National uprisings against the USSR

33 posts / 0 new
Last post
meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Jan 26 2016 09:03
National uprisings against the USSR

.
Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia were an independent States. In 1920-1921, they were occupied by the red Army and forcibly incorporated into the USSR. In February 1921 Armenians to protest against mass repressions of the Communists, staged a rebellion, capturing the Armenian capital Yerevan. The rebellion was suppressed, the same way as national liberation uprising in Georgia in 1924. In Azerbaijan also have been some revolts against the USSR.
.
In Turkestan (Central Asia) the Bolsheviks occupied the region, destroying local Autonomy in Kokand and suppressing the resistance of the majority indigenous Muslim population. Armed resistance to the Bolsheviks in Central Asia headed a group called the Basmachi, among which there were nationalists and Islamists, supporters of democratic state and moderate socialists from the party named ERK. War in Turkestan lasted about 20 years. According to modern Uzbek historian Shuhrat Barlas, during the war several million people have been killed.
.
Yakuts rebelled against reds 3 times in 1921-1923, 1924-1925, 1927-1928!
.
Lithuania, Estonia and Chechnya were occupied by Stalin in 1940. Lithuania and Estonia rebelled against the USSR in 1941, as they tried to use the defeat of the red army at the front. Lithuania was covered by a huge uprising, while 30 thousand Lithuanians mobilized into the Red army, killed their red commanders, and fled, destroying the right flank of the army of the USSR. It has become one of the important reasons for the defeat of the red army in the border battle with the Wehrmacht. These events had tragic consequences as nazi-German occupation of Lithuania and Estonia and mass repressions, but from the point of view of the Lithuanian rebels USSR was no better than the Nazis. The reason for this was that Stalin occupied Lithuania in 1940 and organized mass repression against the population.
.
The name of the leader of Chechen rebellion at the same time was Hassan Israilov. This chechen rebellion like some others, had not only a national reason, but a social one: the rebels resisted the introduction of the system of collective farms, which led to the enslavement of the peasantry and the massive seizures of food from the peasants who constituted the majority of the population of the some insurgent regions.
.
After the second world war, insurrection and guerrilla war against the Soviet Union encompassed Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Western Ukraine (against the USSR battled to 100 thousand partisans of Ukrainian nationalists OUN-UPA) and Belarus . However, this war was not only national but also social in nature. Millions of peasants in Lithuania, Chechnya, Ukraine etc. had been supporting the rebels because they resisted turning population into state slaves of a system of collective farms. So Army Liberation of Lithuania (ALL) led by Jonas Zemaitis, had almost total support from the population and destroyed part of the the military and police of the USSR. Armed resistance in Ukraine and Lithuania lasted until the mid of 1950's.
.
In Belarus acted guerrilla movement against the USSR under the name Black Cat.
.
The Soviet leadership responded to the rebellion with mass murder and ethnic cleansing. 500 thousand Chechens and Ingush, hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, Balts and others were deported. With the aim of changing the ethnic composition of the regions the Soviet leadership has incorporated there the Russian-speaking enclaves and carried out a policy of resettlement of ethnic Russians. This is one of the reasons for the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 by Khrushchev.
.
According to historian Mark Kramer, with the transfer of the Crimea Khrushchev was going to change the ethnic composition of the USSR in the direction of increasing the ethnic-Russian population, undermining the basis for the development of Ukrainian nationalism. Probably for the same reason, 300 thousand of Crimean Tatars, deported by Stalin from Crimea, as well as tens of thousands of Armenians, Bulgarians, and others not granted the right to return.
.
A few years before, Stalin invited the Lithuanian communist leadership to take control of a huge region - the German city of Konigsberg and surrounding area; reds have already deported millions of Germans and the region had to be inhabited by the Russians. But the Communist leaders of Lithuania had refused this offer.
.
...These uprisings were not social-revolutionary, libertarian and anarchist movements. Of course, they were mainly authoritarian. We must remember that the meaning and purpose of social struggle is not the replacement of one state to another, but in the absence of the state and its replacement by a self-governing Federation of labor collectives of the factories and territories. Nationalism in most cases is an obstacle to this struggle because it distracts oppressed people from the main goal and prevent the international unity of workers.
.
However, are not supporting the leaders of these uprisings, you need to understand the motives of people who rebelled against the system of slavery, of poverty, of mass repressions, established by the Communist party. The USSR was an imperialist power and as all of the Empires met with resistance from the national movements of oppressed peoples.

