Jump to content

Talk:Political repression in the Soviet Union: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Timurite (talk | contribs)
1,695 edits
Assessment: banner shell, Human rights (Mid) (Rater)
 
(48 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talk header}}
{{WikiProject Soviet Union|class=Stub|importance=Mid|nested=}}
{{WikiProject Human rights}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|1=
{{WikiProject Socialism|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Soviet Union|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Russia|importance=high|hist=yes}}
{{WikiProject Human rights|importance=Mid}}
}}
{{Annual readership}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(90d)
| archive = Talk:Political repression in the Soviet Union/Archive %(counter)d
| counter = 1
| maxarchivesize = 150K
| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadsleft = 3
}}


== Name of the article ==
== References and POV ==


This article is highly under-referenced, which is especially bad as it makes such bold claims (with a hint of bias). The entire opening paragraph features none, nor does the second, and the third is apparently possibly untrustworthy (It needs a partial re-write to be honest). I'll see if I can improve it.
There were many types of repressions in Soviet Union. I am absolutely sure that the repressions against '''kulaks''' of late 20ies - early 30ies were about rather about economy (state just needed more resources to forced industrialization). These repressions costed Soviet republics millions of lives. There were also repressions against nationalities. These should not be considered political, as the whole ethnos (see Ingush, or Crimean Tartar) was repressed, even communists of this background. I '''propose name change''' to something reflecting both politicy, nationality and economy-driven repressions. [[User:FeelSunny|FeelSunny]] ([[User talk:FeelSunny|talk]]) 10:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
:I am afraid you have misunderstanding. First "political repression" is an ''instrument''. Economy and industrialization is a goal. So there is no contradiction here. Second, kulaks were repressed exactly for political reasons: their form of ownerwhip was incompatible with communist idea, and they presented an obstacle and resistance to soviet politics. Even if kulaks were quietly paying all burdens of [[prodrazvyorstka]], [[prodnalog]], etc., this would not change the fact that they used [[hired labor]], which is "[[exploitation]]" in Marxist parlance, and which is inadmissible in socialism/communism. You may say that not all kulaks were using hired labor (more correctly to say, the label "kulak" was slapped on many hard-working peasants who achieved their riches by work of family), but this is a different and long story, which is no sense to discuss here. Third: whole ethnoses you mentioned were repressed exactly as political action: they were repressed not because they were Ingush, but because Ingush were declared nation of traitors, collaborators with Nazis. Fourth, "even communists" is not an argument: communists themselves were routinely repressed all the time. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 18:30, 5 November 2008 (UTC)


[[User:Tiraboschi|Tiraboschi]] ([[User talk:Tiraboschi|talk]]) 11:52, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
== Seems short ==


== Dictatorship of the Proletariat is not Lenin's creation ==
This article seems kind of lame ...is there a more thorough overview of Soviet repression on another page? <small>unsigned comment by IP 70.189.32.215</small>


Quote article: "''Early on, the Leninist view of the class struggle and the resulting notion of the dictatorship of the proletariat provided the theoretical basis of the repressions.''" Lenin did not formulate the concept of dictatorship of the proletariat as far as I am aware. I believe that the concept exists in Marx's writings too. The article attributes it to Leninism according to the quoted section of the article above.[[Special:Contributions/121.73.7.84|121.73.7.84]] ([[User talk:121.73.7.84|talk]]) 11:41, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
:No, there are many articles on specific topics, but no general/review article. This article should be extended.[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] 18:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


