Questions and answers about Stalin and the Stalin
Sono un giovane studente romano di 15 anni e da qualche tempo mi interesso di storia del novecento e politica. Ho letto il suo libro su Stalin, che ho trovato molto interessante e che mi ha permesso di comprendere il valore storico di questo personaggio, comunque le scrivo questa lettera per sottoporle alcune osservazioni e dubbi.
1) Nel suo libro non cita la testimonianza dell'ambasciatore americano Joseph E Davis:
A Sua Eccellenza il Segretario di Stato
n° 57 Mosca, 17 febbraio 1937 (Riservato)
... With an interpreter by my side, I have closely followed the testimony, I must confess that I was prejudiced against the reliability of the testimony of those accused. The unanimity of their confessions, had undergone a long imprisonment with the possibility of coercion used to them or to their families aroused in me the serious doubts. But judging objectively and based on my experience, they have arrived, albeit reluctantly, the conclusion that the State had failed to show what you want, or at least to prove the existence of a massive conspiracy against the Soviet Government by To assume that political leaders ... the whole process was a frame would be to admit the existence of a creative great as Shakespeare and the ability to direct a Belasco. The historical background and current circumstances, they also grant some credibility to the evidence. The argument made by Radek Sokolnikov and a justification of their activities and the result is perfectly logical. The details came to light really have confirmed the allegations and the conduct of the accused had its weight in my opinion .... The accused minors, who were just performers, they told the details of the crimes.
Given the evidence, I think that any court of any jurisdiction could only to judge guilty of violation of the accused.
I have spoken with nearly all members of the Diplomatic Corps here and, with one exception, all are of the opinion that has been clearly shown that there was a plot to overthrow the government,,, Joseph E. Davies
Or is this statement by a French ambassador in Moscow during those years:
"Tukhachevsky ... had actually taken command of a movement that aimed to stifle the party and to establish a military dictatorship "
Coulundre Robert French Ambassador in Moscow 36 to 38 - 1950
By chance not to be reliable?
2) is often given to Stalin accused of not tolerating policies different from hers, she is aware of people who occasionally took positions different from those of the president without being purified?
3) The political testament of Lenin in my opinion, nothing counts for little, the same Trotsky reduce its value:
Vladimir Ilyich did not leave any "will", and the same character of its relations with the party, as the character of the party itself, discounted the possibility of such a "testament". The release of migration, the foreign press and the bourgeois Menshevik usually remembered as "will" a letter from Vladimir Ilyich (so altered as to be unrecognizable) containing organizational tips. The XIII Congress has scrutinized this letter also, like all others, and drew the conclusions in accordance with the conditions and circumstances of the moment. Any talk on concealment or breach of the "head" is an evil invention, and is entirely directed against the actual will of Vladimir Ilic and interests of the party he created.
L. Trotsky Article "About Eastman's book - After the death of Lenin - Bolsheviks n ° 16, 1 September 1925
also seems that Stalin after becoming aware of the test resigned from his post twice, but twice the party comrades, including Trotsky, and Kamanev Zinon'ev, voted against the measure. Do you know something?
'blather' may 'but must have a sense of proportion. It is said that this' will' mate Lenin propose to Congress that, given the 'rudeness' of Stalin, you should think about replacing it with another fellow in the office of Secretary-General. It is absolutely true, yes, I'm rude, companions in regard to those who so rude and evil destroy and split the party. This I have not hidden, or hide it. Perhaps it would take a certain sweetness in respect of the division but not from me you will get. At the first plenary session of the XIII Congress of the CC after I asked the general assembly of the CC to exempt themselves from the post of secretary general. The conference discussed the same issue. Each delegation has discussed, and all delegations unanimously, including Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev, Comrade Stalin imposed to remain in place. So what could I do? Escaping from my place? It is not in my nature, have never escaped from nowhere and have no right to do so, since this would be a desertion. As I said before, are not free to dispose of me when the party requires one thing I must submit. A year later I again asked the general assembly to be relieved from office, but again I was forced to stay. What then could I do?
As for the publication of 'will', Congress decided not to publish it because it was addressed to Congress and was not intended for print ... The opposition points all his cards on the 'will' of Lenin. But you just read this 'will' to understand that their cards are worth anything. On the contrary, the 'text' of Lenin is fatal to the current opposition leaders. It is a fact, indeed, that Lenin in his 'testament' Trotsky accused of 'not Bolshevism', and the errors of Kamenev and Zinoviev at the time of October said that it is not error 'random'. What does this mean? This means that politically you can not trust nor Trotsky, who is sick of 'not Bolshevism', nor Kamenev and Zinoviev, whose errors are not 'random' and can be repeated and repeated. It is characteristic that the 'test' there is neither a word or a hint to the errors of Stalin. It speaks only of the harshness of Stalin. But the harshness is not and can be a fault line or political position of Stalin (Stalin, Collected Works, vol. X, pp. 185-189).
3) Another do you acknowledge that Stalin is not to have taken advantage of people's democracy inherent in a socialist state, but by what is stated in the American journalist Anna Lee Strong to the Soviet constitution of '36 there was a substantial contribution of the Soviet people. In his book never refers to this, perhaps the journalist in question is not an unbiased source?
The project .... of the Constitution was presented to the people in 60 million copies printed. This project was discussed in assemblies 527 000, which took part in 36 million people. For months every newspaper was filled with readers' letters on the draft Constitution, amendments were proposed about 154 000 ... ..
From "The era of Stalin"
4) After the Second World War, the countries liberated by the Red Army were communist or socialist majority was imposed? It seems that there were elections to determine what should be the future of the country, but these elections were rigged at the end to win the Communists, you know something about it?
5) The writer Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, he was interned in the Gulag, from what it seems, just for criticizing Stalin in a letter intercepted. It does not seem likely to have been incarcerated for that reason alone, you better know the facts?
I hope that all of its commitments will be able to answer these questions, anyway thank you in advance and ask if he plans writing a new book.
Sincerely, Andrea Mingo
DL
1) On several occasions my book mentions that Western diplomats and statesmen have endorsed the version of Stalin. But the various charges against Stalin I'm worried to take new evidence, including Trotsky and his followers!
2) At least on the military is significant testimony that I carried over the front pages of the book: Judging from the testimony dell’ammiraglio Nikolai Kusnezov, il leader supremo [Stalin] «apprezzava in modo particolare quei compagni che ragionavano con la loro testa e non esitavano ad esprimere il loro punto di vista senza compromessi».
E' presumibile che anche sulla Costituzione si sia sviluppato un ampio dibattito. La situazione comincia a cambiare con con l'attentato terroristico che costa la vita a quello strettissimo collaboratore di Stalin che era Kirov
3) Sul «Testamento» di Lenin, mi sono già espresso su questo blog. Qualunque sia il significato di quel «Testamento», non spetta a un leader scegliere il suo successore...
4) Occorre fare opportune distinctions. There is no doubt that the Communist Party and the Soviet Union enjoyed a wide or broad consensus in a country such as Czechoslovakia, more problematic was the situation in Poland.
5) I have no particular information about the case. But you can make a general consideration: The ruthlessness and the excessive power of the West media turn even a single case of "dissent" in a relentless campaign and political agitation, which go far beyond of the 'review' . This also made it difficult in "real socialism" the transition from a state of emergency to normal, except that you should not lose sight of the errors and limits of ideological and political elites of each country and the communist movement as a whole.
