The Black Book of Communism

97 posts / 0 new
Last post
sergio60
The Black Book of Communism

The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression

By Mark Kramer , Jonathan Murphy, Stephane Courtois, Jean-Louis Panne, Andrzej Paczkowski, Karel Bartosek, and Jean-Louis Margolin

This book should be in every school library across the country. People must know that Communism, a totalitarian system of government no better than the fascist variety, is largely responsible for making the 20th century the bloodiest in human history. Wherever the fanatical followers of Marx were able to usurp power, there was repression, terror, torture, mass murder and genocide. I cannot stress how badly this needs to be read, because I've heard far too many "useful idiots".' Books such as this one really bring the "idiots" out of the woodwork) say things such as "I don't really view communism as a bad thing." (Whoppi Goldberg) and "when Communist U.S.S.R. was a superpower, the world was better off." (Janeane Garofalo). I have a feeling that if you walked down the street and asked various people about the Soviet Gulag, Stalin's forced famine in Ukraine or Mao's bloody "land reforms," you'd most likely get blank looks because they have forgotten or have never even heard of these outrages. This book was written to educate and remind them.

Some (mostly radical Leftists who want you to forget about the bloody history of their favorite ideology) have said that The Black Book is "biased" because it doesn't mention the atrocities of "anti-Communists" such as Pinochet, Suharto, Rios Montt, Videla, Somoza and Marcos. True, but this is a history of Communist crimes, the deliberate starvation and wholesale slaughter of *SCORES OF MILLIONS* of people by Lenin, Stalin, Mao Tse-tung, Pol Pot, Mengistu, Kim Il-sung, Kim Jong-il, etc, which make the crimes of the aforementioned anti-Communists pale in comparison. How many books on the Nazi Holocaust mention Communist atrocities during WWII? (the massacres at Katyn, Bleiburg, Nemmersdorf, Vinnitsa, Lwow, etc., the deportation of Polish and Baltic citizens to the Gulag during the Nazi/Soviet pact, the mass rape of nearly 2 million German women by the Red Army, the repression of ethnic minorities in the USSR, the murderous post-war expulsion of Germans from Eastern Europe... this list could go on and on) Not many. Does that mean these books on Nazi genocide are "biased" and therefore not credible for failing to mention the misdeeds committed by the other side? I don't believe so. And so what if an "anti-Communist" or a "right-winger" writes about the crimes of Communism? Don't anti-Fascists and Jews write about the evils of Nazism? While you're at Amazon.com, look up a few books on the crimes committed by the Pinochet regime in Chile (the 3,000 'disappeared' Marxists and sympathizers we are *always* hearing about. The radical Left would have us believe this was the crime of the century, but their hero Lenin had that many political opponents executed in just a week during the Red Terror). You'll notice that nearly all of them were written by Leftists and Socialists who are pro-Allende. Perhaps we should discount them altogether?

There is also some controversy over the numbers The Black Book claims to have been killed by Communism. Some say the introduction places the number too high (100 million, which is accepted by The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation: www.victimsofcommunism.org). Even some contributors to the book, former Communists who are obviously not ready to completely damn the poisoned ideology of Marxism, have denounced Courtois for inflating the numbers and said they would have settled for a total of 85 million. I have to admit that I also have a problem with one estimate. The introduction places those killed by the Soviet regime from 1917-1991 at only 20 million. Many historians estimate that Stalin ALONE killed 20 million people (Robert Conquest, Simon Sebag Montefiore, Daniel Chirot, Adam Hochschild, Tina Rosenberg, John Heidenrich, etc). Alexander Yakovlev, author of the excellent new book on Soviet tyranny and mass murder entitled "A Century of Violence in Soviet Russia," places the Soviet death toll at 30-35 million (in my opinion the most reliable estimate). Others such as Norman Davies, R.J. Rummel and Gulag survivor Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn place the Soviet death toll at a whopping 50 to 60 million! Therefore I believe it is safe to say that Communism is indeed responsible for killing *at least* 100 million people in the 20th century, making it one of the greatest evils in the annals of human history.

We must never forget the 100 million.

DaveW

very popular in France, and perhaps the tipping-point when the French intelligentsia became broadly "post- Marxist";

but why are you discussing it here, and in a confrontational tone?

Cueball Cueball's picture

Hilarious. No one ever talks about the world wide starvation during the depression or blames capitalism for the death of the 12 million Americans who starved in the US during the great depression.

