent words, but these remained words. You, Lenin, were an exception. You not only spoke and taught us, but translated your words into deeds. You created a new country. You showed us the road of joint struggle… You, great man that you are, will live on in the memories of the oppressed people through the centuries.[229]

Winston Churchill, who encouraged British intervention against the Russian Revolution, in league with the White Movement, to destroy the Bolsheviks and Bolshevism, said:

He alone could have led Russia into the enchanted quagmire; he alone could have found the way back to the causeway. He saw; he turned; he perished. The strong illumination that guided him was cut off at the moment when he had turned resolutely for home. The Russian people were left floundering in the bog. Their worst misfortune was his birth: their next worst his death.[230]

Funeral

Lenin’s funeral by I.Brodsky

The Soviet government publicly announced Lenin’s death the following day, with head of State Mikhail Kalinin tearfully reading an official statement to delegates of the All-Russian Congress of Soviets at 11am, the same time that a team of physicians began a postmortem of the body.[231] On 23 January, mourners from the Communist Party Central Committee, the Moscow party organisation, the trade unions and the soviets began to assemble at his house, with the body being removed from his home at about 10am the following day, being carried aloft in a red coffin by Kamenev, Zinoviev, Stalin, Bukharin, Bubhov and Krasin. Transported by train to Moscow, mourners gathered at every station along the way, and upon arriving in the city, a funerary procession carried the coffin for five miles to the House of Trade Unions, where the body lay in state.[232]

Pallbearers carrying Lenin’s coffin during his funeral, from Paveletsky Rail Terminal to the Labour Temple. Felix Dzerzhinsky at the front with Timofei Sapronov behind him and Lev Kamenev on the left.

Over the next three days, around a million mourners from across the Soviet Union came to see the body, many queuing for hours in the freezing conditions, with the events being filmed by the government.[233] On Saturday 26 January, the eleventh All-Union Congress of Soviets met to pay respects to the deceased leader, with speeches being made by Kalinin, Zinoviev and Stalin, but notably not Trotsky, who had been convalescing in the Caucasus.[233] Lenin’s funeral took place the following day, when his body was carried to Red Square, accompanied by martial music, where assembled crowds listened to a series of speeches before the corpse was carried into a vault, followed by the singing of the revolutionary hymn, “You fell in sacrifice.”[233]

Three days after his death, Petrograd was renamed Leningrad in his honour, remaining so until the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, when its former name Saint Petersburg was restored, yet the administrative area remains Leningrad Oblast. In the early 1920s, the Russian cosmism movement proved so popular that Leonid Krasin and Alexander Bogdanov proposed tocryonically preserve Lenin for future resurrection, yet, despite buying the requisite equipment, that was not done.[234]Instead, the body of V. I. Lenin was embalmed and permanently exhibited in Lenin’s Mausoleum, in Moscow, on 27 January 1924.

Despite the official diagnosis of death from stroke consequences, the Russian scientist Ivan Pavlov reported that Lenin died of neurosyphilis, according to a publication by V. Lerner and colleagues in the European Journal of Neurology in 2004. The authors also note that “It is possible that future DNA technology applied to Lenin’s preserved brain material could ultimately establish or disprove neurosyphilis as the primary cause of Lenin’s death.”[235]

In a poll conducted in 2012 by a Russian website, 48 per cent of the people that responded voted that the body of the former leader should be buried.[236][237]

Lenin’s funeral train consisting of the locomotive and funeral van still containing the original wreaths is preserved at the Museum of the Moscow Railway, Paveletsky Rail Terminal in Moscow.

Political ideology

Main article: Leninism

Lenin giving a speech.