== External links modified ==
::I think this article needs to be developed thoroughly, which will take time. Until that point, it is likely that some aspects would be given undue weight simply because others aren't covered yet. I see two alternative solutions: 1) a tag on top of the article pointing the reader that it is an article in development and that the information might not be complete, proportional etc. + an invitation to contribute 2) An asssesment by a/some very knowlegeble person(s) of the full tematic extent of what is needed in the article (do we know such persons?), and as a result the creation of half a dosen empty sections: in time these sections would have to be filled and developed to more or less the same volutme as the other sections. Also it is possible to make a combination of 1) and 2)
::Also I think both words "democide" and "genocide" must be used. In most instances it is correct ot use the first. In a few cases it is the case for the second. My personal understanding is that genocide occures when the number of victimes is of the order of 50% or close to that. Also, on one side, clearly genocide can not be used in reference to ethnic Russians, b/c the nation was not under threat of extinction or assimilation. On the other side, ethnic Russians represented the biggest category of Soviet victims. AFAIK, democide is the term used for ethnic Russians, while the term genocide is mostly appropriate for nations like Crimean Tatars.
::''Question 1'' Can we use Solzhenitsyn's Arkhipelag Gulag as a sourse?
::''Question 2'' I understand that ''political'' represion does not include for example deportees, but mostly imprisonment, executions, Gulag, specific political repressions in some areas (e.g. mountain regions of western Ukraine), forced mental assylums. Did I understand correctly? In such case we need a section "Oppostion to Soviet regime" to outline the major fenomena from armed resistance groups to Helsinki group to public protests in times of Khrushchev and Brezhnev to samizdat. [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 18:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
:::''Answer to Q2:'' Sorry you are mistaken: Soviet deportees were deported precisely for ''political'' reasons, as political "[[enemies of the people]]". `'[[user:mikkalai|Míkka]][[user talk:mikkalai|>t]] 19:30, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
:::: Regarding Q2. I mean, when they were deported together with families, as "class enemies" or "potential anti-Soviet material". Are these considered political, too? I mean, they were given forced settlements as opposed to being executed or sent to Gulag. I simply don't know, that's why I am asking. For Bessarabia and northern Bukovina I know that the number of deportees is actually 2-2.5 times bigger than the number of actually ''political'' victims (like arrested and sentenced for anti-Soviet deeds). Again, I am simply asking, I am not stating anything, and I do not claim my understanding is right/wrong. I rather want to understand how people (scholars) classify these. Do you know? Thank you very much.[[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 20:26, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
:::::I am beginning to understand your point. Regarding Bessarabia and N.Bukovina, deportations were part of "ethnic cleansing" of border regions, see [[Forced settlements in the Soviet Union]]. Similar actions were done along the whole new European Soviet border. While it is doubtless a '''political''' action, as well as violation of human rights, it is not "political repression" ''per se''. It may be compared, e.g., with [[Japanese American internment|internment of Japanese in the U.S. during the WWII]], although the scale was incomparable. `'[[user:mikkalai|Míkka]][[user talk:mikkalai|>t]] 21:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
::::::So, I understand this from you: despite the deportations being not "political repression" ''pre see'', they are covered under "Soviet political repression" because they were a political action, etc. OK, that makes sense. Thank you!
:::::::To put it into another perspective, "cleansing of borders" was a ''[[preventive repression]]'' of people who were suspected to become the "[[fifth column]]" in the case of war. (Hehe, one more redlink; filling it right now.)`'[[user:mikkalai|Míkka]][[user talk:mikkalai|>t]] 18:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
::::::Also, I know it is strange that I say this when you called it "ethnic cleansing", but among the deportees were very many ethnic minorities (I mean in B&nB). The actions did indeed have some ethnic cleansing aim/tent, especially in northern Bukovina, in the areas close to present Romanian border, there was also a "good" ethnic cleansing of Moldavians/Romanians is the cities of [[Budjak]], however the 2 major actions (June 1941 and July 1949), which alone account for about 40% of the number of deportees were not at all ethnical: the first one contained a lot of "enriched" Jews, or ethnic Russian engineers/professionals, the second - a lot of peasants of all ethnic groups present in the countryside.
::::::I am just wondering: maybe one day we ought to create an article [[Operation Yug]] (July 6-7, 1949 deportations that took place in a lot of other areas, not only Moldavian SSR). It just happens that I acummulated some data about this one, and I am thinking the same might be the case wiht other users, too (either 1949 archieves seem to be less secret, or 1941 ones were destroyed/moved/lost/hidden, or 1944-48 ones contain more sensible material, who knows... or maybe scholars are more interested in 1949, which would be strange, but anyhow...) Again, thank you for your explanation. [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 23:31, 3 November 2008 (UTC)


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
==Image copyright problem with Image:Magadan, 09.06 019.jpg==
The image [[:Image:Magadan, 09.06 019.jpg]] is used in this article under a claim of [[WP:NFC|fair use]], but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the [[WP:NFCC|requirements for such images]] when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an [[Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline|explanation]] linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