Let the airbrushing of history begin.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

The world's primary superpower teeters on the brink of fascism, and this bozo wants us to worry about communism?

Kev55

What about the countless suicides in capitalist society the constant sexual deprivation and relationship instability of lower class men in capitalist society?  Given brainwashing of women into status and economically based reasons for dating men. No one wants to talk about the death by deprivation that capitalist society inflicts on the people through the wage labor system.  Nor how many health, psychological and moral degradation issues living in a society laden by corrupt advertising.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Never forget the casus beli of fascism was anti-communism.

Unionist

100 million? I thought it was 100 billion. Why is this character understating the evils of the Left???

Never forget the 100 billion.

Caissa

I see we picked up  some new friends over the weekend.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
What about the countless suicides in capitalist society the constant sexual deprivation and relationship instability of lower class men in capitalist society?  Given brainwashing of women into status and economically based reasons for dating men. No one wants to talk about the death by deprivation

 

Suddenly I do. LOL!

 

Death by sexual deprivation under Capitalism. Discuss.

Maysie Maysie's picture

*face palm*

For the love of cats.

Bye sergio.

Kev55. I mean, really? I don't know what you're on about and since you've already been sternly warned I think this isn't the place for you. See ya.

But for the purpose of fixing the lies in the OP, I'm not going to close this.

oldgoat

Gee, I don't often get called "useful".

siamdave

Better reading here - Killing Hope http://killinghope.org/ . Real stuff. Real bad stuff. Most of the stuff about 'them damned commies' is just American propaganda to justify maintaining and using a massive war machine. Nobody is saying Stalin was a good guy - but then Stalin was a 'commie' only in the sense that Kim Jong is a 'democrat' because he calls his country 'the democratic republic' of whatever. One thing the capitalists are very much opposed to is their serfs thinking, as this poster demonstrates well. No point in wasting much time here.

 

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

Hilarious. No one ever talks about the world wide starvation during the depression or blames capitalism for the death of the 12 million Americans who starved in the US during the great depression.

Let the airbrushing of history begin.

Do you have a source for the 12 million figure?

Snert Snert's picture

Let's see... Stalinist Communism vs. Laissez-Faire Capitalism.  Which was worse?

Oh, if only I didn't have to choose!  If only it were possible to critical of two things at once!

But we can't, so we need to choose ONLY ONE.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

While we're at it, let's discuss one of the true evils inflicted upon the world by American Capitalism: Modern Art

Wink

Cueball Cueball's picture

ygtbk wrote:

Cueball wrote:

Hilarious. No one ever talks about the world wide starvation during the depression or blames capitalism for the death of the 12 million Americans who starved in the US during the great depression.

Let the airbrushing of history begin.

Do you have a source for the 12 million figure?

Do you have a better figure of how many people starved to death during the great depression in the USA?

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

Using the demographic methods of the previously mentioned Black Book of Communism, some put the figure at over 7 million. But most reputable scholars reject the methodology used, in both instances.

Fidel

[url=http://www.spectrezine.org/global/chomsky.htm]Counting the bodies[/url] Chomsky

Quote:
Overcoming amnesia, suppose we now apply the methodology of the Black Book and its reviewers to the full story, not just the doctrinally acceptable half. We therefore conclude that in India the democratic capitalist "experiment" since 1947 has caused more deaths than in the entire history of the "colossal, wholly failed...experiment" of Communism everywhere since 1917: over 100 million deaths by 1979, tens of millions more since, in India alone.

IIt's the equivalent of a Great Leap in democratic capitalist India every eight years on time every time? Millions more since? Millions more every year? What do we call this conveyor belt of death and suffering?

Capitalists are guilty of using bad arithmetic even in these modern times. Capitalism is a monumental failure. It's a monstrous ideology that sacrifices millions of a desperate humanity on the altar of false economic gods of prosperity every year without remorse or pity. Capitalism has no soul.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:

Using the demographic methods of the previously mentioned Black Book of Communism, some put the figure at over 7 million. But most reputable scholars reject the methodology used, in both instances.

Wasn't using the methodolgy used to determine the death toll of the Ukrainian famine and applying it to the depression, the hidden point of Borisov's research?

