Since old posts are no longer accessible, I will be posting the preface of Davies and Wheatcroft's The Years of Hunger, a scholarly work by mainstream historians, in the comments. The full work is available on Sci-Hub, but it isn't really about debunking the nazi's holodomor narrative. It covers the Soviet famine of the 1930's, the last in a long series of famines in that part of the world. The preface is the only part that is specifically dedicated to debunking, and the explanations for that are in the text of the preface. I found this work in an old post on here while debate-broing on Discord with a bunch of European liberals utterly convinced that Stalin had personally eaten all the grain with his giant spoon. Maybe this can help you when liberals try to label you a genocide denialist.
:soviet-chad:
1 ‘Holodomor’ – a Ukrainian word meaning ‘death by hunger’ (in Russian rendered as ‘golodomor’).
2 See http://www.ucc.ca/holodomor/files/IHC-The-Case-for-7-Million (accessed April 29, 2009).
3 Golod v SSSR 1930-1934; Famine in the USSR 1930–1934 (2009), 518 pp.
4 Op. cit. 7.
5 S. Kul’chitskii, Pochemu ON nas unichtozhil? Stalin i ukrainskii golodomor (Kiev, 2007), 120.
6 Demografichna katastrofa v Ukraini vnaslidok golodomoru 1932–1933 rokiv: skladovi, masshtabi, naslidki, Institut Demografii ta sotsial’nykh doslidzhen’, Natsional’na akademiya nauk Ukraini (Kiiv, 2008), 76, 82, 84. For our own lower estimate, see pp. 412–17 below.
7 See for example the school syllabus in http://faminegenocide.com/resources/ teachingkuryliw.html (accessed April 30, 2009).
8 See below, pp. 190–1, 413–14.
9 S. Mironin, ‘Golodomor’ na Rusi (2008), 9–10 (a 221 page book, published in 5,000 copies).
10 V. P. Danilov and I. E. Zelenin, ‘Organizovannyi golod’, OI, 6, 2004, 97–111, especially p. 108. This view is broadly endorsed by the principal Russian specialist on the famine, Viktor V. Kondrashin – see his Golod 1932–1933 godov: tragediya Rossiiskoi derevni (2008), especially p. 376, where he writes (somewhat cautiously) that ‘it may be defined as an “organised famine” ’.
11 These measures are described below on pp. 163–8, 187–8, 426–7, and in vol. 4 of this series, pp. 290–1.
12 It is regrettable that many of the advocates of the genocide thesis continue to claim Conquest to justify their position, despite his clearly expressed views on this matter. See the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute Conference on Holodomor on November 18, 2008, http://www.huri.harvard.edu/na/2008_11_17-18_famine_ conf/2008_11_18_werth-graziosi-flier.html (accessed May 18, 2009). At the conference Nicolas Werth was asked by a participant in the conference, who had attended a lecture given by Wheatcroft, whether Conquest accepted the view that the famine was genocide. Werth strangely replied that ‘we all know in scientific circles the very complicated relations between Conquest and Wheatcroft’; he repeated this several times, but declined to reply to the question. Kul’chitskii more straightforwardly has explained that in June 2006 a Ukrainian delegation of experts on the Holocaust and the Golodomor met Robert Conquest in Stanford University and enquired about his views, and were told directly by him that he preferred not to use the term genocide (Kul’chitskii (2007), 176).
13 For these developments, see vol. 4 of this series: R. W. Davies, Crisis and Progress in the Soviet Economy, 1931–1933 (1996), pp. 164–76 (defence), 118–21, 155–64 (foreign trade and import cuts), 176–92 (food shortage), 419, 539 (reduction in nonagricultural employment).
14 For Syrtsov’s views, see vol. 3 of this series, The Soviet Economy in Turmoil, 1929–1930 (1989), especially pp. 400–3, 411–15, and Oleg Khlevniuk’s article in The Lost Politburo Transcripts (New Haven and London, 2009), especially pp. 86–92.
15 Tauger, The Carl Beck Papers, no. 1506 (2001), 46.
16 For the revised table of grain production by region, see http://www.sovietarchives- research.co.uk/hunger and Europe-Asia Studies, vol. 59, 864–6. Some misprints and minor errors elsewhere in our book have also been corrected in the present edition.
17 Vol. 57 (2005), 823–41 (Ellman), vol. 58 (2006), 625–33 (Davies and Wheatcroft), 973–84 (Tauger), vol. 59 (2007), 663–93 (Ellman), 847–68 (Wheatcroft), vol. 60 (2008), 663–75 (Kuromiya), and vol. 61 (2009), 505–18 (D. R. Marples).