I was reminded a while back, by an article from Terry Teachout at Commentary Magazine, about just how brutal Stalin really was.
Now, as I’ve said before, 20th Century history is not my thing, and that historians, in my view, are best served studying time periods prior to their own age. Historians, like everyone else, can find it rather difficult to escape the confines of their own experiences and be objective. I believe that, in so many cases, history written within 80 years of a given period is so subjective that the historiography often falls into the category of political science or social commentary.
Having said that, we are nearing the point where we can begin to think about World War II with something of the detachment necessary to the historical profession.
At any rate, back to Hitler, Stalin, and the Teachout article. It amazes me, when discussing World War II with people, just the degree of ignorance there still is regarding Stalin. The bare historical facts are these:
- Hitler was responsible for the murder of 6 million Jews, and other horrific acts;
- Stalin was responsible for the murder of no less than 30 million (some estimates double that number) in the Soviet Union, including at least 3 million Jews in the Ukraine.
- Hitler attempted to conquer all of Europe;
- Stalin did conquer most of Eastern Europe, in part because of the actions of the Allies after World War II.
Does this mean that Hitler should not have been stopped? Of course not. But you don’t ally with Satan himself in order to do away with a mere demon.
Why is it that we missed it? Why didn’t the United States get what was going on? I think there are several reasons:
- We are more interested, generally, in what is happening in Europe proper, rather than other areas of the world. Take Bosnia vs. Darfur as a modern example if you need one.
- The American left in the 1930s was sympathetic to communism. This is not to say that they were all communists (many were), but rather that, as socialists, they felt a kinship with communism. This forced them to turn a blind eye.
- FDR, in particular, believed in a state-run economy, and wanted to see it work.
- Stalin controlled the flow of information masterfully. There wasn’t that much information getting out. Today, in the Information Age, it would be harder to do.
- Even Churchill, who knew the dangers Stalin posed, conceded to work with him to defeat Hitler. (Churchill, it must be said in his defense, didn’t likely know the extent of Stalin’s Reign of Terror.)
Were there other factors? You could make a case that Germanophobia was a contributor, as a remnant from World War I. You could also make the case that there was an image issue, in which the Soviet Union posited itself to be the greatest and most powerful nation on the planet. There are other issues, too, but I think the four above make up the bulk of the reasoning.
So, how did the United States, including the American Left, ever get to the point where we were worried about the Soviets? There were several factors here, as well:
- Nuclear capability. Once the Soviets had nukes, it changed the setup of the board. The Cuban missile crisis has to play into this at some point, as well.
- Aggressiveness after World War II. We saw Soviet expansion firsthand, and didn’t especially care for it.
- The Berlin Wall. Once you put up a gate to keep people in (as opposed to keeping them out), you raise attention to the fact that everything inside might not be copacetic.
- The miracle of Solzhenitsyn. I don’t think we can, truly, underestimate the impact of The Gulag Archipelago or the Harvard Address in their roles of awakening the American mind.
So, there you have it. America’s biggest blunder, apart from how it handled slavery, had to have been letting Stalin go.
Further reading:
Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives
Stalin and His Hangmen: The Tyrant and Those Who Killed for Him
Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler: The Age of Social Catastrophe (Vintage)