Cueball Cueball's picture

Quote:
One of the ironies of the Great Depression was that an enormous surplus of food was being farmed around the country, while in the cities, people fought over rotting refuse in garbage cans. Government programs helped bail out farmers, buying up the unsold crops and burning them or using them as feed. But the International Apple Shippers Association approached the produce glut with city folk in mind, putting thousands of the unemployed to work by offering them crates of 100 apples for $2, usually on credit. By 1931, city streets around the nation were filled with apple vendors hawking their goods at a nickel apiece.

Of course to the USNews its merely "ironic" not criminal, I suppose because it is done in the name of the market.

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

ygtbk wrote:

Cueball wrote:

Hilarious. No one ever talks about the world wide starvation during the depression or blames capitalism for the death of the 12 million Americans who starved in the US during the great depression.

Let the airbrushing of history begin.

Do you have a source for the 12 million figure?

Do you have a better figure of how many people starved to death during the great depression in the USA?

That wasn't an answer. But here's why I think the 12 million number is improbable. You can get annual population death rates from, for instance,

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005131.html

If you think that 12 million starved over, say, 1930-1939, that's 1.2 million a year, which on a population base of say 120 million is 1% (or 10 per 1000) per year. That means that the death rates for those years should be at least 20 per 1000, which they aren't. The death rate during the depression never cracks the death rate for 1925.

So, once again, what's your source for the 12 million figure?

Cueball Cueball's picture

What's your figure?

Borisov makes a rather simple analysis that shows that based on previous demographic trends the US population in 1940 was at least 10 million less than it should have been. This is precisely the same kind of analysis used to establish the figure for the number of deaths caused in the Ukrainian famine of the 1930's.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say,

 

Fidel

What makes capitalists doubly guilty of genocide and infanticide around the democratic capitalist third world today is that it's happening in a modern age of computers and increasingly integrated global economies. Capitalism has the advantage of globalization working in its favour, and still tens of thousands are dying in agony every day like clockwork and millions every year. 85% of chronically hungry nations are exporting food to "the market" while their people are starving.

 Capitalists continue to hide millions of skeletons in their ideological closet of holocaust arithmetic every year. Capitalism works only if they ignore basic human rights to food and other necessities of life denied billions of human beings living in third world capitalist  misery. Capitalism is a colossal failure.

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

What's your figure?

Borisov makes a rather simple analysis that shows that based on previous demographic trends the US population in 1940 was at least 10 million less than it should have been. This is precisely the same kind of analysis used to establish the figure for the number of deaths caused in the Ukrainian famine of the 1930's.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say,

 

So is Borisov your source? If so, do you have a link to his paper (not the Pravda story that cites it) so we can see how he derived his estimate? Otherwise, can you describe the rather simple analysis for us?

I've already established that the 12 million figure is not plausible, using actual data, so the onus is on you to tell us where you got the 12 million figure. If you don't provide a source this time I might begin to suspect that you don't have one.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

...and if he pulled it out of thin air, it matters how?

Now back to the question of modern art, the hoax perpetrated on the world by the CIA, please.

Cueball Cueball's picture

ygtbk wrote:

Cueball wrote:

What's your figure?

Borisov makes a rather simple analysis that shows that based on previous demographic trends the US population in 1940 was at least 10 million less than it should have been. This is precisely the same kind of analysis used to establish the figure for the number of deaths caused in the Ukrainian famine of the 1930's.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say,

 

So is Borisov your source? If so, do you have a link to his paper (not the Pravda story that cites it) so we can see how he derived his estimate? Otherwise, can you describe the rather simple analysis for us?

I've already established that the 12 million figure is not plausible, using actual data, so the onus is on you to tell us where you got the 12 million figure. If you don't provide a source this time I might begin to suspect that you don't have one.

What is your figure for the number of people who starved to death in the USA during the depression. I am begining to suspect that you don't have one.

Here is a link to Borisov explaining his methodology in interview: Millions of people "vanished" in U.S. - historian (Did 7,000,000 Die?)

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

ygtbk wrote:

Cueball wrote:

What's your figure?

Borisov makes a rather simple analysis that shows that based on previous demographic trends the US population in 1940 was at least 10 million less than it should have been. This is precisely the same kind of analysis used to establish the figure for the number of deaths caused in the Ukrainian famine of the 1930's.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say,

 

So is Borisov your source? If so, do you have a link to his paper (not the Pravda story that cites it) so we can see how he derived his estimate? Otherwise, can you describe the rather simple analysis for us?