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Jan 26 2016 09:20

p.s.
On the one forum i was asked: "Ok so you're some kind of supporter of national liberation struggles?"

My answer is: No. Look at the end of this text. I am not a supporter of these movements. They were not libertarian. But first you need to understand causes and at least respect the people resisting the red despotism. Secondly, you need to understand what was the Empire of the USSR. For example I do not support the Palestinian nationalist movement. But in any case, the Israeli occupation must be ended and the occupiers should leave and Palestinian resistance deserves at least understanding - understanding of the reasons that caused it.

Mark.
Offline
Joined: 11-02-07
Jan 26 2016 11:12

Kautsky on Georgia

Gepetto's picture
Gepetto
Offline
Joined: 28-10-12
Jan 26 2016 18:17

Who cares? People who led these were often worse than the USSR, like Latvian, Estonian and Lithuanian "Forest Brothers" who gladly participated in Holocaust (and who were supported by some on the left).

Would you also oppose "imperialist aggression" of USSR in Afghanistan?

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Jan 26 2016 20:41

Who cares? People who led these were often worse than the USSR,

Personally I' don't care even if all the Reds die )


Would you also oppose "imperialist aggression" of USSR in Afghanistan?

For sure

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Jan 27 2016 09:13

People who led these were often worse than the USSR, like Latvian, Estonian and Lithuanian "Forest Brothers" who gladly participated in Holocaust

For exmaple What documents prove that Jonas Zemaitis, head of the Lithuanian partisan army, participated in the Holocaust? Do You just repeat the red lies?


Would you also oppose "imperialist aggression" of USSR in Afghanistan?

So, you take the words of the imperialist aggression in Afghanistan in quotation marks? Do you support the Soviet aggression in Afghanistan? Tell me about it.

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Jan 27 2016 09:15

The roots of Russian imperialism
http://libcom.org/forums/general/roots-russian-imperialism-27012016

Gepetto's picture
Gepetto
Offline
Joined: 28-10-12
Jan 27 2016 16:06
meerov21 wrote:
Do you support the Soviet aggression in Afghanistan? Tell me about it.

There was no aggression, Soviets intervened to defend the left-nationalist government. I don't think that USSR was a workers' state but I think that Soviet Army represented progress in relation to the feudal reaction of the mujahideen and as such deserved solidarity of every radical leftist.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Jan 27 2016 16:59

Gepetto, that's a fucking load of nationalist bollocks. You and Meerov deserve each other.

Gepetto's picture
Gepetto
Offline
Joined: 28-10-12
Jan 27 2016 17:17
Khawaga wrote:
Gepetto, that's a fucking load of nationalist bollocks. You and Meerov deserve each other.

So I'm completely the same like a closeted ultra-nationalist who had "mixed feelings" about pogrom of immigrants in Kondopoga in Russia in 2007 and defends pogromists from Right Sector?

radicalgraffiti
Offline
Joined: 4-11-07
Jan 27 2016 17:45

you can be a reactionary shit with out being identical to every other reactionary shit

radicalgraffiti
Offline
Joined: 4-11-07
Jan 27 2016 17:45

you can be a reactionary shit with out being identical to every other reactionary shit

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Jan 27 2016 18:58

Gepetto So I'm completely the same like a closeted ultra-nationalist who had "mixed feelings" about pogrom of immigrants in Kondopoga in Russia in 2007 and defends pogromists from Right Sector?

And this is another lie of the red. Bring the quote where I defend the attacks on Caucasians or Right sector)))

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Jan 27 2016 18:59

what radicalgrafitti said

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Jan 27 2016 19:04

Gepetto
Jan 27 2016 20:06
meerov21 wrote:
Do you support the Soviet aggression in Afghanistan? Tell me about it.
There was no aggression, Soviets intervened to defend the left-nationalist government. I don't think that USSR was a workers' state but I think that Soviet Army represented progress

Oh... that is enough. Unlike my mythical support pogroms against Caucasians or my mythical support of the right sector... here it's all obvious))

Gepetto's picture
Gepetto
Offline
Joined: 28-10-12
Jan 27 2016 19:33

I just hold to the basic Marxist position that capitalism is progressive in relation to previous social formations because it creates material preconditions for communism, and since I see USSR as society moving towards capitalism, I'd take its side when it would fight feudal reactionaries.