Lenin was a Marxist and principally a revolutionary. His revolutionary theory—the belief in the necessity of a violent overthrow of capitalism through communist revolution, to be followed by a dictatorship of the proletariat as the first stage of moving towards communism, and the need for a vanguard party to lead the proletariat in this effort—developed into Marxism–Leninism, a highly influential ideology. Although a Marxist, Lenin was also influenced by earlier currents of Russian socialist thought such asNarodnichestvo.[238] Conversely, he derided Marxists who adopted from contemporary non-Marxist philosophers and sociologists.[239]He believed that his interpretation of Marxism was the sole authentic one.[240] Robert Service noted that Lenin considered “moral questions” to be “an irrelevance”, rejecting the concept of moral absolutism; instead he judged whether an action was justifiable based upon its chances of success for the revolutionary cause.[241]

Lenin was an internationalist, and a keen supporter of world revolution, thereby deeming national borders to be an outdated concept and nationalism a distraction from class struggle.[242] He believed that under revolutionary socialism, there would be “the inevitable merging of nations” and the ultimate establishment of “a United States of the World“.[243] He opposed federalism, deeming it to be bourgeoisie, instead emphasising the need for a centralised unitary state.[244]

Lenin the icon: A 1929 Laz language newspaper featuring Lenin’s writing

Lenin was an anti-imperialist, and believed that all nations deserved “the right of self-determination”.[244] He thus supportedwars of national liberation, accepting that such conflicts might be necessary for a minority group to break away from asocialist state, asserting that the latter were not “holy or insured against mistakes or weaknesses”.[245]

He also staunchly criticised anti-Semitism within the Russian Empire, commenting “It is not the Jews who are the enemies of the working people. The enemies of the workers are the capitalists of all countries. Among the Jews there are working people, and they form the majority. They are our brothers, who, like us, are oppressed by capital; they are our comrades in the struggle for socialism.”[246]

He believed that revolution in the Third World would come about through an alliance of the proletarians with the rural peasantry.[247] In 1923 Lenin said:

The outcome of the struggle will be determined by the fact that Russia, India, China, etc,. account for the overwhelming majority of the population of the globe. And during the last few years it is this majority that has been drawn into the struggle for emancipation with extraordinary rapidity, so that in this respect there cannot be the slightest doubt what the final outcome of the world struggle will be. In this sense the complete victory of socialism is fully and absolutely assured.[248]

Lenin believed that representative democracy had simply been used to give the illusion of democracy while maintaining the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie; describing the U.S. representative democratic system, he described the “spectacular and meaningless duels between two bourgeois parties”, both of whom were led by “astute multimillionaires” who exploited the American proletariat.[249]

Writings

Lenin was a prolific political theoretician and philosopher who wrote about the practical aspects of carrying out a proletarian revolution; he wrote pamphlets, articles, and books, without a stenographer or secretary, until prevented by illness.[250] He simultaneously corresponded with comrades, allies, and friends, in Russia and world-wide. His Collected Works comprise 54 volumes, each of about 650 pages, translated into English in 45 volumes by Progress Publishers, Moscow 1960–70.[251]

After Lenin’s death, the USSR selectively censored his writings, to establish the dogma of the infallibility of Lenin, Stalin (his successor), and the Central Committee;[252] thus, the Soviet fifth edition (55 vols., 1958–65) of Lenin’s œuvre deleted the Lenin–Stalin contradictions, and all that was unfavourable to the founder of the USSR.[253] The historian Richard Pipes published a documentary collection of letters and telegrams excluded from the Soviet fifth edition, proposing that edition as incomplete.[254]

Personal life and characteristics

“[Lenin’s collected writings] reveal in detail a man with iron will, self-enslaving self-discipline, scorn for opponents and obstacles, the cold determination of a zealot, the drive of a fanatic, and the ability to convince or browbeat weaker persons by his singleness of purpose, imposing intensity, impersonal approach, personal sacrifice, political astuteness, and complete conviction of the possession of the absolute truth. His life became the history of the Bolshevik movement.”

—Biographer Louis Fischer, 1964.[255]

Lenin believed himself to be a man of destiny, having an unshakable belief in the righteousness of his cause,[256] and in his own ability as a revolutionary leader.[257] Historian Richard Pipes noted that he exhibited a great deal of charisma and personal magnetism,[258] and that he had “an extraordinary capacity for disciplined work and total commitment to the revolutionary cause.”[259] Aside from Russian, Lenin spoke and read French, German, and English.[260]