I've already established that the 12 million figure is not plausible, using actual data, so the onus is on you to tell us where you got the 12 million figure. If you don't provide a source this time I might begin to suspect that you don't have one.

What is your figure for the number of people who starved to death in the USA during the depression. I am begining to suspect that you don't have one.

Sigh. It's clearly under 12 million, and I think 7 million is also far too high to be consistent with the data. I also think that I found your source:

http://www.northstarcompass.org/nsc0903/amholomor.htm

You can read this yourself to decide whether Borisov is a reliable source of demographic information, given that his objective appears to be to establish moral equivalence between the Holodomor (definitely caused by Stalin) and an American famine (caused by Hoover or FDR? Who can say?). I appear to have cut him too much slack by assuming deaths spread out over 10 years - since he refers to the "American Holodomor of 1932/33", a naive interpretation would be that the deaths occurred over two years, boosting the mortality rate by a factor of four or five. I'm pretty sure that someone other than Boris would have noticed this.

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

ygtbk wrote:

Cueball wrote:

What's your figure?

Borisov makes a rather simple analysis that shows that based on previous demographic trends the US population in 1940 was at least 10 million less than it should have been. This is precisely the same kind of analysis used to establish the figure for the number of deaths caused in the Ukrainian famine of the 1930's.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say,

 

So is Borisov your source? If so, do you have a link to his paper (not the Pravda story that cites it) so we can see how he derived his estimate? Otherwise, can you describe the rather simple analysis for us?

I've already established that the 12 million figure is not plausible, using actual data, so the onus is on you to tell us where you got the 12 million figure. If you don't provide a source this time I might begin to suspect that you don't have one.

What is your figure for the number of people who starved to death in the USA during the depression. I am begining to suspect that you don't have one.

Here is a link to Borisov explaining his methodology in interview: Millions of people "vanished" in U.S. - historian (Did 7,000,000 Die?)

Thank-you for admitting that Borisov is your source.

Cueball Cueball's picture

A real forensic analysis of the number of people who entered the NKVD penal system and the Gulag based on Kremlin archives released after the end of the Soviet Union in 1990: Victims of the Soviet penal system in the pre-war years -- Viktor Zemskov, as opposed to fudgery concocted out of totally unreliable census statistics, and guesstimates of how many people should have been born, how many might have been alive, and anecdotal accounts such as those found in the evocative poetry of Alexander Solschenizyn.

 

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

Yes. That is precisely what he is doing. And using precisely the same methodolgy of statistical analysis upon which your claim that Stalin caused "X" number of deaths by starvation is founded on. Yet for some reason, you take on face value the basis of your last assertion about Stalin and then reject the same method of analysis when applied to the USA. Just because you want to believe the last, and don't want to believe the former, it would seem.

You say that the deaths cause by famine in the Ukraine are directly the result of Stalin's government policy. Does not the fact that the US government bought huge amounts of surplus food from farmers, and then burned and otherwise destroyed it not also implicate the US government in hardship caused by the great depression? People are starving in the streets so New York, and the government is keeping the value of food prices high by reducing the supply of food.

How about the fact that millions were put into work camps, and paid next to nothing by the US government?

In anycase, what is your estimate and source for the number of deaths caused by the Great Depression in the USA.

I've noticed that your number is no longer 12 million. And I never attributed a specific number to Stalin, because I don't have to: the liquidation of the Kulaks is well-known.

I've already posted population mortality stats for the U.S. during the 20th century, available from this link:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005131.html

There is no spike in the 1930's, relative to say 1925. Here's some additional public health stats that might be useful to you:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2024011/pdf/pubhealthreporig00184-0087.pdf

Similarly, no spike in the 1930's.

So I'm going to go out on a limb and say, that my estimate of U.S. depression starvation deaths, to the nearest million, is zero.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Yes. That is precisely what he is doing. And using precisely the same methodolgy of statistical analysis upon which your claim that Stalin caused "X" number of deaths by starvation is founded on. Yet for some reason, you take on face value the basis of your last assertion about Stalin and then reject the same method of analysis when applied to the USA. Just because you want to believe the last, and don't want to believe the former, it would seem.

You say that the deaths cause by famine in the Ukraine are directly the result of Stalin's government policy. In fact, I agree! Indeed, even Nikita Kruscheov agrees, it would seem. However, does not the fact that the US government bought huge amounts of surplus food from farmers, and then burned and otherwise destroyed it not also implicate the US government in hardship caused by the great depression? People are starving in the streets of New York, and the government is keeping the value of food prices high by reducing the supply of food.

