What if: USA (and allies) places embargo on Soviet Union for Holodomor?
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Historically pre-fabricated in USA and shipped to USSR. Many other Soviet weapon plants were also dependent upon imported factory components.
If enforced such an embargo would completely derail Stalin's plans to conquer Europe. But would it be enforced? I have my doubts as he had so many supporters in 1930s Britain, France and USA.
If enforced such an embargo would completely derail Stalin's plans to conquer Europe. But would it be enforced? I have my doubts as he had so many supporters in 1930s Britain, France and USA.
Shortround6
Major General
It just wasn't tank factories. It was steel mills, blast furnaces, power plants, quite possible ship yard equipment and so on.
Would the sale/license of the Wright R-1820 have been followed through with? The Shvetsov series of engines? The Klimov series of engines?
Would the sale/license of the Wright R-1820 have been followed through with? The Shvetsov series of engines? The Klimov series of engines?
How many people knew about the Holodomor in it's time, or even 5 years later ?
To bring pressure on the politicians to put sanctions on the Soviets, the general population would have to know.
Even now probably 95% of the population has never even heard of it.
To bring pressure on the politicians to put sanctions on the Soviets, the general population would have to know.
Even now probably 95% of the population has never even heard of it.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Many people in Eastern Europe know of Stalin's Famine. So then if word of this had reached the western Allies AND word of Katyn as well, it may have caused the Allies to sit back and rethink their aid policy...
Shortround6
Major General
There is knowing that a Famine happened and there is knowing it was caused by deliberate policy. Or that steps to ease the problem were stopped/withheld by deliberate policy.
We have famines happening even in the last few decades, The usual response is more aid, not less. Grasping the idea (or proving it) that a government would use such an occurrence for political objectives is way outside the norm.
The US was experiencing the first few years of the Dust bowl at the time and the world was in the midst of the great depression. I am certainly not saying that Stalin and his crony's didn't do it. But for foreign observers to figure out what was going on would have been difficult.
We have famines happening even in the last few decades, The usual response is more aid, not less. Grasping the idea (or proving it) that a government would use such an occurrence for political objectives is way outside the norm.
The US was experiencing the first few years of the Dust bowl at the time and the world was in the midst of the great depression. I am certainly not saying that Stalin and his crony's didn't do it. But for foreign observers to figure out what was going on would have been difficult.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The people in the region knew...they called it "Stalin's Famine".
Keep in mind that in a little over twelve years, the people that knew what happened to the Ukraine and her people would be under Stalin's control as well.
Many of the older folks today in the region who remeber the "famine", are pointing to Russia's recent seizure of Crimea and it's invasion of the Ukraine and saying simply "it never ends".
Keep in mind that in a little over twelve years, the people that knew what happened to the Ukraine and her people would be under Stalin's control as well.
Many of the older folks today in the region who remeber the "famine", are pointing to Russia's recent seizure of Crimea and it's invasion of the Ukraine and saying simply "it never ends".
davebender
1st Lieutenant
High ranking politicians and major newspapers in the west knew also. Unfortunately many were communist sympathizers (or outright Soviet agents) so they downplayed the information.
Can you in any way prove that without going to a neo-Nazi website.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
I find this extremely hard to believe, as the U.S. wasn't at war, so the media would have jumped on the famine as very newsworthy like they did with all other events that were unfolding during that time. Especially if it drew people's thoughts away from the misery of the depression and the politicians who were in charge at the time.
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Read minutes from House UnAmerican Activity Committee meetings.
Read FBI interviews.
Read list of agents and sympathizers from Verona intercepts.
Read "Red Channels" which lists 151 actors, writers and others considered communist sympathizers.
Read a history of President Reagan. He got his political start fighting communist influence in Hollywood.
Read any one of a multitude of books on Soviet Espionage during 1930s and 1940s. Some very reputable authors such as Patrick Buchanan are included.
There's no shortage of information concerning Soviet Espionage during WWII era. However you won't find it on the History Channel and most people would rather not have their image of wartime Britain and USA sullied by the truth. Easier to simply believe we and our allies were always the good guys and our enemies were always evil.
Read FBI interviews.
Read list of agents and sympathizers from Verona intercepts.
Read "Red Channels" which lists 151 actors, writers and others considered communist sympathizers.
Read a history of President Reagan. He got his political start fighting communist influence in Hollywood.
Read any one of a multitude of books on Soviet Espionage during 1930s and 1940s. Some very reputable authors such as Patrick Buchanan are included.