Lenin had a strong emotional hatred of the Tsarist authorities,[261] with biographer Louis Fischer describing him as “a lover of radical change and maximum upheaval”.[262] Historian and biographer Robert Serviceasserted that Lenin had been an intensely emotional young man,[263] who developed an “emotional attachment” to his ideological heroes, such as Marx, Engels and Chernyshevsky; he owned portraits of them,[264] and privately asserted that he was “in love” with Marx.[265] Lenin was an atheist, and believed that socialism was inherently atheistic; he thus deemed Christian socialism to be a contradiction in terms.[266]

Lenin’s wife, Nadezhda Krupskaya

Concerned with physical fitness, he took regular exercise,[267] enjoyed cycling, swimming, and hunting,[268] also developed a passion for mountain walking in the Swiss peaks.[269] He despised untidiness, always keeping his work desk tidy and his pencils sharpened,[270] and insisted on total silence while he was working.[271] In personal dealings with others, he was modest, and for this reason disliked the cult of personality that the Soviet administration had begun to build around him; he nevertheless accepted that it might have some benefits in unifying the movement.[272] After an hour’s meeting with Lenin, the philosopher Bertrand Russellasserted that Lenin was “very friendly, and apparently simple, entirely without a trace of hauteur… I have never met a personage so destitute of self-importance.”[273] Similarly, Lenin’s friend Gorky described him as “a baldheaded, stocky, sturdy person”, being “too ordinary” and not giving “the impression of being a leader”.[274]

Throughout his adult life, Lenin was in a relationship with Nadezhda Krupskaya, a fellow Marxist whom he married. Lenin and Nadya were both sad that they never had children,[275] and enjoyed entertaining the children of their friends.[276] Despite his radical politics, he took a conservative attitude with regard to sex and marriage.[277]

Lenin was privately critical of Russia, describing it as “one of the most benighted, medieval and shamefully backward of Asian countries”.[249] He was similarly critical of the Russian people, informing Gorky that “An intelligent Russian is almost always a Jew or someone with Jewish blood”, in other instances admitting that he knew little of Russia, having spent one half of his adult life abroad.[278]

According to Pipes and Fischer, Lenin was intolerant of opposition and often dismissed opinions that differed from his own outright.[279] He ignored facts which did not suit his argument,[280] abhorring compromise,[281] and very rarely admitting his own errors.[282] He refused to bend his opinions, until he rejected them completely, at which he would treat the new view as if it was just as unbendable.[283] Robert Service stated that Lenin was a man who could be “moody and volatile”,[284] and who exhibited a “virtual lust for violence” although had no desire to personally involve himself in killing.[285] Similarly, Fischer asserted that he had “neither an emotional commitment to terror nor a revulsion to terror”,[286] while Pipes commented that Lenin had “a strong streak of cruelty” and exhibited no remorse for those killed by the revolutionary cause, asserting that this arose out of indifference rather than sadism.[287]

In 1922, according to Robert Service, Lenin “advocated the final eradication of all remaining threats, real or potential, to his state. For Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks he demanded the staging of show trials followed by exemplary severe punishment.”[219]

Legacy

Statue of Lenin in front of a state building in Nizhyn, Ukraine(demolished by the city council in February 2014).

When Lenin died on 21 January 1924, he was acclaimed by Communists as “the greatest genius of mankind” and “the leader and teacher of the peoples of the whole world”.[288]

Lenin’s reputation inside the Soviet Union and its allies remained high until Communism ended in 1989–91. During the upheavals of the 1960s, Service argues, the reputation of Soviet Communism, and of Lenin himself, started slipping as intellectuals and students on the left turned against dictatorship:

Even the Italian and Spanish communist parties abandoned their ideological fealty to Moscow and formulated doctrines hostile to dictatorship. Especially after the USSR-led invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, the number of admirers of Lenin was getting smaller in states not subject to communist leaderships.[289]

Importance in 20th century

Historian J. Arch Getty has remarked that “Lenin deserves a lot of credit for the notion that the meek can inherit the earth, that there can be a political movement based on social justice and equality”.[10]Time Magazine also named Lenin one of the100 most important people of the 20th century,[12] and one of their top 25 political icons of all time; remarking that “for decades, Marxist–Leninist rebellions shook the world while Lenin’s embalmed corpse lay in repose in the Red Square“.[13] Following the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, reverence for Lenin declined among the post-Soviet generations, yet he remains an important historical figure for the Soviet-era generations.[290]

