@Jacob

dude that's really long

can you summarize or give me a specific paragraph to look for?

okay so I read the conclusion

the author is basically saying what I was saying

He says that it was largely the result of bad policies plus two bad harvests, and that it *might* be genocide if you use a broad enough interpretation of the word

I don't disagree with his analysis that Stalin's bad policies likely made the famine worse. The only issue I have is that the author doesn't take into account that the Kulaks were burning their own grain out of spite.

page 676

I read the page

doesn't say that Ukrainians were targeted

it also says "I do not argue that Stalin wanted to annihilate the peasants"

he deliberately starved people yes

maybe he did, but that's not the point I'm making

I'm not saying Stalin did nothing wrong, I'm just saying that there's no evidence there was a targeted campaign against Ukrainians

There's plenty of reasons Stalin was bad, we don't need to make stuff up to say he was bad

according to this faulty definition communists could never be said to commit genocide since they saw the world in terms of classes

he did undermine Ukrainian nationalism as well tho

"According to them [Davies and Wheatcroft], only taking an action whose sole objective is to cause deaths among the peasantry counts as intent. Taking an action with some other goal (e.g. exporting grain to import machinery) but which the actor certainly knows will also cause peasants to starve does not count as intentionally starving the peasants. However, this is an interpretation of 'intent' which flies in the face of the general legal interpretation."

the sort of non racial communists of the past could be said to never commit genocide since they would not have wanted that even if they did effectively do that

I think we're kinda talking past each other

thats fine

im going to bed

oh well!

My point here isn't to say whether they intentionally killed people or not. I mean, they obviously did in some cases, but that's not the point here.

The point I was making was just that there's no evidence *Ukrainians specifically* were targetted

imma pull up the undermining of ukrainian nationalism another time. goodnight

I didn’t know much here so did some reading. Vince basically said what I wanted to say and more

But let me get this straight Stalin kills 30,000 of the wealthiest, aka best, farmers in Russia.

Then he expects Ukrainians to foot the bill. And when the Ukrainians can’t perform as well he takes grain and lets them starve.

@VinceChaos Good night

I think the term genocide is the issue. It’s genocide out of negligence.

Worse than negligence. But negligence at best.

Well have to confiscate that corn supply.

For all you language enthusiasts, do you recommend I learn Danish or Swedish first?

I haven't looked into the killing farmers thing. The point I was making was just that Ukrainians just happened to be more likely to live in grain producing areas. If you look at the map of affected areas, there's plenty of ethnic Ukrainian areas that weren't affected, and plenty of ethnic Russian areas that were affected. So, my point still stands, there's no evidence that Ukrainians specifically were being targeted.

That would depend why you're learning it

@Jacob lol I use the archives as well! Just not the Soviet ones... <:teehee:381917632359563264>

I mean the Soviet archives reveal plenty of really incriminating stuff about the Soviet Union

It's mainly cultural interest. I don't have any plans on living in Sweden or Denmark long term.

oh, if it's just out of interest, then just choose based on which country you're more interested in