How Russian Kids Are Taught World War II

Moscow Times ^ | 2017 | Ola Cichowlas

[CondoleezzaProtege]

From Kaliningrad to Vladivostok, Russian schoolchildren are preparing for the most important holiday of the year: Victory Day. Commemorated with a grand military parade on Moscow’s Red Square every May 9, the Soviet Union’s defeat of Nazi Germany has long been used by authorities to rally support for the state. And it starts in school.

In September 2016, three history textbooks were sanctioned by the Ministry of Education, all of which gloss over Stalin’s crimes and his initial alliance with Nazi Germany. “My main issue with the textbooks is that they do not reveal the whole truth,” says historian and teacher Leonid Katsva.

What is still unclear is who decides which book should be used in the classroom. “Is it the teacher, the school director or the city? I asked this question to the Moscow city government many times and received no answer,” says Abalov.

Most schools across the country have sided with one of them, published by Prosveshenie, whose retelling of the war focuses almost exclusively on the heroic aspects of the Soviet war effort.

The pact was defensive!

For Russians, World War II began—not in 1939 as it did for the rest of the world—but in 1941. What happened before, and the Soviet Union’s role in it, has stirred emotions and denial in Russia. The most controversial moment, which the Kremlin traditionally does not emphasize, is the Molotov–Ribbentrop “non-aggression” pact between the USSR and Nazi Germany.

Putin has made contradictory statements about the pact. He struck a conciliatory tone in 2009 when he spoke in Gdansk in Poland, saying the Russian parliament had condemned the pact. Six years later, in a meeting with Germany’s Angela Merkel, Putin said the pact “made sense for ensuring the security of the Soviet Union.”

[sauropod]

Bkmk

[marktwain]

What has that to do with my question?

Do you consider Stalin to be better than Hitler?

[BobL]

“This makes a lot of sense as Ford sold a huge auto plant to the Soviet Union and helped them get it started. Vickers too.”

Yep, it was crazy, Ford was paling around with Stalin in the earlier days and the Kennedy’s bunch was paling around with Hitler. Most of the Europeans were all-in on Hitler too. In fact, Ford was playing both sides. Of course they ‘claimed’ they were trying to help the Germans...but it was all for the money. Go figure!

[dfwgator]

Hollywood was in on Hitler too, because they didn’t want to lose access to the lucrative German market.

[Bull Snipe]

Ford did not sell the auto plant at Gorki to the Soviets. He built it for them under contract. The tooling used was from the Ford Model A and B productions era. The GAZ factory was the largest industrial operation in the USSR until the middle of WWII. If you look at old photos from the war, the wheels on a 37 mm anti-tank gun are 19-inch Model A wheels. The engines used in the early BT series light tanks, are model B engines.
The cowl gas tank the GAZ 67 scout car was the same cowl gas tank used in the Model A Fords.

[BobL]

“Hollywood was in on Hitler too, because they didn’t want to lose access to the lucrative German market.”

Even worse, rumor has it that AMERICAN companies and AMERICAN PEOPLE actually supported the Nazi-installed Regime in Ukraine. But no doubt people will claim otherwise.

[Does so]

Stalin may still have Russian admirers at online websites. (Mostly elderly Russians were seen in online parades).

[Dr. Franklin]

What a mendacious pantload. Poland was too small? They stole land from almost all of their neighbors. Lands that they had no valid claim to except a few Poles lived there.

The first treaty signed at Versailles was formally titled, "The Treaty of Polish Independence". Having committed to recreate Poland, Poland was obligated to accept the borders of its allies in the main "Treaty of Peace with Germany" at Versailles. The Allies conducted plebiscites in former German lands which became interwar Poland, but none anywhere else. The Allies cared not if the people of Ukraine, Belarus or even the former Duchy of Teschen wanted to governed by Poland or not. Since Lenin offered Belarus and Western Poland to Poland at Riga, and Poland declined them, Poland stole nothing from anyone. All of Poland's borders were approved by the Allies, and its Eastern border was far less than Lenin offered Poland at Riga.