Detail of Man at the Crossroads, fresco at Palacio de Bellas Artes inMexico City showing Lenin

Historians evaluate Lenin

Lee states:

instead of guiding Russian history on to a new highway, Lenin had simply shoved it up a cul-de-sac. This is also the point that seems to have been reached by many recent Russian historians, especially Volkogonov.[291][292]

According to the article in Encyclopædia Britannica written by Professor of Northern Illinois UniversityAlbert Resis:[293]

If the Bolshevik Revolution is—as some people have called it—the most significant political event of the 20th century, then Lenin must for good or ill be considered the century’s most significant political leader. Not only in the scholarly circles of the former Soviet Union, but even among many non-Communist scholars, he has been regarded as both the greatest revolutionary leader and revolutionary statesman in history, as well as the greatest revolutionary thinker since Marx

There is little question that Lenin did influence revolutionaries, including successful ones in China, Vietnam, and Cuba.

As influential as he was in life, Lenin may have been more so in death. Over 100 million have lined up to view his mummified body. His memory has been used to support every change in Soviet policy and every new regime since his death. His theories inspired the successful revolutions of Fidel Castro, Mao Zedong, and Ho Chi Minh; as well as countless other revolutionaries in countries full of oppressed and powerless people.
Vladimir Lenin: Voice of Revolution, A&E Biography, 2005[10]

Statues and city names

Commemorative one rouble coin minted in 1970, in honor of Lenin’s centenary.

During the Soviet period, many statues of Lenin were erected across Eastern Europe. Although many of the statues have subsequently been removed, some remain standing, and a few new ones have been erected.[294] During Euromaidanseveral were damaged or destroyed.[295] However, Russian lawmakers from the ruling United Russia party and the opposition Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) have indicated a proposal to remove all statues of Lenin from Russian cities, with LDPR deputy Aleksandr Kurdyumov citing high maintenance costs and vandalism concerns as some of the main reasons. The proposal is being strongly opposed by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation.[296]

Many places and entities were named in honor of Lenin. The city of Saint Petersburg, the site where both February and October revolutions started, was renamed Leningrad in 1924, four days after Lenin’s death. In 1991, after a contested vote between Communists and liberals, the Leningrad government reverted the city’s name to Saint Petersburg while the surrounding Leningrad Oblast remained so named;[297] like-wise the city of Ulyanovsk (so-named after Lenin’s birth name) and the Ulyanovsk Oblast remain so named. Gyumri in Armenia was named Leninakan from 1924 to 1990, Khujand in Tajikistan Leninabad from 1936 to 1991.

In space, the 852 Wladilenaasteroid was named in his honor.

In popular culture

Lenin as represented in Sergei Eisenstein‘s 1927 film October.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Lenin

Fabian Society

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Fabianism)
The Fabian Society
Fabian Society Logo CMYK.JPG

Fabian Society logo
Abbreviation Fabian Society
Formation January 4, 1884; 131 years ago
Legal status Unincorporated membership association
Purpose It aims to promote greater equality of power, wealth and opportunity; the value of collective action and public service; an accountable, tolerant and active democracy; citizenship, liberty and human rights; sustainable development; and multilateral international cooperation
Headquarters London, United Kingdom
Location
  • 61 Petty France, London, SW1H 9EU
Membership
7,000
Official language
English
General Secretary
Andrew Harrop
Main organ
Executive Committee
Subsidiaries Young Fabians, Fabian Women’s Network, Scottish Fabians, around 60 local Fabian Societies
Affiliations Labour Party
Website fabians.org.uk

The Fabian Society is a British socialist organisation whose purpose is to advance the principles of socialism viagradualist and reformist means.[1][2] The society laid many of the foundations of the Labour Party and subsequently affected the policies of states emerging from the decolonisation of the British Empire, most notably India andSingapore.