How about the fact that millions were put into work camps, and paid next to nothing by the US government?

In anycase, what is your estimate and source for the number of deaths caused by the Great Depression in the USA.

Cueball Cueball's picture

That is what I wanted you to say. Zero. Perfect. It shows that your commentary is completely unreliable and tainted by ideological bias. No one died during the Great Depression. If I went to a Soviet era commissar and asked him how many died during the Ukrainian famine, I would get the same answer, "zero", and he would likewise reveal that his views were completely unreliable and tainted by ideological bias.

Of course many people died in the Great Depression. And many people died in the Ukrainian famine as well. Its just that neither government bothered to any kind of clinincal analysis of the facts on the ground and then publish the results because it was not in their best interests to do so.

You never wondered why no US government agency has ever published any kind of serious study relating to the Great Depression and the impacts upon the population?

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

That is what I wanted you to say. Zero. Perfect. It shows that your commentary is completely unreliable and tainted by ideological bias. No one died during the Great Depression. If I went to a Soviet era commissar and asked him how many died during the Ukrainian famine, I would get the same answer, "zero", and he would likewise reveal that his views were completely unreliable and tainted by ideological bias.

Of course many people died in the Great Depression. And many people died in the Ukrainian famine as well. Its just that neither government bothered to any kind of clinincal analysis of the facts on the ground and then publish the results because it was not in their best interests to do so.

You never wondered why no US government agency has ever published any kind of serious study relating to the Great Depression and the impacts upon the population?

I said "to the nearest million, zero". This is not the same as zero. It means 500,000 or less. Did you look at the links I provided?

Cueball Cueball's picture

So your revisionist estimate is lower by a factor of 14 than Borisov's census based guesstimate. That is about the same factor of difference between many of the pre-1990 guesstimates about deaths caused by Stalin during the 1930's (such as those by Robert Conquest) based in the same methodology used by Borisov to assertain the number of deaths caused by the Great Depression, and a real forensic analysis of Soviet State archives that were opened after 1990.

Your new material adds nothing to this discussion, It is a discussion about deaths from infectious diseases from 1900 to 1950.

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

Based on what? Did you just pull that figure out of the air?

No, I based it on the fact that there must have been some starvation deaths (only a commissar would say zero) but that there weren't enough, based on the death rates that I already posted, to move the mortality statistics, as I've already pointed out. That's my estimate and I'm sticking with it, until I see credible data that would cause me to update it.

Evening Star

Tbf, India was basically a democratic socialist country until the 90s.

 

Fidel wrote:

[url=http://www.spectrezine.org/global/chomsky.htm]Counting the bodies[/url] Chomsky

Quote:
Overcoming amnesia, suppose we now apply the methodology of the Black Book and its reviewers to the full story, not just the doctrinally acceptable half. We therefore conclude that in India the democratic capitalist "experiment" since 1947 has caused more deaths than in the entire history of the "colossal, wholly failed...experiment" of Communism everywhere since 1917: over 100 million deaths by 1979, tens of millions more since, in India alone.

IIt's the equivalent of a Great Leap in democratic capitalist India every eight years on time every time? Millions more since? Millions more every year? What do we call this conveyor belt of death and suffering?

Capitalists are guilty of using bad arithmetic even in these modern times. Capitalism is a monumental failure. It's a monstrous ideology that sacrifices millions of a desperate humanity on the altar of false economic gods of prosperity every year without remorse or pity. Capitalism has no soul.

Cueball Cueball's picture

ygtbk wrote:

Cueball wrote:

Based on what? Did you just pull that figure out of the air?

No, I based it on the fact that there must have been some starvation deaths (only a commissar would say zero) but that there weren't enough, based on the death rates that I already posted, to move the mortality statistics, as I've already pointed out. That's my estimate and I'm sticking with it, until I see credible data that would cause me to update it.

Your new material adds nothing to this discussion, It is a discussion about deaths from infectious diseases from 1900 to 1950.

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

So your revisionist estimate is lower by a factor of 14 than Borisov's census based guesstimate. That is about the same factor of difference between many of the pre-1990 guesstimates about deaths caused by Stalin during the 1930's (such as those by Robert Conquest) based in the same methodology used by Borisov to assertain the number of deaths caused by the Great Depression, and a real forensic analysis of Soviet State archives that were opened after 1990.