I have just modified 3 external links on [[Political repression in the Soviet Union]]. Please take a moment to review [[special:diff/818985064|my edit]]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
:* That there is a [[Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline|non-free use rationale]] on the image's description page for the use in this article.
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060721011333/http://www.zerkalo-nedeli.com/nn/show/420/36833/ to http://www.zerkalo-nedeli.com/nn/show/420/36833/
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080320010655/http://lj.streamclub.ru/history/tragedy.html to http://lj.streamclub.ru/history/tragedy.html
<!-- Additional 10c list header goes here -->
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20010301223347/http://www.rel.ee/eng/communism_crimes.htm to http://www.rel.ee/eng/communism_crimes.htm


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This is an automated notice by [[User:FairuseBot|FairuseBot]]. For assistance on the image use policy, see [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions]]. --22:50, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
==Image of famine victim and "genocide" ==
The image of the famine victim used in the article presented as petraining to 1933 famine is in fact from the collection of the Nansen Commission photos pertaining to the [[1921 Soviet famine]]. I removed it. Also, please avoid using the tem "Genocide" passingly in cases where does not seem to be a mainstream consensus of the term's applicability. Ethnic deportation took place without doubt. But Genocide is a specific legal term that should be applied appropriately. --[[user:Irpen|Irpen]] 20:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
:Did you read what I just said about genocide/democide ? [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 20:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
::What do you mean by "mainstream consensus"? Unlike in WP, I don't think there is a mainstream schilarly debate. It's politicians and ordinary people that misuse the term genocide. I haven't seen a reputable historian doing that. So, as there can not be consensus when there is no debate, why bother? The problem here, IMHO, is as you say, applicability (not consensus): did we use the term as it is used in scholarly works? [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 20:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)


Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 18:54, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
I mean [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Soviet_political_repression&diff=249473751&oldid=249473056 this]. The term "Genocide" was used in the section title which implied that the issue of the applicability of the term is settled. In fact it is not. There are different legal terms for different crimes. Let me give you an incomplete overview of different legal terms that apply to various events:
*[[mass murder]]
*[[war crime]]
*[[ethnic cleansing]]
*[[crime against humanity]]
*[[democide]]
*[[genocide]]
Not every [[serial killer]] is a ''[[mass murder]]er''. And a legal term [[war crime]] applies in very specific situations and not to every [[mass murder]] either. (Eg. shooting a prisoner is a ''war crime'' too). And not every ''ethnic cleansing'' qualifies as ''genocide'' and it is certainly not up to a Wikipedian to make a judgment and insert it into an article.

Those terms have each their own meaning and they should not be used indiscriminately and passingly for POV-pushing purposes. Different terms apply to different events and care should be taken to use appropriate terminology specifically for such hot-button topics. --[[user:Irpen|Irpen]] 21:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

:Duly noted. I was ''not'' a supporter of the word genocide in the title of that section. On the contrary, its presence made the article look like a "cry against crimes", too emotional. I am not the proponent of such discorse. I prefer "bombarding" (the reader) in moderate language with "unpleasant" facts. :) [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 23:42, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

==Definition==
The article says:
:''"Soviet political repressions was a de facto and de jure system of prosecution of people who were or perceived to be enemies of the Soviet system"''
Can we get a source of this definition? --[[user:Irpen|Irpen]] 20:05, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

::Indeed, the first sentance of a WP article should be from a reputable sourse or a reputable encyclopedia. I'd rather prefer "Soviet political repression occured ''where'', ''when'', ''why'', ''with what aim'', ''to what avail''." Then in the second sentence, it can be smth like "The victims were de facto and de jure prosecuted by the system for being perceived as enemies of the Soviet system". Something like that, soursed obviously. [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 20:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I suggest the following as an article's opening:
:''Throughout different periods of the [[Soviet history]] millions of people fell victims of political repressions.''
This is objective and clear and bypasses the need to somehow "define" a term whose meaning is obvious through a quasilegal definition invented by a Wikipedian. --[[user:Irpen|Irpen]] 21:08, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

:How about without "different periods of"? The thing that sticks to my mind at this moment is Solzhenitsyn's words that the "organs" which do not work ''continuously'' die out. I do not want to push it necessarily too much in that direction, but it would be incorrect to say that the repression occured only in certain periods. We know it was continuous, and that "those" were just periods of higher intencity, and/or (like 1937-38) more concerned with communist party people, which made it more visible. Anyway, its not my speciality. I'd rather wait if other people have smarter ideas than mine. But, yes, (albeit with my caveat) something like your proposal would definitevely do, since "being perceived to be enemies of the Soviet system" can go somewhere down in the text. A phrase like that demands more elaboration, which I don't see in the article. Standing alone, it's sort of strange. [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 23:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

