Communism as genocidal?

In our class discussions about the Holocaust, we identified racist, discriminatory, and destructive tendencies inherent in Hitler’s Nazi ideology that made genocide a likely and maybe even inevitable outcome. Moving on to Stalinist Russia raises important issues in a similar vein, namely, the nature of “Communist” ideology. Is there something inherently violent and discriminatory that, like Nazism in Germany, created the preconditions for genocide in Russia?

To answer my own question, I would have to say both yes and no. Marx’s Communist Manifesto does not explicitly mention violence, but certain terminologies such as “class warfare” and “liquidation” of social groups can certainly be (and have been) interpreted as physically destructive. It is likely that although Marx certainly did not intend for the Manifesto to be used as a means for mass murder or genocide, he was not opposed to the use of violence in order to achieve the “dictatorship of the proletariat”.

Stalinism was a perversion of Communism; that much is obvious. However, Stalinism used Marxist principles to justify the oppression and murder of social and ethnic groups. For example, the Communist Manifesto calls for the “liquidation of the bourgeoisie”, the same concept as the de-kulakization campaign of the 1930’s. The goal of Communism was internationalism, in which the “withering away of the state” would produce a worldwide proletariat that had no need of ethnic delineations. Stalin justified the deportation and attempted cultural genocide of the Chechens-Ingush and Crimean Tatars as eliminating threats to the internationalism of Communism.

I would also like to look back on the posts that Brooklyn and Marina made about corporate capitalism as genocidal. I think that their arguments are very valid and apply just as well to Communism. Although Communism and capitalism are opposing ideologies, it would seem that they are both conducive to perpetrators of genocide. In both cases, the ideology itself is not genocidal, but in many cases its execution is, and that’s just as bad.

"Multiculturalism has Failed in Germany"

Toward the end of class today (April 17th),  we began to discuss the issue of cultural genocide, specifically in relation to colonialism both in Latin America and in the American west. I feel that there was a general consensus among us that the elimination of a group’s identity or way of life constitutes cultural genocide, at least as conceived by Raphael Lemkin. I firmly agree that the acts perpetrated by not only Spanish, but English, French, Portuguese, and all other colonial powers against native populations with the intent (and possibly even effect) of destroying or “converting” their way of life constitutes cultural genocide. In fact, Robins’ article has opened my mind to viewing Stalinism through this culturally genocidal lens and helped me to come to terms with some issues in the Soviet case that I have been struggling with these past few weeks.

But I don’t want to stop there. Robins discussion of subaltern genocide has also challenged other preconceptions I found I held regarding genocide. As this class has demonstrated to all of us, there is little that is black and white in genocide, yet in reading his analysis of insurrection movements I discovered my own bias or tendency toward assuming the immutable righteousness of victim groups. This discovery led me to some questions: Would the class agree or disagree that indigenous populations in Latin America committed genocide as described by Robins? Are all identities protected from cultural genocide? Can minority groups perpetrate genocide, cultural or otherwise? In reflecting on these questions, I want to challenge the class to put aside some of our collective biases against Western Powers (ones I certainly share), and explore a current case study in cultural genocide. I will not assert that this case is or is not cultural genocide, but I feel it can spark both interesting and productive discussion. Get ready for some irony. The victim? Germany.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/10/16/us-germany-merkel-immigration-idUSTRE69F1K320101016

(I highly recommend you read the above article before reading further.)

German multiculturalism has failed. At least according to Angela Merkel and many other native Germans. In the past few decades, Germany has experienced a boom in its Muslim population. Mosques are increasingly becoming a part of the German landscape. Merkel has asserted that multiculturalism without integration is simply not working and has stressed the importance of immigrants learning German and adapting to German society. Throughout the article there is a palpable frustration, that of the Germans towards this seemingly invading population.

It is easy to quickly dismiss this as German xenophobia. Obviously they must be Islamophobic, why else would a majority of Germans agree with such a blanket statement as ‘Muslim immigrants lower the intelligence of German society’? But these hurtful words stem from a real fear Germans have of losing their cultural identity in a sea of other immigrant identities. One reader left this comment:

txgadfly wrote:
Yes, the Germans have a history. As does everyone else. And they all should have the right to exist as separate entities. That also includes the Germans. And everyone else.

Muslims around the world experience real and horrendous discrimination and violence due to their identity and beliefs. I in no way intend or wish to discredit this. But I feel that this case study forces us to at least pause in making quick assumptions or assertions regarding Western politics and policies. Does Germany have the right to preserve its cultural identity within its own borders? Let me know what you think.