Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
April 29, 2021

German Ambassador Wants More Nazis? - 112 Ukraine Makes A Curious Little Translation Mistake

The privately owned media organization 112 Ukraine, recently banned by the government as 'pro-Russian', reports of a Nazi march in Kiev.

March dedicated to Waffen-SS Division Galicia held in Kyiv

On April 28, about 250 people marched in black embroidered shirts (vyshyvankas) on the occasion of the 78th anniversary of Waffen-SS Division "Galicia" and came on the Independence Square in Kyiv. This was reported by Ukrainian News agency.

The march began near the Arsenalna metro station and ended near Independence Square.

The marching participants carried the emblems of the Galicia division, the flags of the Cossack Sich, the Ukrainian Volunteer Corps, flags with the Sun and the inscription Solaris with a cross inside the letter "o", flags of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN).

The marchers chanted: "Glory to the nation-Death to the enemies", " Glory to Ukraine- Glory to heroes!", "Under the sign of lion!", "Galicia - division of heroes"," Glory to the soldiers of the Ukrainian-Russian war"," One and only free Ukraine!"

Among the them were children. Most of those present were dressed in black embroidered shirts, some in white shirts or military camouflage, and people in plain clothes were also present.

I can not find any 'western' media that reported the march.

Anka Feldhusen, the German ambassador to the Ukraine, condemned it. But here is how 112 Ukraine reported that:

German Ambassador condemns March dedicated to SS Division Galicia

Ambassador of Germany in Ukraine Anka Feldhusen has condemned the March dedicated to Waffen-SS Division Galicia that took place in Kyiv yesterday as she reported on Twitter.

“The detachments of Waffen-SS participated in the gravy military crimes and the Holocaust during World War II. Any volunteer organizations that fight and work in Ukraine today should be associated with them,” she wrote.

"Any volunteer organizations ... should be associated with them?"



Thankfully not. This is the Google translation of Feldhusen's Russian language tweet:

Waffen CC units were involved in the most serious war crimes and the Holocaust during World War II. No volunteer organization that is fighting and working for Ukraine today should be associated with them.


A Bing translation comes to the same result.

One wonders how 112 Ukraine's translation mistake happened.

Or is there a political intent behind it which I do not grasp?

Posted by b on April 29, 2021 at 13:51 UTC | Permalink

next page »

I have no idea about the translation, or motives for any mistranslation. But the 112 Ukraine version is inadvertently correct: All fighting volunteer organizations in Ukraine should be associated with Nazi collaborators. But then, I think Ukraine is fascist, so what do I know?

Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 29 2021 14:02 utc | 1

Yet all of the volunteer organizations that are "fighting and working for Ukraine" are Waffen SS and friends related. Note in your screen caption the automatically detected language, though. Then again, if a language is a dialect with an army and a navy, the day is not far off.

Posted by: Johan Meyer (2) | Apr 29 2021 14:16 utc | 2

The detachments of Waffen-SS participated in the gravy military crimes...

What did gravy ever do to them? I knew these nationalists were gravophobic.

Posted by: Patroklos | Apr 29 2021 14:27 utc | 3

well, it was either a mistake, or intentional... until they provide a retraction, it appears intentional... someone could send a note asking for clarification...

Posted by: james | Apr 29 2021 15:29 utc | 4

This is clearly a translation mistake. Non-Anglophones learn the adverb any as a necessary substitute of every in negative sentences. Unless you live in an anglophone country and speaks it every day, it is easy to automatically associate "any" in the negative depending on your mother tongue (as a substitute to neither/no one/no).

And the march not only did happen: the RT filmed it live:

Ukrainian far-right nationalists stage march in center of Kiev to mark 77th anniversary of WWII Nazi military division SS Galicia

Posted by: vk | Apr 29 2021 15:32 utc | 5

I don't know anything about translations. However the Banderas party did collaborate with both the Nazis during WWII and the Clinton/Kerry State Department via Victoria Nuland. She's the probable reason the narrative press isn't covering this. Or maybe it is due to Hunter Biden. Who knows in the world of DC fairytales.

Posted by: Old and Grumpy | Apr 29 2021 15:32 utc | 6

The tweet is in Ukrainian not Russian, of course no western media would publish anything of what really happens in Ukraine, Rozhin in ColonelCassad published some pictures a couple of days ago, and signed off with his typical "There is no fascism in Ukraine"© Any Idiot.

Posted by: Paco | Apr 29 2021 15:34 utc | 7

Why is this march of 250 people significant?

My expectation would be that they are lunatic fringe.

We all have such, I think.

Nuland would be another matter - lunatic running the assylum.

Posted by: jared | Apr 29 2021 15:39 utc | 8

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...graaaaaavy military crimes.

(only works with a homer simspons voice, i guess.)

Posted by: the pair | Apr 29 2021 15:48 utc | 9

If only 250 people showed up (I've seen an estimate of 100), I think this is actually a good thing.

But of course it would've been great if other groups, not as loved by the establishment as neo-Nazis, had a chance to march also.

Posted by: Mao Cheng Ji | Apr 29 2021 15:53 utc | 10

Good/balanced article on RT regarding the cultural battles in Ukraine:

Putin messed-up on Ukraine.
He left it to fester then did little when government was over-thrown.
Now he would like to influence how Ukraine handles it's internal affairs - which admittedly it handles very badly.