"Different periods" is important because at different times there was obviously different scales with numbers of victims varying between none (or perhaps less than a dozen per year) to hundreds of thousand. --[[user:Irpen|Irpen]] 00:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

::That is '''exactly to the point''' why I proposed to remove "deferent periods". Because there were never periods with "less than a dosen per year". There were never even period with "less than a dosen per day, or even per hour". (8760 hours/year x 70 years = 61320 hours) I'm afraid you did not read Solzhenitsyn, did you? :) [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 02:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

:::I did read him. The point is that the scale varied vastly. --[[user:Irpen|Irpen]] 09:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

:Definition? This is not Wikitionary. An article lead ''"serves both as an introduction to the article below and as a short, independent summary of the important aspects of the article's topic"'', see [[Wikipedia:Lead section]]. [[User:Martintg|Martintg]] ([[User talk:Martintg|talk]]) 00:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Martintg, the first sentence currently in the article is not a summary of anything. It is a statement that asserts that "Soviet political repressions was..." This ''is'' and attempt to define the subject. The definition of the subject, especially of such complexity, cannot be made by a Wikipedian and inserted into an article. --[[user:Irpen|Irpen]] 01:07, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

== Is [[1921 Soviet famine]] part of Soviet persecusions or not? ==

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Soviet_political_repression&diff=249484874&oldid=249483864]

Irpen, granted you have a point there. But we ought to discuss it, don't you think? So, let's invite the other editors to answer (preferably with citations/arguments) the question from the title of this section ([[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 20:57, 3 November 2008 (UTC)):
:Dc76, it works the other way around. If someone claims that some particular humane disaster is the fault of the political regime, that editor should bring the arguments supporting such supposition. --[[user:Irpen|Irpen]] 21:10, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
::It is absolutely fine for that picture to stay out as we discuss it. I am more interested in learning just for my knowledge here rather than editting. The subject is too broad for me. [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 00:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
:See [http://books.google.com/books?id=Zj83HmNUdYUC&pg=PA52&dq=1921+%2BSoviet+%2Bfamine+%2Bcaused&as_brr=3#PPA52,M1 this page] and the next for a discussion of the causes. [[User:Biruitorul|Biruitorul]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Biruitorul|Talk]]</sup></small> 21:28, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

== PENDING EDIT WAR ==

This article is going to be a '''battle ground''' for another '''EASTERN EUROPEAN''' '''edit war'''.

If we do not change from this '''style of editing''' which could be more accurately described as '''CENSORSHIP'''. Editors are acting more like censors and not allowing other points of view to be included. Major changes are being made with cryptic explanations in the edit summary. All these explanations should be found in the '''talk page''' so that a consensus can be reached.

I have '''reverted''' the last set of edits not because of the content of the edits but because they were not properly explained in TALK.

If we do not become more collaborative and communicate - the end result will be '''time-wasting edit wars''' followed by '''more time-wasting arbitration''' followed by editors being '''banned''' from WIKIPEDIA.

Remember in '''HISTORY''' there is not just '''ONE TRUTH''' - different points of view can honestly exist based on the author’s perspective. The one author’s point of view that the Soviet Union was a '''“workers paradise”''' can be valid and should be able to co-exist with another author’s valid point of view that the Soviet Union
was '''“hell on earth”.'''

It is not the responsibility of Wikipedia editors to promote the '''one truth'''.

[[User:Bobanni|Bobanni]] ([[User talk:Bobanni|talk]]) 13:21, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

:Should we even bother trying to create articles like this in first place? Every single bit of information will be mercilessly flagged as POV,{{dubious}} then the article will be whittled away to pointlessness, and then someone will propose a merge or delete. To paraphrase a line attributed{{who?}} to Stalin{{fact}}: no article, no problem. For most editors, particularly those not trained as professional historians, there is, indeed, only one historical truth — usually their own. —[[User:Zalktis|Zalktis]] ([[User talk:Zalktis|talk]]) 13:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
::If you are referring to gratuious tagging of the intro part, this was not very thoughtful edit of [[user:FeelSunny]]; reverted. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 16:16, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Please don't rise mass hysteria and discuss the issues in essence. In particular, you have to present counter-arguments to edit summaries to edits you reverted, rather than cry panic.

