A question about the number of people killed by Stalin

Reply

TANSTAAFL replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 6:51 AM

rated by 0 users

Find a copy of The Black Book of Communism

Reply

CrazyCoot replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 6:56 AM

rated by 0 users

I know about the Black Book, but I think the response would be " That´s just propaganda."  I´ve had other people make the same claim during debates.  They must learn it somewhere.  Are there any historians who make the claim that the numbers of people killed by Stalin, and other communist regimes, are blown out of proportion due to political bias? 

Reply

Tex2002ans replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 7:43 AM

rated by 0 users

I cannot speak all of the people who hold that view, but I remember Maltsev mentioning it in a few of his speeches (I think he was talking about Lenin though), that the explanation was:

"They weren't killed by the state, most of those people died of "natural causes."" (starvation, freezing, etc.)

Reply

EmperorNero replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 8:06 AM

rated by 0 users

CrazyCoot:

I was talking  with a guy at a bar the other day when the topic of WWII came up. I said we should have stayed out, he said the opposite.  Then I made the point that Stalin was just as bad as Hitler.  He came back with the claim that the purported number of people killed by Stalin is much much larger than the real number, and that the numbers have been inflated.  The two-part question is;  is this a commonly held view and is there any form of historical evidence to back up his argument?

Arguing the precise number of deaths is a red herring, a distraction from the main argument. Memes like that survive precisely because they employ such distractions to escape the argument that would prove them wrong. Just ask him what he considers the real number and go with that. His 'uninflated' number is big enough to make your point.

Reply

Marko replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 9:02 AM

rated by 0 users

I was talking  with a guy at a bar the other day when the topic of WWII came up. I said we should have stayed out, he said the opposite.  Then I made the point that Stalin was just as bad as Hitler.  He came back with the claim that the purported number of people killed by Stalin is much much larger than the real number, and that the numbers have been inflated.  The two-part question is;  is this a commonly held view and is there any form of historical evidence to back up his argument?

Was there a specific number you talked about?

Reply

Laotzu del Zinn replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 11:31 AM

rated by 0 users

The 40 million number is bogus right on its face.  But Stalin was stil a worthless puke and a tyrant.  The actual number of people killed "by the state" is somewhere between 200k and 1million, probably closer to the former.  The vast majority of deaths are from famines in some of the soviet sattelite states, somewhere around 2million to a possible 10 million.  Reliable stats from the Soviets are hard to come by.

But whether it's 200k, 2million, or 2 billion, that doesn't change one thing about Stalin, or M-L policy one iota.

Reply

Clayton replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 12:19 PM

rated by 0 users

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/USSR.CHAP.1.HTM

Rummel's pretty much got the market cornered on government murder stats. If there's information you're not finding on the webpage above, I recommend emailing him directly. His solution, unfortunately, is democracy (more of the same) but his documentation of the problem is excellent.

http://www.amazon.com/Power-Kills-Democracy-Method-Nonviolence/dp/0765805235

Clayton -

Reply

David Sherin replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 1:06 PM

rated by 0 users

Laotzu del Zinn,

Why do you believe the real figure is so much lower? I'm not saying you're wrong,I'm just curious. I agree with your point though that ultimately it doesn't matter whether it's 200,000 or 2 billion. 

Reply

Laotzu del Zinn replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 2:10 PM

rated by 0 users

I got into a big debate with a Stalinist, and the more I researched Stalin's murder rate, the smaller and smaller it got.  The 40m number is widely regarded as absolute bollox.

Reply

William replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 2:16 PM

rated by 0 users

But whether it's 200k, 2million, or 2 billion, that doesn't change one thing about Stalin, or M-L policy one iota. 

There is this.  And also the fact that few of us have little or anything to do with Stalin, ad couldn't name a single person we met to suffer under him and are more interested in bringing up large/small statistical numbers to make communism look good/bad or whatever.

Reply

nirgrahamUK replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 2:18 PM

rated by 0 users

widely regarded?

Reply

EmperorNero replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 2:19 PM

rated by 0 users

Laotzu del Zinn:

I got into a big debate with a Stalinist, and the more I researched Stalin's murder rate, the smaller and smaller it got.  The 40m number is widely regarded as absolute bollox.

It depends what kinds of indirect murder you count. Do you only count those they actually shot, or those who starved because of the economic disruption and epidemics caused by Stalinism. If you took it to it's extreme, the number would be zero, since I don't think Stalin ever killed anyone personally. Maybe earlier in his life, but not after being in charge of the Soviet union.

Reply

Clayton replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 3:00 PM

rated by 0 users

Rummel has carefully categorized all the deaths which are down to the Soviet government, what Rummel terms "democide". Let me give Rummel's definition of democide:

Genocide: among other things, the killing of people by a government because of their indelible group membership (race, ethnicity, religion, language).
Politicide: the murder of any person or people by a government because of their politics or for political purposes.

Mass Murder: the indiscriminate killing of any person or people by a government.

Democide: The murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder.

The "bullet in the back of the head" definition of government murder used by a Stalin apologist is bizarre in the extreme. As you noted, Laotzu, even if the number of dead was "merely" 200,000, the Stalin apologist would still have failed in his essential purpose, to give an apologetic for the actions of Stalin and his government. 200,000 murders is orders of magnitude more prolific than the most blood-soaked serial killer who ever lived.

However, if you sensibly expand the definition of death by government to include all forms of death that are the direct result of government policy, the number of deaths due to democide in the 20th century alone is staggering... 262 million by Rummel's count. Rummel says (from the same webpage above):

I have found that in the vast majority of events and episodes democide is unambiguous. When under the command of higher authorities soldiers force villagers into a field and then machine gun them, there should be no question about definition. When a group armed by the government for this purpose turn the teachers and students out of their school, line up those of a particular tribe and shoot them, it is surely democide. When all food stuffs are systematically removed from a region by government authorities and a food blockade is put in place, the resulting deaths must be democide. Sad to say, most cases of government killing in this century is that clear. The number of deaths will be hazy for many of these cases; the perpetrators and intent will not. 

Rummel puts the number of dead by the hands of Soviets between 1917 and 1987 at around 62 million. That is sobering to any sensible person.

Clayton -

Reply

Marko replied on Mon, Apr 4 2011 3:34 PM

rated by 0 users

I got into a big debate with a Stalinist, and the more I researched Stalin's murder rate, the smaller and smaller it got.  The 40m number is widely regarded as absolute bollox.

I am not aware of a "the 40m number". There are many numbers out there, none of which is really regarded as "the number". A few million, 5 million, 20 million, 40 million, 60 million, 75 million, 80 million, you can hear just about anything.