Tuesday, November 03, 2009

The Great Patriotic War

Championship Insane Person, Masha Lipman, warns us that . . . well, something! Look, it turns out that the figure of Joseph Stalin occupies an ambiguous place in the Russian psyche. On the one hand, he was one of history's great monsters. On the other hand, he preserved the Russian nation and destroyed Hitler. History is in fact full of such figures, both monstrous and grand. Augustus was cruel to the point of sociopathy, and yet he carved the West's most enduring political entity. Chiang Kai-Shek was a monster too, but we santify his movement in order to anathematize Chairman Mao. You know the drill. History might be more telgenic if it were composed of a panel of judges with little score-cards, like Olympic diving. Alas, it is not.

There are many actual trends toward authoritarianism and revanchism in Russia today that might worry a truly sympathetic observer, but the replacement of a few lines of lousy patriotic poetry in an historical architectural restoration, for Lenin's sake, is just lazy propoganda for ignorant Americans. According to Lipman

Russians cling to the image of Stalin as the embodiment of the great state, and he is particularly inseparable from the triumph of the Soviet Union over Nazi Germany. The implication is that individuals may have been cowed, and that the ferocious state treated them mercilessly, but the state was the vehicle that inspired Russia's victory in world War II, its greatest achievement of the 20th century.
I guess this is supposed to be tendentious somehow? It is, of course, what happened. Individuals were cowed, from dragooned peasants right up through the highest ranks of the the Red Army. The ferocious state treated them mercilessly, and was the vehicle that inspired Russia's victory in World War II. The Russian victory in World War II was its greatest achievement in the 20th Century. Is this even debatable? How about a little pause for historical irony, in that Russia sacrificed tens of millions of its own people to defeat Nazi Germany, so that six decades later, the editorial page of the Washington Post could perpetually agitate for imperial conflicts under the banner of defeating all those little Hitlers before they become like the big Hitler that America did not defeat in the first place. Zing.

25 comments:

Mr.Fundamental said...

History is in fact full of such figures, both monstrous and grand.

OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG! YOU SUPPORT COMMUNISM! OMGOMGOMG

*shits pants, feints*

Mr.Fundamental said...

MORAL CASUISTRIST!!!

OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG

Montag said...

what makes a man, Mr. Lebowski? is it, being prepared to do the right thing, whatever the price? is that what makes a man?

Anonymous said...

The Russian victory in World War II was its greatest achievement in the 20th Century. Is this even debatable?

Plastics.

Anonymous said...

The Russian victory in World War II was its greatest achievement in the 20th Century. Is this even debatable?

Uh IOZ, I know that you are gay and all, but what about Anna Kournikova? Oh does too much of her career bleed into the 21st century for her to count?

Montag said...

what about Anna Kournikova?

she can execute a pincer maneuver around my Stalingrad any day.

Anonymous said...

I heard they were pioneers in laser eye surgery. Which, since it affects me (unlike burning up undesirables), makes that the greatest achievement in the 20th century.

Roderick Jaynes said...

http://tinyurl.com/yj66tl2

This is Russia's greatest achievement of the 20th century.

Inspector Lee said...

Not sufficiently libertarian or Old Right.

Look, it turns out that the figure of Franklin Delano Roosevelt occupies an ambiguous place in the American psyche. On the one hand, he was one of history's great monsters. On the other hand, he preserved the American nation and destroyed Tojo.

There ya go.

Inkberrow said...

IOZ---

Yes, it is indeed debatable that the Russian victory in WWII was its greatest 20th century achievement. One might argue that finally overthrowing of centuries of Tsarist autocracy at least deserves a place in the discussion.

In that connection, maybe the New York Times can produce a Championship Not-Insane Person to sneer, on behalf of hindsight sophisticates everywhere, at Lipman's overreaction to modern-day apologetics on behalf of good old Uncle Joe. With a view to maintaining Grey Lady standards, traditions, and modern ahistorical detachment, perhaps Walter Duranty's grandson is available, now that he and Jayson Blair have broken up for good.

periscopedepth said...

On the one hand, he was one of history's great monsters. On the other hand, he preserved the Russian nation and destroyed Hitler.

What's with this "one hand, other hand" crap? Isn't the point of everything that you've written for the last n years (which I agree with, FYI) is that Stalin was only able to muster the manpower to fend off Hitler because he was such a monster?

Who do you think built the Pyramids, or the Panama Canal, or the Magna Carta? Philosopher-kings?

IOZ said...

Periscope: I think the Magna Carta is looking for another verb. Otherwise, I think you may be taking the flippant for dismissive. What you say is plainly the case.

Inkberrow: You can do better.

Anonymous said...

This isn't a guy who built the railroads here.

He peed on my rug!

Inkberrow said...

Ooops, I need to clarify---SELECTIVE ahistorical detachment. After all, it's not Hitler apologetics we're talking about. I don't mean to suggest the Times would stand for THAT, even as they would join in tittering at Lipman of the Post over Stalin. As the Times, Morris Dees, and all good proggies know, the danger represented by a few dozen neo-Nazis with goatees in American trailer-parks, far, far outweighs the "danger" of Neo-Stalinist sentiments in the current Russian leadership.

I wonder if these risk-assessments have anything to do with the political ideologies of the assessors.....

IOZ said...

Now that is some good shit, buddy, and although I'm not so sure about the Neo-Stalinist sentiments in the current Russian leadership--I mean, Bad Vlad seems a lot more a Romanov than a Bolshevik, despite the KGB shit--it is true that the left and their horror of "eliminationism" is one Captain Sisko teaches Eddie Furlong a valuable lesson about Caring History X because, Redemption, too many for me.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, the whole Lysenko thing was kind of embarrassing, but some acknowledgment of the groundbreaking research the Soviets funded is nonetheless in order here. Have you guys, like, not read Psychic Discoveries Behind the Iron Curtain?

Christopher said...

How much of our shit has Reagan's name emblazoned all over it?

Anonymous said...

Aw, shit. By WaPo op-ed standards, Lippman's barely Miss Nutcase Congeniality. Human Panzer Krauthammer's gonna retire the championship trophy for sure.
-- sglover

Anonymous said...

she can execute a pincer maneuver around my Stalingrad any day.

I think you mean your Kursk salient.
-- sglover

Anonymous said...

Banker and boss
hate the Red Soviet Star.
Gladly they build
a new throne for the Czar.
But from the East to
the black Russian sea,
Lenin's great army
brings vic-to-ry.

So workers hold your ranks
Stay sharp and steady.
For freedom's name
Your bayonets bright.
For Worker's Russia,
the Soviet Union.
Together for the last
fierce fight.

periscopedepth said...

Ah. Well, hell, IOZ, don't scare a bro like that.

Anonymous said...

Ekranoplan?

Gridlock said...

Cute little doggy space suits.

Montag said...

get your mind out of the gutter, sglover!

Anonymous said...

masha is talking about drawing a line in the sand.