Paul
Goble
Staunton, January 27 – Some
genocides either because of the way they are carried out or because of the
obvious innocence of their victims quickly gain recognition. Hitler’s killing
of the Jews is the archetype and indeed for many around the world the case
which defines what a genocide is.
Other genocides, the mass murder by
government officials of an ethnic community, have attracted less attention or
are even denied either because those attacked are somehow assumed to have acted
in ways that deserve such “punishment,” the people involved are not viewed as
an ethnic group by some, or because the killing is carried out in ways different
than many expect.
And there is yet another reason why
many genocides are not recognized: those in power don’t want them acknowledged
lest questions be asked about predecessors on whom they base their legitimacy
and against whom the current rulers are not prepared to go after the
perpetrators or failing that because of the passage of time to condemn such
crimes against humanity.
One of the clearest examples of a
genocide many refuse to see as such is the systematic destruction of the
Cossacks by Lenin’s regime. Many accept the Hollywood version of the Cossacks,
reject their status as a nation, and somehow believe that all people in that
category were brutal defenders of the tsarist regime and thus “had it coming.”
The Bolshevik genocide of the
Cossacks was highly decentralized and relied on mobilizing local populations
with grievances against their neighbors. Thus, it rarely looked like the
institutionalized mass murder that most people have come to expect as
characteristic of a “real” genocide like Hitler’s or Pol Pot’s.
And the Putin regime isn’t
interested in denouncing the Soviet moves against this opposition group as a
genocide lest questions be raised about the legitimacy of the Soviet system and
hence of its successor or about who is guilty of crimes against humanity, given
post-Soviet crimes against the Chechens and other “peoples of Caucasian
nationality.”
(The Putin regime has an additional
reason for not wanting to talk about this genocide. It is organizing its own
pocket Cossacks that are intended to be little more than servants of the state
and has no interest in attracting attention to the vibrant and varied life of
the Cossacks it does not control and is not interested in seeing revived.)
But the genocide of the Cossacks
which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of men, women and
children of that community must be remembered. After all, as the great Russian
memoirist Nadezhda Mandelshtam said, “happy is that country where the
despicable will at least be despised.”
Sometimes despising evil is all that
one can do; but not despising evil when it exists is to fail as a human being.
This month marks the centenary of
the Leninist degree falling for “de-Cossackization,” a horrific Bolshevik
euphemism for the mass murder of that community. Russian officials have mostly ignored this
event: the problems of doing otherwise for the current regime are simply too
great.
But there are genuine Cossacks and
good Russians who paused to remember this most neglected of genocides. In cities and towns in the southern and
eastern portions of the country where the Cossack hosts once were extremely
numerous, they held services, marched, and demonstrated against this crime
against humanity (nazaccent.ru/content/29101-pamyat-zhertv-raskazachivaniya-pochtili-v-regionah.html).
Cossacks and their supporters have
been holding such commemorations since the 1990s – earlier the Soviets
prohibited any such actions – but it is an indication of the problem this
genocide presents that there are not only disputes about whether it was a
genocide but even whether only a few tens of thousands were killed or several
million.
No comments:
Post a Comment