> I
> say that it is essential to a proper appraisal of the
> Stalinist system, which is no longer really an object
> to be defended, but merely assessed. I don't dismiss
> the positive aspects of the Soviet experience. But
> apart from insisting on the negative lessons of total
> planning, I see no point in apologizing for the
> intentional evils and cruelty of the Stalinist
> dictatorship. Note that I reject the high body counts
> of the likes of Conquest and Solzhentisn -- I go with
> Getty's and Davies' much lower figures. But the lowest
> of those figures give us 8 million dead in the planned
> famine in the Ukraine.
>
It seems that what you describe as kulaks might be anti-communist, being ambitious and focused on self. Then they died because state power decided that communism's survival was threatened.
What assessment do you draw from that observation?
Martin