Originally, the Fabian society was committed to the establishment of a socialist economy, alongside a commitment toBritish imperialism as a progressive and modernizing force.[3]

Today, the society functions primarily as a think tank and is one of 15 socialist societies affiliated with the Labour Party. Similar societies exist in Australia (the Australian Fabian Society), in Canada (the Douglas-Coldwell Foundation and the now disbanded League for Social Reconstruction), in Sicily (Sicilian Fabian Society) and in New Zealand.

Organisational history

Establishment

Blue plaque at 17 Osnaburgh St, where the Society was founded in 1884.

Fabian Society was named after “Fabius the Delayer” at the suggestion of Frank Podmore, above.

Tortoise is the symbol of Fabian Society, representing its goal of gradual expansion of socialism.[1]

The Fabian Society was founded on 4 January 1884 in London as an offshoot of a society founded a year earlier calledThe Fellowship of the New Life.[4] Fellowship members included poets Edward Carpenter and John Davidson, sexologist Havelock Ellis and the future Fabian secretary Edward R. Pease. They wanted to transform society by setting an example of clean simplified living for others to follow, but when some members also wanted to become politically involved to aid society’s transformation, it was decided that a separate society, the Fabian Society, also be set up. All members were free to attend both societies. The Fabian Society additionally advocated renewal of Western European Renaissance ideas and their promulgation throughout the rest of the world.

The Fellowship of the New Life was dissolved in 1899,[5] but the Fabian Society grew to become the pre-eminent academic society in the United Kingdom in theEdwardian era, typified by the members of its vanguard Coefficients club. Public meetings of the Society were for many years held at Essex Hall, a popular location just off the Strand in central London.[6]

The Fabian Society, which favoured gradual change rather than revolutionary change, was named – at the suggestion of Frank Podmore – in honour of the Roman general Fabius Maximus (nicknamed “Cunctator”, meaning “the Delayer”). His Fabian strategy advocated tactics of harassment and attrition rather than head-on battles against the Carthaginianarmy under the renowned general Hannibal.

An explanatory note appearing on the title page of the group’s first pamphlet declared:

“For the right moment you must wait, as Fabius did most patiently, when warring against Hannibal, though many censured his delays; but when the time comes you must strike hard, as Fabius did, or your waiting will be in vain, and fruitless.”[7]

Organisational growth

Immediately upon its inception, the Fabian Society began attracting many prominent contemporary figures drawn to its socialist cause, including George Bernard Shaw, H. G. Wells, Annie Besant, Graham Wallas, Charles Marson, Hubert Bland, Edith Nesbit,Sydney Olivier, Oliver Lodge, Leonard Woolf and Virginia Woolf, Ramsay MacDonald and Emmeline Pankhurst. Even Bertrand Russell briefly became a member, but resigned after he expressed his belief that the Society’s principle of entente (in this case, between countries allying themselves against Germany) could lead to war.

At the core of the Fabian Society were Sidney and Beatrice Webb. Together, they wrote numerous studies[8] of industrial Britain, including alternative co-operative economics that applied to ownership of capital as well as land.

Many Fabians participated in the formation of the Labour Party in 1900 and the group’s constitution, written by Sidney Webb, borrowed heavily from the founding documents of the Fabian Society. At the Labour Party Foundation Conference in 1900, the Fabian Society claimed 861 members and sent one delegate.

The years 1903 to 1908 saw a growth in popular interest in the socialist idea in Great Britain and the Fabian Society grew accordingly, tripling its membership to nearly 2500 by the end of the period, half of whom were located in London.[9] In 1912 a student section was organised called the University Socialist Federation (USF) and by the outbreak of World War I this contingent counted its own membership of more than 500.[9]

Early Fabian views

The first Fabian Society pamphlets[10] advocating tenets of social justice coincided with the zeitgeist of Liberal reforms during the early 1900s. The Fabian proposals however were considerably more progressive than those that were enacted in the Liberal reform legislation. The Fabians lobbied for the introduction of a minimum wage in 1906, for the creation of a universal health care system in 1911 and for the abolition of hereditary peerages in 1917.[11]