So I am really just as reactionary as the one who sees Banderomaidan as a popular uprising that should have been supported critically, says Right Sector doesn't present a threat to Russian-speaking population (perhaps also towards Jews, though chief rabbi of Kiev would think otherwise) and blames Odessa pogrom on victims, and probably would also "respect" the mujahideen (who fought to get women back into the kitchen) as another heroic fighters against "red despotism"?

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Jan 27 2016 19:57
Quote:
I just hold to the basic Marxist position that capitalism is progressive in relation to previous social formations because it creates material preconditions for communism, and since I see USSR as society moving towards capitalism, I'd take its side when it would fight feudal reactionaries.

How quaint.

Mark.
Offline
Joined: 11-02-07
Jan 27 2016 20:07
Mark. wrote:
Kautsky on Georgia

Gepetto - what position would you take on the Bolsheviks' invasion of Georgia?

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Jan 27 2016 23:24

Right Sector doesn't present a threat to Russian-speaking population

Of course. There is Just the fact that Right Sector - and this is really conservative, authoritarian and nationalist organization which I do not like, consists of Russian-speaking is hardly less than half. Exactly the same as Kiev there Russian-speakers predominate (also at Maidan.)) Just Gepetto has no idea that Ukrainian nationalism, authoritarianism and bourgeois Right Sector has no relation to the language. Or Perhaps they are against the status of state language for Russian language, but they are not against the Russian language in schools, universities and at work (as it is todey in all Ukraine) and not against the Russian-speaking population, just becouse they are Russian-speaking people themselves.This Gepetto simply does not understand the situation in Ukraine. And he doesn't understand what is actually really dangerous with Right Sector.

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Jan 27 2016 23:42

Gepetto There was no aggression, Soviets intervened to defend the left-nationalist government. I don't think that USSR was a workers' state but I think that Soviet Army represented progress

Oh, Yes, Yes, Yes! How much I love Marxists-Leninists or close to them persons, then they think about progress.

By the way, Hitler built a good factorys to produce artificial fuel and a great rockets. So one familiar Marxist-leninist said: "Hitler developed the German economy, built many new factories and created several million jobs, developing technology, so in case of victory Germany would have had a chance at the progressive development".

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Jan 29 2016 09:23

So I hope now, on this occasion the all clear about Gepetto (Antoni Lulek).
I am interesting more in another question.

Khawaga
Gepetto, that's a fucking load of nationalist bollocks. You and Meerov deserve each other.

I write at this article:

"...These uprisings were not social-revolutionary, libertarian and anarchist movements. Of course, they were mainly authoritarian. We must remember that the meaning and purpose of social struggle is not the replacement of one state to another, but in the absence of the state and its replacement by a self-governing Federation of labor collectives of the factories and territories. Nationalism in most cases is an obstacle to this struggle because it distracts oppressed people from the main goal and prevent the international unity of workers.

However, are not supporting the leaders of these uprisings, you need to understand the motives of people who rebelled against the system of slavery, of poverty, of mass repressions, established by the Communist party. The USSR was an imperialist power and as all of the Empires met with resistance from the national movements of oppressed peoples".

So where is nationalism? Do you call "nationalism" all you don't not understand?

Is that new that the colonial Empire generates anti-colonial national liberation movements like the Indian national Congress, the Vietnamese guerrillas, or the Palestinian movement? This is a natural phenomenon. Did I say that I sympathize with this situation? I said that I do not share the views of these movements.

However, the point of my article is that the USSR was a colonial Empire and (like others) gave rise to the same anti-colonial movement. And that's a fact.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Jan 30 2016 20:05

Not referring to your stance on the USSR, but your parroting of Ukrainian/western propaganda on Russia. What you have written on Russia here I see day in many bourgeois newspapers from Europe

Gepetto's picture
Gepetto
Offline
Joined: 28-10-12
Jan 31 2016 12:29
meerov21 wrote:
For exmaple What documents prove that Jonas Zemaitis, head of the Lithuanian partisan army, participated in the Holocaust?

I don't know if he participated, but he certainly collaborated with Nazis for a time, being a soldier of Lithuanian Territorial Defense Force.

I ask you, do you also respect the mujahideen, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (you certainly have warm feelings towards its epigones of Right Sector), or the Polish "cursed soldiers"? They also fought against "red despotism" (and why are you on a communist forum if you hate "reds"?).

rooieravotr
Offline
Joined: 28-10-09
Feb 5 2016 15:51

On Afghanistan. Was that a matter of a "left-nationalist government" being defended by the Russian army against "feudal reaction of the mujahideen", as Gepetto says? And did that defence deserve support? I do not think so.

