Starting in Chapter X (“Into the Planned Economy”), Conquest begins to examine the relation of the Western world to the Communist world from two basic standpoints: the almost incredible extent of the deception that was practiced by Stalinism, both internally and externally, and, in retrospect, the equally incredible extent of the West’s willingness to be fooled by that deception. The “planned economy” was a concept that appealed “not only to revolutionaries, but also to foreign scholars and others seeking a rational society,” who were only too ready to accept the “facts and figures” supplied by Stalin’s apparat. Chief among them were “those deans of Western social science”, the Fabian socialists Sidney and Beatrice Webb, “who are now, in this field at least, rightly forgotten.”
The true dimensions of the falsifications and distortions that were built into the official statistics released by the Soviet state have only recently become clear, with the publication of previously restricted material. “The striking thing is,” Conquest notes, “is that, in almost every respect, the history, including the history of Stalin’s postwar foreign policy, turns out to be even worse than we had envisaged.” The history makes some grim reading: in his earlier book, The Harvest of Sorrow, the author had a whole page of individual reports of Ukrainians going north into Russia in 1930-33, during the “terror-famine”, in search of bread, and being arrested or sent back: “Now we have the secret telegram, dated January 21, 1933, from Stalin and Molotov to the party and police chiefs of the provinces affected. It orders the blocking of peasants trying to enter Russia from the Ukraine or Kuban; they are to be sent back and the ringleaders arrested.” Even more serious is the evidence that the Soviet leaders were perfectly well aware that famine would result if their plans were put into implementation – though for decades this was denied by Western academics and historians. Conquest quotes a recently-discovered document relating to a Politburo decision of 1932, in which Molotov, who had just returned from the Ukraine, wrote: “We definitely face the spectre of famine, especially in the rich bread areas.” The decision insisted, however, that “Whatever the cost, the confirmed plan for grain requisition must be fulfilled.”
There is further evidence of the falsification of statistics during the period of the terror-famine:
I was able, from the odd report, to note that the registration of death has been largely suspended in the Ukraine after October 1932. From the newly available documents, we now have direct analyses. In the Kiev Medical Inspectorate, 9,742 corpses were noted, only 3,997 of which were registered, and similar things were reported from other districts.At the same time, the propaganda offensive continued:
On another point, a report to the Central Committee from the deputy head of the North Caucasus Political Section of the Machine Tractor Stations alleged that kulak bodies were being left near the railways to “simulate famine” (see E.N. Oskolkov, Golod 1932-1933).The Western delusions about the Soviet Union – delusions held above all by a large section of the educated liberal left, who wanted to believe that the new state was the incarnation of all the ideals of etatist socialism they had nurtured for so long – were reinforced further by the writings of contemporary political observers. Eminent among these was the British historian E.H. Carr, to whom Conquest devotes considerable attention. Carr’s first political book, which was published on the eve of World War II, was a study in the application of “political realism” to European politics: it advocated appeasement of Hitler. During the war, Carr served as a leader-writer on the London Times, which at that period was regarded as the voice of establishment orthodoxy, and even of official government policy. “The tone,” Conquest writes, “might be called magisterial or condescending, depending on one’s taste.” However, in 1944, Carr abandoned his “realism” in order to attack British government policy on the fighting in Greece: when British troops prevented a Communist takeover of the country, Carr hotly opposed the action on the grounds that the Communist partisans “appeared to exercise almost unchallengeable authority” over most of Greece…After the war, Carr began work on his massive History of Soviet Russia. It consists of 14 volumes, the last six of which take as their focus and rationale the “planned economy” which its author believed was emerging in the USSR – and which, it is important to note, he considered to point out the direction of the world’s future.
Conquest analyses Carr’s acceptance of Soviet official “facts”, showing how it played along with the Soviet promotion of such phantasmagoria as the “five-year plans” so beloved of Soviet orthodoxy: these “plans” were in fact no more than a set of targets for various industries – targets which were repeatedly increased, with pressure to “overfulfill” them. Carr’s readiness to accept official Communist accounts was, Conquest suggests, merely one more expression of an intellectual prejudice that characterized large sections of the political left in Europe. Although towards the end of his life Carr criticized the inhumanities of Stalin’s regime, he did so belatedly and inadequately: right to the end, he insisted that it was wrong to “moralize” about the crimes of Stalin – and even of Hitler. This approach, the essay points out, lives on today in the so-called “non-judgmental” neutrality promoted in many academic quarters. But, as Conquest notes:
… neutrality on such issues is itself a moral stance, and this human failing goes with a smug affectation of being above the battle. Carr’s view that history is not, or not much, interested in the losers has long been criticized as both insensitive and uncomprehensive. But the past decade has relegated his favorites, the proletarian revolution and the planned economy, to the status of… losers.
See also: Dragons and Democracy
Dragons and Democracy - II
Dragons and Democracy - III
Dragons and Democracy - IV
Dragons and Democracy - V
Dragons and Democracy - VI
No comments:
Post a Comment