There's no shortage of information concerning Soviet Espionage during WWII era. However you won't find it on the History Channel and most people would rather not have their image of wartime Britain and USA sullied by the truth. Easier to simply believe we and our allies were always the good guys and our enemies were always evil.
Almost the whole Nazi leadership believed US politicians, and newspapers were under the control and influence of the Jews and communists.
The McCarthy era, with it's House UnAmerican Activity Committee is one of our nations more shameful episodes.
I've never thought Patrick Buchanan particularly reputable myself. I've always considered him a sort of closet Nazi.
Try again Dave.
The McCarthy era, with it's House UnAmerican Activity Committee is one of our nations more shameful episodes.
I've never thought Patrick Buchanan particularly reputable myself. I've always considered him a sort of closet Nazi.
Try again Dave.
- Thread starter
- #14
American communists attacking a demonstration of Ukrainians against Holodomor, Depression-era Chicago, December 1933
rank amateur
Airman 1st Class
Can we for arguments' sake assume that the Holodomor case had found it's way to general media? What would have been the result. I don't think Stalin would have found many friends...
wiking85
Staff Sergeant
Um it was in Western media historically:
Gareth Jones (journalist) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortround6
Major General
If cut off from western help/assistance in the early and mid 30s Russia is a hollow shell. The steel mills and factories don't get built or updated. The railroad system continues in a less than later capacity,The national telegraph system is also less than what it was historically. Basically a lot of the infrastructure is less than what was needed to support the army in the field in the numbers needed ( although that is subject to debate, if Stalin hadn't gone through several rounds of purges of officers perhaps fewer troops would have been needed).
Much of the Western media, notably the New York times, was actively supressing critical information about the Soviet Union. That paper hasn't changed. A few "Guardinistas" as the British call the politically correct left such as Malcom Muggeridge who were on the ground became disillusioned and may even have found their way to Christ because of it.
It wasn't just Ukrainians but many other nationalities in the Baltic Nations that suffered from Communist incompetence and ideological viciousness that has its inevitable extension to mass murder as classes of people that don't conform to ideological theories are eliminated. One can blame the delusional incompetence of the collectivisation policies but it must also be remembered that it began with Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin,) not Stalin. Lenin on a number of occasions issued orders such as "Liquidate 15,000 Kulaks". A Kulak is a small Ukrainian farmer with perhaps 8-12 employees. When I hear the word Redneck used I hear the same voice as was used to vilify Kulaks. The communists basically murdered the people that knew how to grow food. It's still happening, see Zimbabwe, see Mugable in power. They were rather efficient at producing food beyond the small scale 'just enough to starve' subsistence agriculture romanticised by some city hipsters thinking of a 3rd world idealised or the plain low yields of disorganised collective farming.
One reason the USSR didn't get embargoed is that US Banking and Business were up to their necks in deals with the Communists. Standard Oil (Rockefeller/Esso) were into deals over oil and minerals, so was the big end of town, you know the kind of people in business and banking that can throw a few hundred million into a mining project. These people have serious connections and influence. A reading of Kerry Bolton's "The Revolution from Above" gives and indication. On top of that many newspapers were sympathetic. It has to be remembered that Lev Davidovich Bronshtein (Trotsky) was an American and travelled with US money to fight for a revolution which had as much to do with over throwing democratic Russians than the Tsar. Revolutions have a way of biting their creators and Iosif Vissarionovich (Stalin) made it happen.
Its worth noting that without communism, there is no fascism or National Socialism. In all cases of Fascism they have arisen as a palliative to extreme leftism that developed in Spain and the Soviet Union.
There was a time that Mussolini and Hitler expressed concern about what was going on but much of the western leadership remained silent.
Vidkun Quisling, who met Lev Davidovich Bronshtein with alarm did Stirling work providing food aid to Russian and Baltic people to preserve them against starvation, he might even have made to saint hood if history had fallen to a different course. Quisling wanted a Nordic defence allegiance to protect against Bolshevism and to protect neutrality against interventions from other quarters. He was on the money, there.
I digress, business was beginning to cosy up to the Soviets and big parts of the western press were overtly sticking their heads in the sand over Communist atrocities, perhaps they shared their ideals.
One reason this was unlikely to have happened is that too many people believe in 'heaven on earth' and will turn a blind eye to keep that dream.