Since you already know that it is a hot topic, rising the heat is disruption of wikipedia and may lead you to be banned from editing this article. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 16:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

<sp>

From '''Help:Edit summary'''
"Avoid using edit summaries to carry on debates or negotiation over the content or to express opinions of the other users involved. This creates an atmosphere where the only way to carry on discussion is to revert other editors! Instead, place such comments, if required, on the talk page. This keeps discussions and debates away from the article page itself. For example:

''reverted edits by User:Editor, see talk for rationale''

[[User:Bobanni|Bobanni]] ([[User talk:Bobanni|talk]]) 06:56, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

:I agree with Bobbani. This is just another example of [[WP:NPOV]] violations by a group of users who remove information about Soviet political repressions from WP articles. A telling example is removal by Irpen of a segment about repressions conducted by [[SMERSH]] in Red Army.[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] ([[User talk:Biophys|talk]]) 16:35, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
::A telling example of misunderstanding is about [[SMERSH]]: while SMERSH indeed did a good deal of political repression (and it is written in "[[SMERSH]]" article in reasonable detail), the deleted piece gives not a slightest hint about this. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 17:41, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Please accept my apologies for my previous harsh edit. While I understand your concern about possible eruption of revert war here, you don't have to write a long text with accusations in censorship and other personal attacks. I understand that deletion of big chunks of text may indeed look like censorship. However please let us look into detail. For example, please explain what was wrong with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Soviet_political_repression&diff=249616910&oldid=249616688 this deletion]. It has a reasonable edit summary and I have to agree: "meat grinding" treatment of their own soldiers in Red Army is a well known fact (and I think deserves a separate article, because it has been widely discussed; please suggest [[a good title for the topic]], and I will put in a lot of information, starting with the deleted piece) but it is hardly political repression. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 16:46, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
*P.S. IMO here is a good and neutral title: [[World War II casualties of the Soviet Union]]. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 17:04, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

::"What was wrong with this deletion"? This deletion includes, for example this segment: [[Order № 270|Stalin’s order No 270]] of August 16, 1941, states that in case of retreat or surrender, all officers involved were to be shot on the spot and all enlisted men threatened with total annihilation as well as possible reprisals against their families.<ref name="Not so friendly" /><ref>[http://www.hrono.ru/dokum/194_dok/19410816.html Order No 270 in Russian language on hrono.ru] </ref>. This particular order by [[NKVD]] is often considered as a repressive policy by [[SMERSH]] and NKVD. Do you need supporting refs? It is ''commonly accepted'' that [[SMERSH]] conducted mass political repressions of servicemen of [[Red Army]] ''and'' civilian population of the occupied territories.[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] ([[User talk:Biophys|talk]]) 22:08, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
::: Yes it is "commonly accepted" what you say, and you are free to write about political repressionss by SMERSH, like filtering [[POW]]s, [[Ostarbeiters]], population of [[Western Belarus]] &[[Western Ukraine]], and [[Baltic States]], as well as looking for real and imaginary spies in the Army. At the same time, shooting military for retreat is not ''political repression''. Military tribunals existed everywhere at all times, since [[Ancient Rome]]. Soviets only re-used Nazi methods (or vice versa, who knows). Of cource, my opinion may be mistake, and if you find solid referenced which call [[barrier troops]] political repression, feel free to use it. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 00:08, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

== References ==

I'm going to insert some {{fact}} into the article. Not because I do not beleive the statements, but actually because I feel they are right and should be made more trustworthy using appropriate references.

I would also humbly advise future editors to use some '''Soviet and Russian''' sources (consider '''Solzhenitsyn''', or '''Sakharov''', for example) rather than Western or Eastern European, that would have too little credibility in the eyes of Russian audience for the topic. [[User:FeelSunny|FeelSunny]] ([[User talk:FeelSunny|talk]]) 10:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

*The tags placed like this: "Repression was conducted by the [[Cheka]]{{fact}}, [[OGPU]]{{fact}} and [[NKVD]]{{fact}}", without comments in talk page explaining why you doubt that [[Cheka]] was instrument of repression, make me doubt your intentions. While I agree that the article is poor, it is only the beginning, and if you really want to improve it, please discuss the content in specific terms. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 16:34, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
*Your remark about Russian sources is duly noted. There is a rich Russian source of factual information about Soviet repressions, both in Russian and English languages: publications and website of the [[Memorial Society]]. While Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn are respectable people who were breaking some really solid walls in the difficult era, it it time to give word to professional historians such as [[Pavel Polian]]. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 16:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

