“Abuse of power comes as no surprise.” Reading up on the GULAG.

Annie Clark aka St. Vincent - She actually did an interview where she talked about Stalin and it’s as bad as you’d think.

How much podcast and audiobook listening do you typically do?

I’m obsessed with podcasts and audiobooks. I probably listen to more audiobooks than I do music. I mean, I certainly listen to music — for enjoyment, for research, for just making sure I know what is happening. Luckily, maybe because I’m a musician, I can retain a lot of information that comes through on the auditory side. I mean, I’ve really been brushing up on my Stalin.

You’ve brushed up on your Stalin?

It makes me feel much better about where we are today. Because they had it bad.

It’s pretty bad now.

It’s really bad now. But it was worse. I’ll go ahead and say it was worse in Stalin’s Russia. So there we are. That makes me feel bright and sunny. I’ve been on a real Stasi Gulag Stalin kick for the past many months. Cold war, espionage — all of it.

https://archive.vn/Ci86Z

  • ssjmarx [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    many academics do in fact frame the Ukrainian famine largely under the Holdamor narrative

    I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case now, but literally less than a year ago the overwhelming majority of academic historians were in agreement that the famine wasn't a genocide or intentional and avoided the politicized term "Holodomor".

    • TheLegendaryCarrot23 [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I simply do not see the evidence to believe that the "overwhelming majority" of academic historians agreed that the Famine in Ukraine during the Soviet Famine 31-34 wasn't a deliberate act to punish land holding peasents and Ukrainian nationalism/separatism . Because many mainstream historians from Applebum to Figes(and now dead popular historians like Richard Pipes) hold that view and held that before a year ago to say the least.
      There's even an Encyclopedia Britannica entry for the Holodomor written by the author OP is reading . I don't think that's just or even mostly all recent in the academic field although with the wider imagination that's probably true to an extent.
      One can reject the exact term "Holodomor" and then churn around and basically recite it's narrative as well .

        • TheLegendaryCarrot23 [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          There are Some like Tauger and J Arch Getty but for instance your assertion that Robert Conquest doesn't assert the Famine in parts of Ukraine wasn't a deliberate act(Holodomor) isn't remotely true . He in fact wrote a whole Book on it arguing just that titled The Harvest Of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v09/n02/j.-arch-getty/starving-the-ukraine Applebaum is from Yale and Conquest is also very important for the general view of Americans. Kotkin on other hand yes mostly blames the famine on Collectivization in particular but doesn't think it was was deliberate let alone a genocide. https://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/11/08/studying-stalin/ and is an effective anti communist historian although i haven't read his tombs on Stalin yet. .

            • TheLegendaryCarrot23 [he/him]
              ·
              2 years ago

              Yes years later he would back peddle but basically argue the same thing.

              "Stalin purposely inflicted the 1933 famine. No. What I argue is that with resulting famine imminent, he could have prevented it, but put “Soviet interest” other than feeding the starving first – thus consciously abetting it "

              That is the Consensus among many is true and also wrong and flawed imo and not much different from the Holodomor narrative which is also a popular view among historians and the wider public.