Talk:Russian famine of 1921

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Russia Portal
Russian famine of 1921 is part of the WikiProject Russian history, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Russian history. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Russian famine of 1921 was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: January 18, 2006

Contents

[edit] Genocide

  • It is policy that it should be obvious to any reader coming from the category to the article that the category applies, and why it applies.
    • Therefore add the evidence for genocide first, and then apply the cat.
  • Describing even the Holodomor as genocide (rather than, say, mass murder) is iffy, although the case can be made: it requires that Stalin have cared which peasants he starved.
  • In 1921, asserting even that Lenin intended mass death, and the consequent loss of resources to the Bolshevik state, is questionable. He could have caused millions more deaths by a simple, obvious, and feasible course of action, which he did not take.
    • Instead he reversed foreign and domestic policy so as to alleviate the famine.
    • Asserting that he intended to destroy any "national, ethnical, racial or religious group" goes well beyond the evidence.
  • None of this denies the argument, made in the article and by several sources, that Bolshevik dogmatism was one of the causes of the famine.
  • I presume that Ghirlandajo did not intend to remove either sources or supported text by reversion.
    • Doing so knowingly would be vandalism.

Septentrionalis 16:53, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

The categorization of Holodomor should be argued there. Frankly, I have only the weakest opinion on the subject.

Unjustified categorization of this article for that purpose is a violation of WP:Point, which is also policy. (For whatever it may be worth, the Famine of 1921 did starve many in the Ukraine, as well as Russia proper. That being said, I regard the comparison of body-counts for purposes of deciding which nationalism can yell "victim" loudest as a contemptible exercise; worthy of summary reversion, independent of all other considerations.) Septentrionalis 15:54, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tsarist

I have reverted an edit that changed the spelling "tsarist" to "Czarist". I agree that a capital letter is appropriate, but I think the Ts spelling is more accurate than the Cz one. Witness the entry for Tsar: 'The spelling tsar is the closest possible transliteration of the Russian using standard English spelling'. Rbreen

[edit] Failed Good Article

There are no inline references and no images or even tables. joturner 04:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Odd. The relevant good article requirements
  • the article be referenced.
    • It is, to quite decent printed sources, which are probably more reliable, on this subject, than anything on the web.
  • that it contain images if possible.
    • I know of no relevant available image with secure provenance, and decline to adorn with random pictures of the Kremlin.

Septentrionalis 21:56, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Original research

The claim of a "second civil war" against the peasantry is unsourced (as is the entire paragraph to which it belongs). The Trotsky paragraph should have a source noted in the References; is it the Life of Lenin? - and why should the reader have to guess? Septentrionalis 01:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Trotsky attributes blame many times to external conditions for the famine, whether in his Military Writings or his autobiography, "My Life." Furthermore, I don't see why my addition after the Kennan mention was deleted. If this is done, it seems that it would be better to put Kennan's finger-pointing in the "Charges and Countercharges" section, which I am going to do. (70.237.240.189)

It wasn't deleted: it was moved, because it interrupted the paragraph (implicitly) sourced to Kennan. I don't dispute the Trotsky quote, but do find it; if the present link says anything, please add the words to the article. I can't find them here. Note that it must cover 1921-3, after all but the Japanese had withdrawn; not 1918-1920. Septentrionalis 05:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
As this goes on, my patience in waiting for the citation diminishes. Septentrionalis 05:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Ultramarine's estimate of up to 10 million dead is not supported by his sources. Matthew White quotes no estimate for it separately higher than Furet's 5 million, and some lower. If it comes back with the same sources, it should be removed. Septentrionalis 05:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I will continue to put George Kennan's affixation of blame where it belongs: in the Charges and Countercharges section. It doesn't even (implicitly) interrupt the flow of the paragraph anymore, considering the recent changes. Any relatively objective observer will see that finger-pointing does NOT belong in a purportedly objective historical exposition. (70.237.240.189 07:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Deletions of sourced material

Unfortunately, someone is instantly deleting the well-referenced material I am adding. Also, the person is inserting POV and unsourced material regarding Lenin's responsiblity. The grain sales started well before his illness. See this diff, all the statements are well-sourced [1]

Does one need to be a rocket scientist to see that something called "The Black Book of Communism" is probably a work that will spend much of its written existence villifying communism, and thus selectively choosing whichever facts fit that mission? As another user so eloquently put it, would we ask Hitler to write a history of the Jews? If one were to take Ultramarine's position: Yes! Why not? It's sourced, isn't it? (Kozlovesred 22:38, 25 January 2006 (UTC))

I repeat: I'll be just as relentless as you are, pmanderson. Why don't you join me in this discussion page and explain yourself? (Kozlovesred 00:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC))

Have you noticed that the section is not called Charges and counterchanges any more? But I will try another attempt, taking out all blame. Have you found the source for that Trotsky quote yet?Septentrionalis 00:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

No, I have not noticed that. My mistake. I'll be looking for that Trotsky quote. (Kozlovesred 01:45, 26 January 2006 (UTC))

I hope this suffices, Septentrionalis. It's fairly short, and explicitly titled "The Disabled of the Civil War." If it doesn't, then please tell me why, and I will attempt to go find another example. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1921-mil/ch16.htm) (Kozlovesred 02:58, 26 January 2006 (UTC))

Wait, my friends, I have found a better example. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1921-mil/ch64.htm) It's fairly long, but do yourself a favor and read one of the great masters of prose, even if you don't agree with his politics. (Kozlovesred 03:02, 26 January 2006 (UTC))