Fabian socialists were in favour of reforming Britain’s imperialist foreign policy as a conduit for internationalist reform, and were in favor of a capitalist welfare state modelled on the Bismarckian German model; they criticised Gladstonian liberalism both for its individualism at home and its internationalism abroad. They favoured a national minimum wage in order to stop British industries compensating for their inefficiency by lowering wages instead of investing in capital equipment; slum clearances and a health service in order for “the breeding of even a moderately Imperial race” which would be more productive and better militarily than the “stunted, anaemic, demoralised denizens…of our great cities”; and a national education system because “it is in the classrooms…that the future battles of the Empire for commercial prosperity are already being lost”.[12]

In 1900 the Society produced Fabianism and the Empire, the first statement of its views on foreign affairs, drafted by Bernard Shaw and incorporating the suggestions of 150 Fabian members. It was directed against the liberal individualism of those such as John Morley and Sir William Harcourt.[13] It claimed that the classical liberal political economy was outdated, and that imperialism was the new stage of the international polity. The question was whether Britain would be the centre of a world empire or whether it would lose its colonies and end up as just two islands in the North Atlantic. It expressed support for Britain in the Boer Warbecause small nations, such as the Boers, were anachronisms in the age of empires.[13] In order to hold onto the Empire, the British needed to fully exploit the trade opportunities secured by war; maintain the British armed forces in a high state of readiness to defend the Empire; the creation of a citizen army to replace the professional army; the Factory Acts would be amended to extend to 21 the age for half-time employment, so that the thirty hours gained would be used in “a combination of physical exercises, technical education, education in civil citizenship…and field training in the use of modern weapons”.[14]

The Fabians also favoured the nationalisation of land rent, believing that rents collected by landowners were unearned, an idea which drew heavily from the work of American economist Henry George.

Second generation

In the period between the two World Wars, the “Second Generation” Fabians, including the writers R. H. Tawney, G. D. H. Cole and Harold Laski, continued to be a major influence on social-democratic thought.

But the general idea is that each man should have power according to his knowledge and capacity. […] And the keynote is that of my fairy State: From every man according to his capacity; to every man according to his needs. A democratic Socialism, controlled by majority votes, guided by numbers, can never succeed; a truly aristocratic Socialism, controlled by duty, guided by wisdom, is the next step upwards in civilization.
—Annie Besant, a Fabian Society member and later president of Indian National Congress, [15]

It was at this time that many of the future leaders of the Third World were exposed to Fabian thought, most notably India’s Jawaharlal Nehru, who subsequently framed economic policy for India on Fabian socialism lines. After independence from Britain, Nehru’s Fabian ideas committed India to an economy in which the state owned, operated and controlled means of production, in particular key heavy industrial sectors such as steel, telecommunications, transportation, electricity generation, mining and real estate development. Private activity, property rights and entrepreneurship were discouraged or regulated through permits, nationalization of economic activity and high taxes were encouraged, rationing, control of individual choices and Mahalanobis model considered by Nehru as a means to implement the Fabian Society version of socialism.[16][17][18] In addition to Nehru, several pre-independence leaders in colonial India such as Annie Besant – Nehru’s mentor and later a president of Indian National Congress – were members of the Fabian Society.[19]

Obafemi Awolowo, who later became the premier of Nigeria’s now defunct Western Region, was also a Fabian member in the late 1940s. It was the Fabian ideology that Awolowo used to run the Western Region during his premiership with great success, although he was prevented from using it in a similar fashion on the national level in Nigeria. It is less known that the founder of Pakistan, Muhammad AliJinnah, was an avid member of the Fabian Society in the early 1930s. Lee Kuan Yew, the first Prime Minister of Singapore, stated in his memoirs that his initial political philosophy was strongly influenced by the Fabian Society. However, he later altered his views, considering the Fabian ideal of socialism as impractical.[20] In 1993, Lee said:

“They [Fabian Socialists] were going to create a just society for the British workers – the beginning of a welfare state, cheap council housing, free medicine and dental treatment, free spectacles, generous unemployment benefits. Of course, for students from the colonies, like Singapore and Malaya, it was a great attraction as the alternative to communism. We did not see until the 1970s that that was the beginning of big problems contributing to the inevitable decline of the British economy.”

