Paul
Goble
Staunton, September 29 – The demolition
of the statue of Lenin in the Ukrainian city of Kharkiv has attracted
international attention, with some seeing this as a provocation by one or another
side in the war in Ukraine and others viewing it as an indication of the
maturation of the Ukrainian revolution and a sign of the final divorce of
Ukraine from Russia.
But this latest destruction of a
statue of the founder of the Soviet state -- the 390th to be taken
down in Ukraine over the last two years (euromaidanpress.com/2014/09/28/kharkiv-lenin-statue-bites-the-dust-marks-number-390-in-list-of-toppled-lenins-in-ukraine/)
-- ought to prompt two larger questions: How many more Lenins are there; and,
far more important, what does it mean that they are still around 20 years after
the system he founded died?
The exact number of such statues is
unknown, but it is certainly in the tens of thousands. According to one count in 2012, there were “about
1800” in the Russian Federation alone, not counting “up to 20,000 busts,” the
mausoleum in Red Square, and some 5,000 streets bearing his name (anvictory.org/blog/2012/01/09/lenin-v-i-v-otnoshenii-russkix-strelyat-i-veshat/).
In other former Soviet bloc
countries and former Soviet republics, there are even more, although their
numbers continue to decline as more people learn about the crimes Lenin
committed and especially as religious leaders focus on his efforts to destroy
religion and extirpate Russian national traditions.
But there is one discernable pattern
about the demise of Lenin statues: When the Soviet system was viewed as an
occupation rather than an organic part of national history, such as the Eastern
European countries and the formerly occupied Baltic states, there are very few
Lenins left and these countries have made the greatest progress toward
democracy and freedom.
Where statues of Lenin continue to
be viewed as an integral part of the national experience either to be tolerated
or celebrated depending upon the country involved, with more Russians than
anyone else prepared to view the founder of the Soviet state as a hero now,
often for the un-Leninist reason that he kept the Russian empire from disintegrating
in 1917.
And in these countries, there has
been much less progress toward democracy and freedom and must less progress toward
a modern economy, with economic growth far more anemic except in those which
have significant amounts of natural resources that they can sell to other
countries.
Obviously, Lenin statues are a
symptom rather than a cause of this pattern, but the demise of the large on in
Kharkiv suggests three conclusions which it would be well for everyone to keep
in mind going forward:
First, except for a very few true
communists, Lenin has become the symbol of the Russian empire rather than of
any radical social transformation. Both
those who are taking down statues of him, such as the Ukrainians, and those who
oppose them, including many in Moscow, clearly view him in this way.
Second, the Lenin statues, which
were part of a broader Lenin cult, were in fact totems of a terrorist
transformed into a god and thus one of the clearest indications of just how
evil the Soviet system was and how great a burden it still places on the
peoples who were subject to its crimes.
And third, the fight over the
statues of Lenin 23 years after the USSR disappeared and communists declared
themselves to be something else shows how unwilling the West was to face up to
the evil of that system and to demand that the losers of the cold war
de-communize themselves as part of the settlement.
Instead in the name of not offending
their new "partners," costing themselves access to new markets, and putting
additional burdens on themselves to complete the job of the cold war, Western
leaders proclaimed victory and ignored the ways in which some parts of
the Soviet inheritance could haunt the world if they did nothing.
The Ukrainians won a victory in that
struggle by taking down the statue of Lenin in Kharkiv. At the very least, they
have helped to separate themselves still more from what Ronald Reagan properly
called “the evil empire.” Their victory
should be celebrated and others encouraged to emulate it rather than be second
guessed by those who fear offending Moscow.
No comments:
Post a Comment