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
Yes, Lenin was a revolutionary and a Marxist ... not an idealistic utopian socialist/communist. He was a hell of a lot less awful than Stalin, but if the USSR had any chance of developing into a functional communist/socialist /republic/ (not dictatorship) they needed someone much more rational, reasonable, and willing to deviate from the many flawed (and often ugly) areas of Marxism and a few of the related socialist works the USSR was initially built on. Instead, things got far worse under Stalin, and aside from purges, social, and religious suppression, there was heavy oppression/suppression of basic rationality and sensibility, including subversion of science and engineering.
That fed back into the problems with farming and food production (particularly with Trofim Lysenko in charge of agricultural management) as well as all other areas of industry and research.
It wasn't until Khrushchev took over that anything really started to improve, but with the huge mess Stalin had created (including the involvement in multiple wars) that was a huge uphill battle with an already horrible, indoctrinated (rather idiotic -even for typical bureaucracy standards) bureaucracy of horrible, illogical, irrational and oppressive doctrine and ideology along with fostering plenty of corruption within the government and military. Khrushchev was far from perfect himself, but I can't help but imagine how different a turn things might have taken if someone like him had replaced Lenin instead of Stalin.
It's depressing and distressing (though not really that surprising) that there weren't more sane, rational, utilitarian communists/socialists protesting that ideology far earlier around the world ... or at very least rejecting and not condoning it, and thereby aided in allowing Communism become redefined as the dirty, distasteful word it is today. (socialism is such a broad concept that it's really disheartening and depressing that the more violent, aggressive, and revolutionary centric ... irrational distorted combative interpretations become so popular, but then again, hate is very easy to play on and manipulate -Hitler managed that well enough) Same sort of mess as the French Revolution dealt with over a century earlier. (and similar sorts of senseless destruction in the name of revolution and not just deposing, but utterly destroying anyone remotely associated with the former oppressors)
Workers/peasants revolts and the associated mob rule are always ugly and destructive ... and very often counter-productive.
But then again, Russian culture had a history steeped in violence, so emphasis on a more passive, peaceful approach to resistance and change was far more foreign and unappealing. (even more so than the average human natural tendencies towards vengeance and retribution)
Sorry if I'm dragging this further off topic or getting to political or philosophical, but it's a particular sore point for me. It's a broad topic to be sure (the whole issue of short-sighted selfish vengeance and retribution driving the instability in the interwar periods as well and why everyone sans perhaps Germany and her allies balked or outright laughed at Wilson's fourteen points).
I don't see it as a problem with Communism, Socialism, or Nationalist movements at all, rather the shift towards hate-fueled revolution coupled with vicious, inflexible, draconically enforced doctrine with unbalanced power (dictatorships or quasi dictatorships) destroying any of the potential progressive/positive aspects those concepts bring. Had some of the more sensible aspects of Oswald Spengler's philosophy trickled into the existing Weimar Republic, there may have been genuine positive change to Germany adopting some of his ideals and completely avoiding the doctrine of hate and insanity spread by Hitler and his followers. (now, whether or not someone could have done that while ALSO pushing nationalism to the point of emphasizing expansion and regaining -or surpassing- Germany's former glory is another matter ... though in an idealistic fantasy, having them do that and then actively oppose the horrors Stalin was perpetrating would be ... interesting fiction with a more compelling rationale behind war if nothing else -Britain's colonialism was pretty damn horrible at the time too ... deposing that in a more organized manner than was seen post war could have avoided much of the instability in Africa and the Middle East we see today -not to get into various countries holding South American and Asian colonies)
If there'd been more Otto Von Bismarks and Teddy Roosevelts around leading the world powers at the turn of the century and beyond ... well, there'd almost certainly have been no Great War and thus no WWII, but beyond that, the progress both in Central Europe and the Americas from politics to social reform to military strategy and compromise between ideals, practical sense, and what was realistically possible in the real world was all dashed by the turmoil, mix of bad leadership and unfortunate events from 1914 into the cold war ... to this very day is just tragic honestly. (that said, Wilson wasn't a bad president in my opinion, in fact if more of the worlds leaders had taken his positions there also likely would have been no war and a good deal of reform, but a lot of his ideals were too radical, his behavior too passive and 'weak' ... not nearly charismatic enough and too radical to really pull off his goals even id he'd had Roosevelt's charm and forceful tact, Wilson came at the wrong time, particularly after the setbacks from Taft's administration ... Wilson probably would have been more what we needed during Hoover's time in office, though)
I'm not sure how much influence on US foreign policy the Hollywood moguls and their communist friends had. As many of these people were also Jewish, next we'll be hearing that they were all part of an international Jewish conspiracy to rule the world. Wait a minute, where have I heard that before?
Cheers
Steve
Cheers
Steve