—Lee Kuan Yew interview with Lianhe Zaobao[20]

In the Middle East, the theories of Fabian Society intellectual movement of early-20th-century Britain inspired the Ba’athist vision. The Middle East adaptation of Fabian socialism led the state to control big industry, transport, banks, internal and external trade. The state would direct the course of economic development, with the ultimate aim to provide a guaranteed minimum standard of living for all.[21] Michel Aflaq, widely considered as the founder of the Ba’athist movement, was a Fabian socialist. Aflaq’s ideas, with those of Salah al-Din al-Bitar and Zaki al-Arsuzi, came to fruition in the Arab world in the form of dictatorial regimes in Iraq andSyria.[22] Salāmah Mūsā of Egypt, another prominent champion of Arab Socialism, was a keen adherent of Fabian Society, and a member since 1909.[23]

Among many current and former Fabian academics are the late political scientist Bernard Crick, the late economists Thomas Balogh and Nicholas Kaldor and the sociologist Peter Townsend.

Contemporary Fabianism

Through the course of the 20th century the group has always been influential in Labour Party circles, with members including Ramsay MacDonald, Clement Attlee, Anthony Crosland, Richard Crossman, Ian Mikardo, Tony Benn, Harold Wilson and more recently Shirley Williams, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Gordon Marsden and Ed Balls. The late Ben Pimlott served as its Chairman in the 1990s. (A Pimlott Prize for Political Writing was organised in his memory by the Fabian Society and The Guardian in 2005 and continues annually). The Society is affiliated to the Party as a socialist society. In recent years the Young Fabian group, founded in 1960, has become an important networking and discussion organisation for younger (under 31) Labour Party activists and played a role in the 1994 election of Tony Blair as Labour Leader. Today there is also an active Fabian Women’s Network and Scottish and Welsh Fabian groups.

On 21 April 2009 the Society’s website stated that it had 6,286 members: “Fabian national membership now stands at a 35 year high: it is over 20% higher than when the Labour Party came to office in May 1997. It is now double what it was when Clement Attlee left office in 1951.” The most recent membership figure on its website at July 2014 showed 6624 members in June 2012.

The latest edition of the Dictionary of National Biography (a reference work listing details of famous or significantBritons throughout history) includes 174 Fabians. Four Fabians, Beatrice and Sidney Webb, Graham Wallas and George Bernard Shaw founded the London School of Economics with the money left to the Fabian Society by Henry Hutchinson. Supposedly the decision was made at a breakfast party on 4 August 1894. The founders are depicted in the Fabian Window[24] designed by George Bernard Shaw. The window was stolen in 1978 and reappeared at Sotheby’s in 2005. It was restored to display in the Shaw Library at the London School of Economics in 2006 at a ceremony over which Tony Blair presided.[25]

Influence on Labour government

With the advent of a Labour Party government in 1997, the Fabian Society was a forum for New Labour ideas and for critical approaches from across the party. The most significant Fabian contribution to Labour’s policy agenda in government was Ed Balls‘ 1992 pamphlet, advocating Bank of England independence. Balls had been a Financial Times journalist when he wrote this Fabian pamphlet, before going to work for Gordon Brown. BBC Business Editor Robert Peston, in his bookBrown’s Britain, calls this an “essential tract” and concludes that Balls “deserves as much credit – probably more – than anyone else for the creation of the modern Bank of England”;[26] William Keegan offers a similar analysis of Balls’ Fabian pamphlet in his book on Labour’s economic policy,[27] which traces in detail the path leading up to this dramatic policy change after Labour’s first week in office.

The Fabian Society Tax Commission of 2000 was widely credited[28] with influencing the Labour government’s policy and political strategy for its one significant public tax increase: the National Insurance rise to raise £8 billion for National Health Service spending. (The Fabian Commission had in fact called for a directlyhypothecated “NHS tax”[29] to cover the full cost of NHS spending, arguing that linking taxation more directly to spending was essential to make tax rise publicly acceptable. The 2001 National Insurance rise was not formally hypothecated, but the government committed itself to using the additional funds for health spending.) Several other recommendations, including a new top rate of income tax, were to the left of government policy and not accepted, though this comprehensive review of UK taxation was influential in economic policy and political circles, and a new top rate of income tax of 50% was introduced in 2010.[30]