The Second Polish Republic was obviously smaller than its historical boundaries of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the East:



The lie that only a few Poles lived East of Poland's present border is a shameful one you made. Poles were still the plurality of ethnic groups in the Eastern provinces of the Riga line as a whole. Even in Polesia, there is not a scintela of evidence that the Polesians preferred to be governed by the Soviets. As British historian Norman Davies noted, "Ukraine was part of Poland for longer than it was inside Russia – and this is key to understanding Ukrainian nationhood" The forgotten history of Poland and Ukraine Don't forget that Simon Petliura's Ukrainian People's Army fought with the Poles against the Soviets, only to be abandoned at Riga to remain in the Soviet Union. While there were many ethnic Poles abandoned in the Soviet Union at Riga, many in Soviet Ukraine and Belarus would have preferred to be part of Poland if given that choice. Stalin knew that and feared Poland more than Germany, and Poles were disproportionally sent to the Soviet gulags. In Soviet Ukraine and Belarus, many starved or were forced to eat their dead children when Stalin stole their food.

The entire history of the region, could have been different had the Allies deigned to recreate a larger Polish-Lithuanian-Ukrainian Commonwealth. Instead of creating a large geo-political entity that could have survived between two large and aggressive neighbors, the Allies created many smaller states that they could play off against each other, until they no longer cared about protecting them and Hitler annexed the Sudentenland and then WWII commenced a year later. The Versailles boundaries failed within 20 years resulting in WWII, death and destruction. That cannot be defended by blaming the Poles for "stealing" historically Polish lands awarded to them at Versailles. The Allies can be blamed for creating Poland, and other states that were too small to last without considerable Allied military support, which they were unwilling to provide.

[Dr. Franklin]

This is flatout untrue. Ukraine was not a prosperous place. It was a backyards and corrupt country not any better than Russia.

I'm sure that most Ukrainians think that Ukraine is a better place to live and work than Russia, and many worked in Russia at some time. In recent years, Ukrainians have been able to live, work and study in E.U. countries. They can see that the E.U. has a better lifestyle than Russia, and they want to be a part of it. That is a threat to Putin who sees Ukraine as historically Russian.

[Dr. Franklin]

*Since Lenin offered Belarus and Western Ukraine to Poland at Riga, and Poland...

[packrat35]

What you posted is the opposite of what I said which was Ukraine is not and has never been a good place. It has historically ALWAYS been a backwards and corrupt place, first in the USSR and then afterwards when independant. In otherwards, it has been a $hithole and would likely remain so.

You note about moving to the EU just proves that point.

[Dr. Franklin]

What you posted is the opposite of what I said which was Ukraine is not and has never been a good place. It has historically ALWAYS been a backwards and corrupt place, first in the USSR and then afterwards when independant. In otherwards, it has been a $hithole and would likely remain so.

Ukraine was a backward agrarian place going back to when it was part of Poland, a land of priests and peasants, and a borderland of runaway serfs and bandits, but that wasn't your point. You wrote that Ukraine is "corrupt country not any better than Russia". I think the population there disagrees. While corrupt by our standards, Ukraine doesn't have the level of corruption that Russia does, at least since they deposed Yanukovich. Ukraine doesn't invade its neighbors for fun and has resisted drafting its young men. As long as the population of Ukraine thinks it is a better place than Russia, that is all that matters, not your opinion.

[packrat35]

Ukraine doesn’t have the level of corruption that Russia does, at least since they deposed Yanukovich. Ukraine doesn’t invade its neighbors for fun and has resisted drafting its young men. As long as the population of Ukraine thinks it is a better place than Russia, that is all that matters, not your opinion.

I whole heartedly disagree with everything in this statement.

Ukraine was as corrupt or more than Russia

They are literally kidnapping men off the streets for combat. You can see videos everywhere showing this.