::I am just strack as odd when I see first "Let's not use non-Soviet and non-Russian sources, even if by reputable scholar, they are not trustworthy b/c to some Russians they might seem so". Then step two "Lets' not use ''arbitrary'' Russian/Soviet sourse, b/c there are some "fringe" writings like by Solzhenitsyn or Sakharov. Let's just use ''only'' this sourse I tell you.". For all it si worth, the source can actually be good. But such extent of self-censorship from, I assume quite educated people, is beyond belief in 21st century!!! [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 22:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
:::Your attempt to put your words in my mouth are deplorable. I didn't call Sakharov "fringe" or said we should not cite them. I merely added that there are quite a few historians working on the issue in these new times, when more factual information is available. I don't tell you which sources to use. Please cease this fighting attitude. Finally, my call to use materials of ''Memorial'' as "censorship" is, like, [[ROTFLMAO]]. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 00:00, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
::::I made a '''remark''' of the way the reasoning was going. Is "While Sakharov and (...) are respectable people (...), it it time to give word to (...)" not the same as calling him "fringe"? You were fringing him out. Also, I did not refer to ''Memorial'' when I said "'''self'''-censorship", I refered to the logic of the rseasoning you were doing, I pointed you a logical mistake and called that mistake, not Memorial, self-censorship. Before you [[ROTFLMAO]] be sure you laugh at the right thing, please. :-) I did not put any words into '''your mouth''', I used them as adjectives, they were in '''my''' mouth. [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 00:23, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
:::::Please try not to read between lines. I wrote what I wrote and meant what I meant. Since there is misunderstanding, let me go into long and boring detail. With some exceptions, most wikipedians are not trained historians and edit what they want and where they want. I am not saying that this is bad. This is good (I am not going to quote Jimbo Wales on this). At the same time really interested people must be aware of limited knowledge of these people. In particular, when speaking about Soviet repressions, everybody, including our new colleague FeelSunny, remember several buzznames: Conquest, Sakharov, etc., but rarely more. And there is a perfect explanation: Time has passed. Soviet life is no longer frontpage news in the West, and nobody gives damn how many Russkies died. Nevertheless, the scholar work continues, and quite a few prominent researchers emerged, but does our friend FeelSunny know them? I doubt. Let me hive you an extreme comparison, to make my point clear. Aristotheles or Archimedes or Pythagoras were great men. We respect them. We have theorems and theories named after tyhem. But do we really write wikipedia articles in math or physics by books of Euclid? No. Euclid is part of history of mathematics. Just the same with Solzhenitsyn. We respect him: he have taught the English world a hew word "gulag". But now he is a page of history. His ''Gulag Archipelago'' is an invaluable firsthand record of what had happened then. It made a huge impression. However now it is not the source of ultimate wisdom, but one of many [[primary source]]s from which historians build a more complete knowledge. I am aware that for some people this sounds like blasphemy, just as it is blasphemy to criticize the [[Gospel]] or "[[Foundations of Leninism]]". [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 03:22, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
:::::My second point: please try to be less jumpy. After all, my sentence could have been a result of quick and sloppy writing, and I didn't really mean what it may seem. If you see something against your opinions, especially from a person like me with whom you never really worked, please start from asking questions, not from accusations. Unless you enjoy fight more than cooperation. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 03:22, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

== Article scope and structure suggestions ==

===Scope===
There is an immense amount of material in wikipedia now; see [[:category:Political repression in the Soviet Union]]. We don't need to put all this material in one single article here by cut and paste. Instead, what we need is a good summary article, a starting point for this broad topic, with leads to all detailed articles, according to '''[[Wikipedia:Summary Style]]'''. While I think it is self-evident, in order to switch from mutual accusation to cooperation, I suggest a quick vote, whether my siggestion is good. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 17:54, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

'''Agree:'''
#[[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 17:54, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

'''Disagree:'''
#There is nothing to vote about. This is a typical "umbrella" article.[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] ([[User talk:Biophys|talk]]) 22:17, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
#*Please explain your understanding of the word "umbrella article". Since you voting against my proposal, I guess it is different from the term "summary article". [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 00:17, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
#Indeed, it is ridiculos to "vote" this. What you are asking is a white check ''for you personally'' to erase whatever you want to hide from history. [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 22:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
#*"Hide from history"? Please read the guidelines in [[wikipedia:Summary style]] and explain me how this style helps me to "hide form history". [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 00:17, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