First, the situation in 1979. Yes, nationalist officers wit Stalinist policies took power. Theu y instigated reforms: land reform, edocation for women. Landlords and religious leaders revolted. That revolt was right wing, reactionary. What was as reactionary, was the way the state enforced the refiorms: by terror and repression. That made the reactionaries look like resisting oppression, and in a very distorted sense, they were. What was at first just a reactionary revolt, grew in to a broader based resistance, in the countryside and in the cities. The stalinist regime was on the verge of being overthrown. The regime,was an ally of the Soviet Union, The Kremlin leadership could not, in their own judgement at least, allow its downfall, not because of any support of capitalist progress against feudal reaction, but because for them Afghanistan was a pawnin the Cold War that was not supposed to fall to the other side: the US supported the other side, already before Russia moved in. It is true that the Russan army moved in to defend the regime there. But that defence had nothing progressive about it. It was a matter of bombing the copuntriside and terrorizing the population in to submission.

Was the resististance 'feudal'? I think that makes no sens if you look at the broader picture. pre-capitalist a forms of expliotation survived in the copun trisede. But the landlords exploited the peasants tio sell the result on the market, not to build castles and hold tournaments with minstrels. Afghanistan was part of capitalism. Look what happened when the Russians withdrew and, a few year later, the regime they left behind fell as well. The Mujahedeen took over, and fell out amongst themselves. They operated, not like a feudal ruling class but like capitalist warlords. One of the gropp of warlords was victorious: the Taliban. They imposed reactionary religious codes. But did they restore 'feudalism'? In fact, they got support from local trading groups for one reason: they rseemed able toiimpose a sort of order on the high rods, so that trade could revive. Not a specifically feudol motivation, I would suggest.

The whole logic of supporting capitalism against a non-existing feudalism is extremely dangerous here. In fact, the US could defend its post 9/11 war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in the very same way, and sometime, in fact, did (using other words but Gepetto 's logic). What, in the meantime, is the main economic activity in the country? Growing opium for export on the world market.

Reddebrek's picture
Reddebrek
Offline
Joined: 4-01-12
Feb 11 2016 04:47

@Rooieravotr,

Minor correction, the "Saur Revolution" took place in April 1978, otherwise that's largely correct. Also what Geppe fails to mention is that the very first act of this Soviet "Defence" was to seize Kabul by surprise and execute the leadership of the PDPA and put an exile (Babrak Kamal) in their place. This basically confirmed to the opposition that the PDPA was a Soviet puppet, and cost the PDPA any support they could have had outside of the party.

Oh and after the Soviet tired of Kamal, they eventually replaced him with Najibullah the head of KHAD the Afghan Secret police, who had been running torture programs and massacres.

It also should be noted that the Afghan Communist party did better militarily and politically after 89 when the Soviet army left. If anything the Soviet intervention just like American interventions harmed the legitimacy of the regimes they tried to prop up.

Oh and it was a brutal and bloody conflict for both Afghans and Soviet citizens, many of whom where conscripts and where plagued with incompetent officers, drug addiction, trauma and guilt over atrocities and all the usual nasty bits of fighting a war. The experience of the Afghansty actually kicked off a large anti war movement in the Soviet Union, effectively causing the internal turmoil they wanted to prevent by going in.
Why its almost like armed conflict doesn't care at all for a nations list of justifications for fighting it.

Entdinglichung's picture
Entdinglichung
Offline
Joined: 2-07-08
Feb 11 2016 09:17

there were in fact also (mostly maoist-inspired) forces in Afghanistan who rejected both the PDPA regime and the Mujaheddin/Jehadi resistance but they were crushed by both sides, they originated in the same circles as the two main wings of the PDPA but were oriented to organize among the rural poor, especially in the North East and the Hazarajat, the PDPA was a quite elitarian and urban group with its base among army officers, civil servants, professionals, etc.

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Feb 13 2016 01:19

Khawaga
"Not referring to your stance on the USSR, but your parroting of Ukrainian/western propaganda on Russia. What you have written on Russia here I see day in many bourgeois newspapers from Europe"

Oh! So if Western Newspapers wrote about Hitler for example (I'm not comparing) that he killed millions of Jews, that means he didn't kill anyone? And if Western Newspapers would say that two times two equals four, you'll be screaming "five! five!"?

