• JosefStainlessSteel [none/use name]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Bullshit. Why didn’t they deport all or

    I dispute even the word deportation tbh. It was an evacuation in my view.

    This twist of language is typical of all contentious issues outside the Anglo-Euro sphere. Like when they call Tinanamen Square a massacre instead of a violent liberal colour revolution of ShitLibs murdering unarmed Chinese soldiers. Or when people call the "Molotov-Ribbentrop" pact an alliance.

    most of Ukrainians then after the war?

    The evacuation occured under conditions of a World War. Why would Soviets deport Ukrainians after the war when the Communists had hegemony amongst the Ukrainian Nation and the Banderites were literally called "German-Ukrainian Nationalists" in popular culture

    I’m saying it’s wasn’t a good rationale for keeping Tatars from their lands.

    I think it was.

    it’s something you made up to make it seem like it wasn’t an actual atrocity.

    An atrocity is definitely when you evacuate a population to even more fertile land and instead of shooting the nazi collaborators they just got deported and kept their lives and the Tatar nation allowed to grow because of that mercy.

    If they'd deported or shot just the collaborators it would've destroyed the Tatar nation by removing most of the family aged men (18-40)

    And when they're offered the lands back the majority don't even want to go.

    This is a contentious issue, I get it but a joke to call it an atrocity

    Why is it so hard to admit that nationalism might have played a part in it.

    The Soviet decision allowed the Tatar nation to continue existing and growing. They've could've done what the Anglo nations do to their oppressed nations and funnelled them onto Reserves where they spend all day drinking alcohol or huffing gas, the suicide rate goes through the roof and the birth rate plummets in a deliberate attempt to exterminate those nations.

    Or they could've shot the Nazi collaborators (completely justified) and wiped out the Tatar nation within a 1 or 2 generatiosn

    The Soviet decision (under geopolitical and national security concerns) seems to be a sincere attempt to keep the Tatar nation intact.

    First by being pretty generous enough not to shoot nazi collaborators and second not splitting up the Tatar nation again with a right of return say in 1965 which may have split the Tatars in half. (say half decide to go and half to stay out of a population of 218k)

    Again, when they were offered full right of return the majority stayed where they were.

    • space_comrade [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      The Soviet decision (under geopolitical and national security concerns) seems to be a sincere attempt to keep the Tatar nation intact.

      You think the Tatars saw it that way? Are there any documented testimonies from any of them?

      First by being pretty generous enough not to shoot nazi collaborators and second not splitting up the Tatar nation again with a right of return say in 1965 which may have split the Tatars in half. (say half decide to go and half to stay out of a population of 218k)

      Ah so now they did it for their own good because they're dum dums and would have split themselves into irrelevance otherwise. Fuck off, I'm done with this discussion.

      Again, when they were offered full right of return the majority stayed where they were.

      Yeah because 50 years passed genius, there was not much to come back to.

      • JosefStainlessSteel [none/use name]
        ·
        2 years ago

        You think the Tatars saw it that way? Are there any documented testimonies from any of them?

        I honestly don't really care about how they saw it. When such a significant amount actively fought the Soviets alongside nazis. A decision was made in the exigencies of 1944 and I'd probably vote for that decision in that time

        Ah so now they did it for their own good because they’re dum dums and would have split themselves into irrelevance otherwise

        I was only entertaining the possibility of allowing return post 1965. It's not even something I'd agree with

        . Fuck off, I’m done with this discussion.

        Sure if discussing hotbutton and squeamish issues affects you this much. But be sure every Socialist nation will have to make these kinds of controversial decisions during the period of Imperialism and capitalist encirclement.

        You said this was a "mistake" of Stalin. I just don't agree

        Yeah because 50 years passed genius, there was not much to come back to.

        Chagos Islanders were deported in the 1960s and 70s by the British and Americans and they still regularly demand their land back.

        That nation was completely obliterated. Most having killed themselves or "died of sadness" (ie. just became despondent after being dumped in other countries) and still protesting and trying to get their land back.

        If 50 years later the Tatars as a majority dont want to move back this is only a testament to the delicate handling of the National question of the Tatar nation by Soviet leadership (both Stalin and post-stalin)