Your new material adds nothing to this discussion, It is a discussion about deaths from infectious diseases from 1900 to 1950.

No, Figures 4 and 5 in the second link are all-in (not just infectious diseases). And the death rates in the first link are quite clear, and leave no room for 7-12 million famine deaths, as I've already demonstrated.

clandestiny

Stalin cared about one thing, and one thing only: the REVOLUTION! And he kept the revolution going longer then reflection says was humanly possible. How does anyone KNOW what misinfo the ratwingers were slipping into Stalin's daily briefing papers? The brits got to RULE India by lying and cheating and ratting and all sorts of nasty tricks even that ancient culture hadn't even though of (i read a book recently set in 1947 India/Pakistan breakup where the ex colonist brits were commonly referred to as 'four-twenties' which was the India Police Service code for 'petty thieves!)  Stalin was, no question, as ruthless a revolutionary as the world has ever seen. Stalin never did anything without thinking about the Paris Commune and the failure of the revolution to consolidate its early success, and the horrific price it paid for eventually losing to overwhelming reactionary force. It seems a great, unspeakable TRAGEDY that the revolution failed, is failing - the USSR was effectively murdered by a multi generational plot hatched and carried out in secrecy- with the pig's media the main player in hiding the facts from the people. No one here at Babble even seems startled by the simple truth that it was the allies, Britain & USA mainly, who caused the division of Germany, the 'cold war' and the Iron curtain, and the subsequent appalling burden the USSR was forced to carry  The USSR was killed, and the same confidence tracksters (churchill, Truman etc) types who arranged the 'Iron Curtain'  have since arranged the murder of JFK, the coup against Nixon, the placing of 1/2 wit reagan into white house in 1980, the KAL shootdown in 1983 and god knows what else since. The mass media, in order to be succesful under the prevailing rules of ad hoc dishonesty, has been turned into prostitutes. No matter how much integrity they have, they have to sell out if they want to work in newsmedia

Cueball Cueball's picture

Stalin didn't care about the revolution. That is why his chief political victims were the revolutionaries themselves.

Cueball Cueball's picture

ygtbk wrote:

Cueball wrote:

So your revisionist estimate is lower by a factor of 14 than Borisov's census based guesstimate. That is about the same factor of difference between many of the pre-1990 guesstimates about deaths caused by Stalin during the 1930's (such as those by Robert Conquest) based in the same methodology used by Borisov to assertain the number of deaths caused by the Great Depression, and a real forensic analysis of Soviet State archives that were opened after 1990.

Your new material adds nothing to this discussion, It is a discussion about deaths from infectious diseases from 1900 to 1950.

No, Figures 4 and 5 in the second link are all-in (not just infectious diseases). And the death rates in the first link are quite clear, and leave no room for 7-12 million famine deaths, as I've already demonstrated.

The data on deaths per thousand is very simplistic.

That kind of simplistic data really says nothing without analysis. Indeed, if you look at the year 1900 you can see a vast drop in the rate of death per 1000 over the period up to 1930,  So, one can consider that advances in medical science are decreasing the overall death rate steadly. In the case of the Great Depression we do not know if advances in medical science are increasing the longevity of those who are best served by society, while deaths per thousand in the bottom strata of society are dying from privation.

So what you should actually be looking for is a consistent rate of decrease in the number of death's per thousand, and indeed, looking at the period between 1930 and 1940 we can see no consistent decrease in the number of deaths per thousand, and between 1930 and 1937 the deaths per thousand hovers around the same mark as it does in 1930.

After 1940, there is a return to a consistent patern of decrease in deaths per thousand over the next decade. No such consistent decrease is evident in the decade before and the depression era decade ends with roughly the same number of deaths per thousand, as it begins.

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

ygtbk wrote:

Cueball wrote:

So your revisionist estimate is lower by a factor of 14 than Borisov's census based guesstimate. That is about the same factor of difference between many of the pre-1990 guesstimates about deaths caused by Stalin during the 1930's (such as those by Robert Conquest) based in the same methodology used by Borisov to assertain the number of deaths caused by the Great Depression, and a real forensic analysis of Soviet State archives that were opened after 1990.

Your new material adds nothing to this discussion, It is a discussion about deaths from infectious diseases from 1900 to 1950.