It's a vivid speech, and belongs in the article - but it seems to be saying that the "philanthropic" ventures are the instruments of the capitalist powers, not that they caused the famine. What am I missing (cut and paste, if you can)? Septentrionalis 04:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that he implies throughout that their (the Communists') hands were forced. Now as you probably well know, it's extremely hard, if not impossible, to elucidate all the causes for the famine, since with such a complex historical occurrence there's always a factor or more that somebody forgets or ignores. The Bolsheviks had a hand to play as well, of course. But the point is that they didn't act that way in a vacuum, nor did their adversaries. Kozlovesred 04:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

This might be a more direct article. (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1921-mil/ch68.htm) Kozlovesred 04:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

That would be the one. Thanks, Koz. Septentrionalis 15:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
In fact, the Black Book of Communism is a respected academic book published in University Press by six historians. It has received extensive praise, see this [2]. No valid reason for ignoring NPOV on this article has been presented. Ultramarine 10:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
So it is; but most of Ultramarine's edits have been more anti-Communist than his source. Don't disparage it; read it. Septentrionalis 15:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

"'I'm convinced he's a robot produced by the CIA. Take his user-name: Ultra Marine. His level of contributions is quite phenomenal.... ...In the long term, I fear that Resistance May Be Futile." - Ultramarine user page.

Please try to avoid ad hominem. Also, will add a disputed tag for the unsourced and false statement that the grain sales were after his illness.Ultramarine 14:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
  • His strokes and his aphasia are in Vladimir Lenin#Premature death. Does Ultramarine dispute those dates? (He really should do so there too.)
  • Is Ultramarine claiming the grain sales took place before 1923? What is his source?
  • After does not appear in the text. Septentrionalis 15:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
You are stating that his responsiblity can be questioned due to his illness. The famine was in 1921, his stroke in 1922, thus dubious.Ultramarine 15:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
And the grain sales, which were what I questioned his reponsibility for, were in 1923. Please read in context. 20:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Unless a dispute of fact is indicated on this page, the {{dubious}} tag is unwarranted. So far there is none. Septentrionalis 16:54, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Obviously there is a dispute of fact, this statement is obviously inaccurate.Ultramarine 16:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Cite sources for claims.Ultramarine 16:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I see no evidence for the assertion, which the present text makes, that the Tambov rebellion helped convince Lenin to change course. Unlike the other factors mentioned, it was not news in the spring of 1921.Septentrionalis 15:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

A very large scale peasant rebellion certainly contributed.Ultramarine 15:23, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
This would require evidence on Lenin's decision making. The Tambov rebellion should be mentioned; it may deserve a paragraph of its own - but not here. Septentrionalis 20:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Another strange argument: "rv. Info from unverified website do not count please read what exactly Pipes wrote and come back" Of course I have read the book, the link however gives a good summary. Ultramarine 17:58, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

We wrote almost simultaneously. Sorry about that. I hope the text below will clarify what I meant. And allow me to disagree that your link gives a good summary of Pipes. mikka (t) 18:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pomgol liquidated

Later most of the Russian members organizing the aid was liquidated

Ultramarine, I have no doubts that this sentence is generally correct. However there are two problems with it. First, you took this info from a website of dubious authorsip, which cannot be considered reliable, even if it quotes some books. Hint: Game of telephone. Second, the key is the word "later". During the Great Purge nearly 80% of Old Bolsheviks were "liquidated" (that's why I tend to believe that the statement is true), but there is no reason to think this was related with their activity in Pomgol. mikka (t) 18:01, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I promise, I will write the Pomgol article, where, anmong other things, I will describe what and when exactly happened with their members. mikka (t) 18:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Just an example of the general ignorance displayed in the quoted (and deleted) sentence. Pomgol was a statewide effort with thousands of participants in various regional sections. So most probably the phrase meant to speak about Pomgol Central Committee created within VTsIK. mikka (t) 19:18, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

  • The Bolsheviks used this as an excuse to liquidate the Orthodox Church
    • Very plausible; but a source is needed both for the claimed connection to the famine and that this was only an excuse. Septentrionalis 18:01, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Subordinate officials did not report famine in their districts until May 1922.
    • Again, a very plausible variety of administrative incompetence, but it needs a source. Septentrionalis 18:01, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

What about this one?

http://www.marxists.de/religion/crouch/bolshislam.html

"Popular support for Orthodoxy was significantly undermined, however, in late 1921 when its leader, Patriarch Tikhon, refused to sell off church valuables to raise foreign currency needed to feed famine victims, of whom there were millions. This was the context in which some 45 priests were executed for organising resistance to Trotsky’s campaign to seize wealth from the church. This harsh policy has to be seen in the context of a famine emergency, not as a malicious attack on the church."

Original source:

W. Husband, Godless Communists: Atheism and Society in Soviet Russia 1917-1932 (Illinois, 2000), pp.54-57.

Darth Sidious 02:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tambov rebellion

I have readded this, with a linking sentence. Any peasant rebellion in 1921 is surely connected with the famine; but I have another reason to want it. The accounts of hostages and poison gas are widely enough distributed over the web that some readers will want to check them out; some PoV editors will want to add them. Including the (quite limited) facts will inform the first, and deter the second. Both are good. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

This article is overwhelmed with things "related", but close to none of the actual topic. Tambov Rebellion is detailed in its own article, but not a single word on the famine itself besides generalities. Copying information from one article to another is rather meaningless in wikipedia, which is not paper, and everything is a mouse click away. Please concentrate on what article title says. In its current state the article is very useless. `'Míkka 17:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
It started here. I must further disagree with the cutting of the first World War paragraph; part of Kennan's analysis is that the food supply of Russia was under strain before the crop failure. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)