What you think vs reality does matter. Many Ukrainians were fleeing Ukraine to the EU and Russia before the war...

[Dr. Franklin]

Ukraine was as corrupt or more than Russia

Which is back tracking on your previous comment. Ukraine is certainly not more corrupt than Russia...

They are literally kidnapping men off the streets for combat. You can see videos everywhere showing this.

That's compulsory military service during wartime when Ukraine has been invaded by its much larger neighbor who doesn't recognize its right to exist. Mohammed Ali got jailed for refusing to serve in the U.S. Army during Vietnam. I wouldn't call that corruption, just normal application of the law.

Many Ukrainians were fleeing Ukraine to the EU and Russia before the war...

I doubt many Ukrainian men went to Russia unless they considered themselves Russians. Even then, they are likely to get set to the front as cannon fodder. Many Ukrainians went to Europe, but many, many Russian males fled Russia to avoid military service. Probably more than the Ukrainians who left Ukraine. That's normal self-preservation during wartime. Many in the U.S. are descended from those who left Europe to avoid the wars there. That doesn't prove corruption, just normal human risk aversion and self-preservation.

[rxh4n1]

Sorry pal, the Curzon Line, the current border was the cutoff. That map you posted, every nationalist group in Europe has grandiose maps like that. Just give your bloody ethnic hatreds a rest. This is America.

[rxh4n1]

I seem to remember the Soviets paid for it all. Hence the collectivization and the Holodomor. Stalin needed the hard currency and robbed and extorted it from the countryside.

[Dr. Franklin]

Sorry pal, the Curzon Line, the current border was the cutoff.

Right, you admit the Allies didn't ask anyone what nation they wished to belong. The whole ethnic determination of peoples didn't apply to the Russian empire much. They held four plebiscites on Germany's borders, but none on Russia's, even when Lenin offered to give land away. In the East, the Allies just issued opinions, but no plebiscites, not even for Ukraine which fought with Poland to leave Russia. Millions starved because of that.

Just give your bloody ethnic hatreds a rest. This is America.

Ethnic hatred? Bovine excrement! Why should Belarus and Ukraine have been returned to Russia, and how were Polesians Belarusians? They were all agrarian and almost completely lacking industry. Petliura knew that Ukraine was too weak to be independent, and the independence movement in Belarus had little popular support. However, neither were ethnically Russian. Nothing mandated their return to Russia any more than Czechoslavakia and Yugoslavia should have been returned to Austria. The Allies made a decision not to weaken Russia any further, even though it was run by godless Bolsheviks. Millions starved because of that decision, and there was a historical alternative which Stalin knew and feared. Putin knows it well too.

[rxh4n1]

Yes, ethnic hatred. Who else nurses these ancient grievances but hateful nationalists? Give it a rest already. Americans don’t care about this stuff.

[Dr. Franklin]

Americans don’t care about this stuff.

It was the American President, Woodrow Wilson, who declared the policy of ethnic self-determination of peoples. Before a joint session of Congress on February, 11 1918 Wilson stated: "National aspirations must be respected; people may now be dominated and governed only by their own consent. 'Self determination' is not a mere phrase; it is an imperative principle of action." The world's Great Powers permitted self-determination for Poland and the Baltics to separate from Russia, but not for Belarus and Ukraine. That model was proved unworkable in WWII. Putin's occupation or Belarus and invasion of Ukraine make clear that the issue of imperialist Russian aggression has disrupted world peace yet again. The issue is again relevant. To quote George Santayana, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it".

[rxh4n1]

It was the American President, Woodrow Wilson, who declared the policy of ethnic self-determination of peoples”

Citing Woodrow Wilson on this forum is not a way to win friends here or convince anyone. You must not pay much attention. Wilson is one the most despised presidents here. Stirring up the nationalities was a huge blunder by Wilson. There were always going to be some that would feel slighted and shortchanged and look to get even, and many of them did.