No, Figures 4 and 5 in the second link are all-in (not just infectious diseases). And the death rates in the first link are quite clear, and leave no room for 7-12 million famine deaths, as I've already demonstrated.

The data on deaths per thousand is very simplistic.

That kind of simplistic data really says nothing without analysis. Indeed, if you look at the year 1900 you can see a vast drop in the rate of death per 1000 over the period up to 1930,  So, one can consider that advances in medical science are decreasing the overall death rate steadly. In the case of the Great Depression we do not know if advances in medical science are increasing the longevity of those who are best served by society, while deaths per thousand in the bottom strata of society are dying from privation.

So what you should actually be looking for is a consistent rate of decrease in the number of death's per thousand, and indeed, looking at the period between 1930 and 1940 we can see no consistent decrease in the number of deaths per thousand, and between 1930 and 1937 the deaths per thousand hovers around the same mark as it does in 1930.

After 1940, there is a return to a consistent patern of decrease in deaths per thousand every year.

I already dealt with this in post 20. The number of additional deaths that you're talking about would have shown up as a doubling of the death rate, (or quadrupling if it were really concentrated in 1932/33), not just a change in the rate of decrease. The data does not bear this out.

Let's recap:

1) You've abandoned your 12 million number; and

2) You've admitted that your sole source is politically biased.

Let it go.

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

You missed the point. The entire reason I brought up Borisov was to establish how the whole census based guesstimates system was a bunch of hocus-pocus. For my money, the whole reason that Borisov did his estimate in this way was to show what a bunch of hocus pocus the system used for establishing the number of people who died in the Ukrainian Famine and the Stalin purges was a bunch of hocus pocus, that either you or I can do on the back of a napkin, because he can use the same system of analysis applied in the Soviet case to establish that 7 million people died of privation in the USA during the great depression.

There are real statistics around based in archival records released by the post soviet government of Russia. There is no longer a reason to go through this phoney census based estimation.

Now. You still have got to explain why there is no meaningful decline in the number of deaths per thousand in the years between 1930 and 1937, that is consistent with the rate of decline in the period 1940 and 1950, where the number of deaths per thousand drops by 1 per thousand, whereas, between 1930 and 1937, the height of the depression years there is no real decline are all. The rate of deaths per thousand remains steady, and even hits the high water mark of deaths per thousand of 1925 in 1937!

No, I did not miss the point. You claimed 12 million starvation deaths in the U.S., and you were demonstrably wrong. Worse, it seems that the only reason you claimed it was to discredit a position that I never took, not because you thought it was true.

Cueball Cueball's picture

As if Robert Conquest isn't biased. Prior to devoting his career to writing, he was a researcher for the British agitation and propaganda effort of the Information Research Department for the British Foreign office.

You missed the point. The entire reason I brought up Borisov was to establish how the whole census based guesstimates system was a bunch of hocus-pocus. For my money, the whole reason that Borisov did his estimate in this way was to show what a bunch of hocus pocus the system used (by Conquest et al) for establishing the number of people who died in the Ukrainian Famine and the Stalin purges was a bunch of hocus pocus, that either you or I can do on the back of a napkin, because he can use the same system of analysis applied in the Soviet case to establish that 7 million people died of privation in the USA during the great depression.

There are real statistics around based in archival records released by the post soviet government of Russia. There is no longer a reason to go through this phoney census based estimation.

Now. You still have got to explain why there is no meaningful decline in the number of deaths per thousand in the years between 1930 and 1937, that is consistent with the rate of decline in the period 1940 and 1950, where the number of deaths per thousand drops by 1 per thousand, whereas, between 1930 and 1937, the height of the depression years there is no real decline are all. The rate of deaths per thousand remains steady, and even hits the high water mark of deaths per thousand of 1925 in 1937!

Cueball Cueball's picture

The only reason you can possibly think this is because you didn't read what I wrote in post number 18:

Cueball wrote:

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:

Using the demographic methods of the previously mentioned Black Book of Communism, some put the figure at over 7 million. But most reputable scholars reject the methodology used, in both instances.

Wasn't using the methodolgy used to determine the death toll of the Ukrainian famine and applying it to the depression, the hidden point of Borisov's research?

In other words, Borisov is making a joke.

So, instead of priding yourself in your awesome abilities of analysis and argumentation, do me the favour of letting me speak for myself, and you can speak for yourself.