'''Comments'''
#Please put radically different suggestions into a separate talk section and comment here only on the essence of my proposal. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 17:54, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
::The essence of your proposal it to push all other editors out of this page. Here is a "radically different suggestion" for you: discuss the content, not procedure. Don't ask for white checks, please. And no, I am not going to start a new section for my remark and put it to vote. :) You want to bug us in procedures, that's what you want. [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 22:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

So, in essence, Biophys and Dc76 refuse looking for common grounds and prefer to keep the position that some cabal wants to silence them, obviously enlisting me into this cabal, despite my constructive approach. Good to know. Thank you. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 23:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
::Now, who used the word ''cabal''? Me? Biophys? No, you! [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 00:25, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

===Structure===

Currently the article seems to be structures along the timeline. While it makes certain sense, and indeed the first what comes to mind, I would ask you to think of another ways of structuring. Possible other ways of classification (I don's insist that my suggestions are smart; just a starter):

#By subject or type of events
#By region
#
Also, it makes sense to have sections about:

#laws which were basis of repressions
#repressive organs
#

Please continue. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 17:54, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

:And your proposal for a Table of Contents: ... is ... [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 00:26, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
::Sorry, after all your nervous messages above I cannot guess correctly whether it is your irony or you genuinely want to know my opinion in order to start cooperation. [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 02:55, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
:::I genuinely want to see the details of your proposal. And I wasn't nervous, at all, maybe too frank, that I grant you. As I said when I dismissed your suggestion in the previous section, let's discuss content, not procedure. [[User:Dc76|Dc76]]\<sup>[[User_talk:Dc76|talk]]</sup> 03:21, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
::::I am not an expert historian; I guess I am just reading books, and my goal was not to impose neither content, nor procedure. My point was to invite more people to throw in a bunch of ideas. My first suggestion was to think from the beginning about a structured article, rather than an amorphous timeline-driven page like [[Violence in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict]]. While it may be helpful to find who killed whom and when, it is basically useless for finding out roots and ends. ... ... ... I took some time to think of it, and it fell heavily unto me that the whole history of the Soviet Union is the history of repression. Many people lived happily, but only in the shadow of you know who. So you may take [[History of the Soviet Union]] and all its sub-articles, insert the word repression in the titles appropriately, and I guarantee you, you will see no empty article. How do you like this proposal of the table of contents? A cross-sectional slice of the whole Soviet history? Similar cross-sectional slices may be taken from topics "Government of the Soviet Union", "Politics of the Soviet Union", "Ideology of the Soviet Union", "Law of the Soviet Union", "Culture of the Soviet Union". As a result, here is a series of articles:
*[[History of political repression in the Soviet Union]] - events
*[[Ideology of political repression in the Soviet Union]] - theoretical foundations
*[[Political repression in the law of the Soviet Union]] - legal foundations
*[[Organs of political repression in the Soviet Union]] - instruments
*[[Politics of political repression in the Soviet Union]] - implementation
*[[Political repression in culture of the Soviet Union]] - in arts and religion
*[[Political repression in science of the Soviet Union]] redirect -> [[Suppressed research in the Soviet Union]]
*[[Image of political repression in culture of the Soviet Union]] - in books, films, arts, folklore
*[[Perception of political repression in the everyday life of the Soviet Union]] - how it was felt and how it was remembered
*[[Struggle against political repression in the Soviet Union]]
Anything else? [[User:Timurite|Timurite]] ([[User talk:Timurite|talk]]) 03:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:48, 16 December 2024

References and POV

[edit]

This article is highly under-referenced, which is especially bad as it makes such bold claims (with a hint of bias). The entire opening paragraph features none, nor does the second, and the third is apparently possibly untrustworthy (It needs a partial re-write to be honest). I'll see if I can improve it.

Tiraboschi (talk) 11:52, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dictatorship of the Proletariat is not Lenin's creation

[edit]

Quote article: "Early on, the Leninist view of the class struggle and the resulting notion of the dictatorship of the proletariat provided the theoretical basis of the repressions." Lenin did not formulate the concept of dictatorship of the proletariat as far as I am aware. I believe that the concept exists in Marx's writings too. The article attributes it to Leninism according to the quoted section of the article above.121.73.7.84 (talk) 11:41, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Political repression in the Soviet Union. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:54, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Political_repression_in_the_Soviet_Union&oldid=1263448038"