Fabianism outside of the United Kingdom

The major influence on the Labour Party and on the English-speaking socialist movement worldwide, has meant that Fabianism became one of the main inspirations of international social democracy. Direct or indirect influence of the Fabians came on a lot of political movements elsewhere; for example, the liberal socialism of Carlo Rosselli (founder, with his brother Nello Rosselli, of the anti-fascist group’s Giustizia e Libertà), and all its derivatives, such as the Action Party inItaly.[31] The Community Movement, created by the socialist entrepreneur Adriano Olivetti, was then the only Italian party which referred explicitly to Fabianism, among his main inspirations along with federalism, communitarianism and social democracy.[32]

During 2000 the Sicilian Fabian Society was founded in Messina.[33]

Structure

Executive Committee

The Fabian Society is governed by an elected Executive Committee. The committee consists of ten ordinary members elected from a national list, three members nationally elected from a list nominated by local groups, representatives from the Young Fabians, Fabians Women’s Network and Scottish and Welsh Fabians. There is also one staff representative and a directly elected Honorary Treasurer from the membership. Elections are held every other year, with the exception of the Young Fabians and staff representation which are elected annually. The Executive Committee meet quarterly. The Executive Committee elect a Chair and at least one Vice Chair annually to conduct it’s business.

Secretariat

The Fabian Society have a number of employees based in their headquarters in London. The secretariat is led by a General Secretary who is the organisations CEO. The staff are arranged into departments including Research, Editorial, Events and Operations.

Young Fabians

Since 1960 members aged under 31 years of age are also members of the Young Fabians. This group has its own elected Chair, executive committee and sub-groups. The Young Fabians are a voluntary organisation that serves as an incubator for member-led activities such as policy and social events, pamphlets and delegations. Within the group are five special interest communities called Networks that are run by voluntary steering groups and elect their own Chair and officers. The current Networks are Finance, Health, International Affairs, Education and Communications (Industry). It also publishes the quarterly magazine Anticipations.

Fabian Women’s Network

All female members of the Fabian Society are also members of the Fabian Women’s Network. This group has its own elected Chair and Executive Committee which organises conferences and events and works with the wider political movement to secure increased representation for women in politics and public life. It has a flagship mentoring programme that recruits on an annual basis and its President is Seema Malhotra MP, a British Labour Party and Co-operative politician. The Network also publishes the quarterly magazine, Fabiana, runs a range of public speaking events, works closely in partnership with a range of women’s campaigning organisations and regularly hosts a fringe at the Labour Party conference.

Criticism

In the early 1900s Fabian Society members advocated the ideal of a scientifically planned society and supported eugenics by way of sterilization.[34] In an article published in The Guardian on 14 February 2008 (following the apology offered by Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to the “stolen generations“), Geoffrey Robertson criticised Fabian socialists for providing the intellectual justification for the eugenics policy that led to the stolen generations scandal.[35][36] However, this stands as an independent criticism of Fabianism as no other prominent lawyers, historians or political figures have been found to draw any such conclusion, other than Robertson himself. Such views on socialism, inequality and eugenics amongst 20th century Fabians was not a phenomenon limited to one individual or group of people; these were widely shared throughout a broad political spectrum.[37][38]

Further reading

  • David Howell, British Workers and the Independent Labour Party, 1888–1906. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1983.
  • A.M. McBriar, Fabian Socialism and English Politics, 1884–1918. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1962.
  • Edward R. Pease, A History of the Fabian Society. New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1916.
  • Lisanne Radice, Beatrice and Sidney Webb: Fabian Socialists. London: Macmillan, 1984.
  • George Bernard Shaw (ed.), Fabian Essays in Socialism. London: Fabian Society, 1931.
  • George Bernard Shaw, The Fabian Society: Its Early History. [1892] London: Fabian Society, 1906.
  • Willard Wolfe, From Radicalism to Socialism: Men and Ideas in the Formation of Fabian Socialist Doctrines, 1881–1889. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press,

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 447-451

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 439-446

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 431-438

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 422-430

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 414-421

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 408-413

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 400-407

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 391-399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 383-390

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 376-382

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 369-375

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 360-368

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 354-359

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 346-353

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...