 

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

The only reason you can possibly think this is because you didn't read what I wrote in post number 18:

Cueball wrote:

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:

Using the demographic methods of the previously mentioned Black Book of Communism, some put the figure at over 7 million. But most reputable scholars reject the methodology used, in both instances.

Wasn't using the methodolgy used to determine the death toll of the Ukrainian famine and applying it to the depression, the hidden point of Borisov's research?

So, instead of priding yourself in your awesome abilities of analysis and argumentation, do me the favour of letting me speak for myself, and you can speak for yourself.

 

Your post #2 (which didn't even mention Borisov) preceded your post #18. As you say, let the airbrushing of history begin!

Cueball Cueball's picture

Now in the period between 1925 and 1937 there is no consistent decline in the deaths per thousand per year, as can be seen in the data of the chart you provided. Based on the 10 year period following we would expect a consistent decline in the rate of deaths per thousand of at least 1 per thousand per year. Such is not evident during the depression.

Therefore, it seems logical to assert that there is at least 0.1% increase in unwarranted deaths in the United States over the depression years, each and every year. This means, that between 1929 and 1937, a period of 8 years, 0.8% more Americans died than should have. Based on a population base of 130 million, I think its safe to say that at least a million Americans died prematurely during the Great Depression.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Well, what do you really want here? Before you were asserting that I was "admitting" that Borisov is my source and now you seem to be claiming that it couldn't possibly be so because I didn't mention him in post number 2? Which is it? I am relying on Borisov or not?

I am allowed to add additional information later, when it suits you, but not when it doesn't?

Seriously I had a vague recollection of the original article, and haven't followed the story closely, but I remembered the upshot of what Borisov was doing was showing the falacy of the statistical system used to assert the often outrageous numbers of people who are considered to have been killed by Stalin, as exhibited in the OP. He inverted the paradigm. I said this various times at various places in this thread.

I have also pointed out that there are far better existing number sets available for making some of this analysis that was not merely guesstimates based in census data.

ygtbk

Cueball wrote:

Now in the period between 1925 and 1937 there is no consistent decline in the deaths per thousand per year, as can be seen in the data of the chart you provided. Based on the 10 year period following we would expect a consistent decline in the rate of deaths per thousand of at least 1 per thousand per year. Such is not evident during the depression.

Therefore, it seems logical to assert that there is at least 0.1% increase in unwarranted deaths in the United States over the depression years, each and every year. This means, that between 1929 and 1937, a period of 8 years, 0.8% more Americans died than should have. Based on a population base of 130 million, I think its safe to say that at least a million Americans died prematurely during the Great Depression.

This is considerably closer to my estimate than 12 million was. Changing "died of starvation" to "died prematurely compared with what would have happened if the trend of the 20's had continued" is of course changing what we're talking about, but the second one is hard to disagree with.

jrootham

I found "BIRTHS, DEATHS, AND NEW DEAL RELIEF DURING THE GREAT DEPRESSION".  Upshot seems to be that there were some excess deaths bur relief efforts were effective in preventing demographic catastrophe.

Somewhat inconclusive about the utter horrors of western political economy.

 

Fidel

Evening Star wrote:

Tbf, India was basically a democratic socialist country until the 90s.

Tbt, India has the [url=http://www.indiaonestop.com/stockmarkjets.htm]oldest stock market in Asia[/url]. Stock markets are generally always associated with capitalism and never with socialism.

Here is what infant mortality rates per 1000 live births of democratic capitalist India and some third world capitalist countries look like according to [url=http://search.worldbank.org/data?qterm=infant%20mortality&language=EN&fo... Bank Statistics:[/url]

WB wrote:
India: 50.3

Pakistan: 70.5 

Haiti: 63.7

Rwanda: 70.4

Uganda: 79.4

Afghanistan: Anywhere from God awful to terrible after 30 year's worth of CIA and US Military and now NATO intervention

And here is what infant mortality rates look like in countries where socialist style health care is the way:

WB wrote:
Cuba: 4.4

Canada: 5.3

Sweden: 2.3

Japan: 2.4

Germany: 3.5

South Korea: 4.5

Socialism works. Socialism is the humane way to stabilize population growth and to nurture healthy workers contributing to productive and competitive economies.

Democratic third world capitalism and cash crop capitalism, OTOH, has been a monumental failure for billions of human beings.

Pages