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Feb 13 2016 02:10

That's a pretty idiotic comment.

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Feb 13 2016 11:12

Khawaga
"Not referring to your stance on the USSR, but your parroting of Ukrainian/western propaganda on Russia...That's a pretty idiotic comment".

Poor Russia! Poor Saddam! Poor Milosevic! How could Western media blame them for anything? It's obvious that if Western media is criticizing someone, he is innocent!
Now everything is clear. I see that you don't own logic, but use the insults. You insult me, although I didn't use rudeness against you. This is what we call "agony at the forum".

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Feb 13 2016 11:10

meerov21 wrote:
For exmaple What documents prove that Jonas Zemaitis, head of the Lithuanian partisan army, participated in the Holocaust?

Gepetto
I don't know if he participated,

Oh! But before that you said : "People who led these were often worse than the USSR, like Latvian, Estonian and Lithuanian "Forest Brothers" who gladly participated in Holocaust" The level of your awareness is obvious.

"but he certainly collaborated with Nazis for a time, being a soldier of Lithuanian Territorial Defense Force".

In those materials, which are published in Russian, it is said that the Jonas Zemaitis entered into a territorial defense force, organized by Povilas Plechavicius. After the dispersal of these forces by the Nazis, Zemaitis disappeared. In other words, the Nazis dispersed these Lithuanian organizations. However, I have not seen any documents about it. Thus, it is doubtful that Zemaitis was a collaborator. It's possible that he and his companions entered into the "self-defense forces" to obtain weapons. In any case Nazis did not trust this movement and banned it. Also In any case then you say thet he "participated in Holocaust" You lied.
Also In any case I do not support the movement of Zemaitis.))

" why are you on a communist forum if you hate "reds"?"

What?? I support libertarian socialism, Autonomous councils of workers ' deputies, stateless society. I am black or black-and -red. And You're the Reds, the Bolsheviks, authoritarian groups and individuals, supporters of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan - the enemies of socialism and communism. You can call yourself whatever you like, but you have been and will remain political opponents.

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Feb 13 2016 12:35

"Gepetto I ask you, do you also respect the mujahideen, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (you certainly have warm feelings towards its epigones of Right Sector),"

First of all, you lied to me again. I never wrote that I feel sympathy for Right Sector in Ukraine. Right Sector is a nationalist conservative bourgeois organization this is what i wrote. I wrote that they do not attack the Russian-speaking population, for the reason that many or most of their activists are Russian-speaking themselves. Like most of the population of Kiev. You just don't know anything about them and lie or fantasize about them. But I didn't say that they are the good guys. For example, they can attack the anarchists or any critic of the Ukrainian statehood.

I don't know the history of Mujahedeen of Afghanistan and will not say anything about them. In any case, whoever they were, there is no justification for imperialism the USSR attacked Afghanistan and killed many people.

Ukrainian insurgent army was a nationalist organization that fought for the Ukrainian state. So no sympathy for this organization I have.

But there is one important thing we need to know.

After world war II, the USSR occupied a huge territory, and there pursued a policy of collectivization. Peasants turned into slaves of the collective farm system. Many people were starving. According to current research in 1946-1947 from 1 to 2 million people in the USSR died from hunger.

I'm not sure that this policy was progressive even from an Orthodox Marxist point of view. The "kolkhoz system" in the village was a huge problem for the economy of the USSR. It's possible that more traditional forms of capitalist development would lead to better economic results. But it doesn't matter att all. People have a right to resist starvation and slavery!

In addition, the state of Stalin used at the Lithuania, Ukraine and some other regions the mass repression. They killed or arrested many people just because their relatives were in the gerilia or just was suspected of it! Article 58 of the Criminal Code of RSFSR provides punishment not only for "political criminal" but also against the members of his family! And these rules are supported by other decrees of the USSR government.

Finally, the USSR pursued a policy of Russian colonization in the Baltic States, resettling there Russian-speaking population, to destroy the possibility of creating an independent national States.

Many young farmers and agricultural workers fought against this in the late 1940s - early 1950s. They joined the nationalist guerrilla in Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, because there were no other rebels.

I don't like these movements, but we should at least understand why it happened. There is Similar situation with the guerrillas of Viet Nam who fought against the Americans, or with the guerrillas in Palestine, or the Indian National Congress, which opposed the British colonial system.

Yes, as for me, nationalism is a stupid thing. Unfortunately, imperialism has often led to resistance in such forms. There are the facts. My article is about it.