Posted by: jared | Apr 29 2021 16:17 utc | 11

There are several types of Nazis in the Ukraine:

1) The classic, Hitler-worshipping Nazis who dress up in Nazi uniforms and explicitly advocate for National Socialism. This is the smallest group.
2) The violent far-right groups like Pravy Sektor and the Azov Battalion whose ideas overlap 90% with the first group, but don't use the term "Nazi" due to the bad press. This is the second largest group, with substantial presence in the government and armed forces.
3) The ostensible moderates who purport themselves not to ascribe to a hate-based ideology, but in reality are motivated a dumb, visceral hatred of the Russian "separs" whom they inaccurately blame for all of their many problems. Much like its "moderate" Syrian counterpats, this group is just as responsible for mass murder as the other two, but according to the Western governments, this is OK because murdering, raping, and crippling people is fine so long as it is for "freedom."

All three groups are worthy of contempt. The third group deserves the most contempt.

Posted by: Donbass Lives Matter | Apr 29 2021 16:30 utc | 12

Looks to me like an innocent translation mistake.

250 participants is surprisingly few.

Posted by: m | Apr 29 2021 16:50 utc | 13

jared | Apr 29 2021 16:17 utc | 11

From your RT link; Thus, we have a strange situation where Ukrainian information warriors are waging a campaign to have the borsch beetroot soup labelled under their flag, but have not campaigned for Leonid Brezhnev, arguably the most powerful Ukrainian who ever lived.

Is this where the reference to gravy comes from?
It is clear that no one has any idea what to do with Ukraine, least of all Zelensky. His call to meet Putin in the Vatican, to sort out problems between Russia and Ukraine, who now have two different Othodox churches, seems a bit desperate.

Putin has had a vaccine so can he travel as allowed by the EU, or will he have to take a Pfizer jab as well? Zelensky needs a jab, - somewhere.

Posted by: Stonebird | Apr 29 2021 17:22 utc | 14

"The lunatic fringe" is all you need to take over a country, so long as the mass media paints them as the good guys and law enforcement looks the other way. Hardcore fascists have always been a minority, even in Japan and Germany in the pre-WWII period. The media simply gaslights the population into thinking there are more of the lunatic fringe than really exist and makes sure the narrative is always on the fascists' side. In this particular case the Europeans are trying hard to maintain denial over the fact that the fascists have taken control in the Ukraine so their local media will downplay the significance of the fascists there; only claiming 250 in this march. If the elites need the fascists to be empowered then the corporate mass media will err in the other direction, claiming tens of thousands of marchers. We've seen that most recently in Venezuela, Hong Kong, Russia, and Syria.

Of course, it is more difficult for the corporate mass media to gaslight the population since the rise of the Internet because their control over the daily narrative has been weakened. That, by the way, is why they have gone full bore on "Identity Politics" and other "woke" nonsense. They need to be able to "cancel" non-establishment voices on the Internet and steer ears away from those voices, otherwise their efforts to glorify monsters and demonize the true heroes will not be as effective as it used to be.

Posted by: William Gruff | Apr 29 2021 17:34 utc | 15

Ukraine's repudiation of the Minsk agreements and the Normandy format has received at least tacit support from the EU and full support from the US. The concept that the Donbass (and Crimea) are merely "temporarily occupied" and that all political disputes are not negotiable until the so-called "occupation" is reversed is hardening towards a "red line".

Borrell yesterday underlined the revisionist position to EU parliament: "the full implementation of the Minsk agreements... for us it is a key condition for a substantial improvement of our relations... Russia must cease its provocations and cooperate on a de-escalation of the tensions, instead of portraying itself as a neutral mediator... That is what Russia is doing now, 'We do not have anything to do with the conflict in Ukraine', they are just there to try to mediate in external problems in which they do not intervene directly. This pretension must be debunked."

The obvious continuing danger of these tensions spiralling out of control remains acute, and will be so for the foreseeable future.

Posted by: jayc | Apr 29 2021 17:44 utc | 16

I agree with VK @5 about the cause of the mistranslation. I can generally translate from Russian to English fairly well, but there are sometimes cultural nuances that can cause problems. Translating from English to Russian is much harder, having grown-up in an English speaking country and having an English language thought process.

Posted by: Cossack | Apr 29 2021 17:55 utc | 17

In the tweet: Жодні волонтерські організації, які сьогодні борються та працюють за Україну, не повинні асоціюватися з ними.

Slavic languages use "double negation", and English, "single negation" (more precisely, "any" has a different version in a negating sentence and in an affirmative sentence and "not"). Whatever translating program was used, it removed the wrong one of the two negating words, namely "not", and left negating "any" without negating connotation that does not exist in English. Very stupid mistake if made by a human. This is the miracle of artificial intelligence: creation of artificial idiots, ten years ago we achieved artificial cretinism, now we advanced to idiocy, in hundred years we will have artificial Einsteins, Shakespeares etc.

A feature of Google translate used to be (I did not test lately) that when a word can be translated in multiple ways, a random option is used, and sometimes a wrong set of options is created. Thus after a battle, a fighter "puts broadsword bloody into pillowcase", correct set of options includes "duvet" but not a pillow case; correct translation is "sheath". Then there is a word that means roughly "belonging to the subject", and in English you have to replace it with "her", "his", "mine", "their" etc., so you get translations like "Anna forget his scarf" (correctly, her scarf) or "Lord knows who are hers".

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Apr 29 2021 17:57 utc | 18

@ Stonebird

Well, what were/are the west's objectives in Ukraine -
1) Stabilize economy,
2) Improve living conditions,
3) Improve governance,
4) Bring it into the EU,
5) Bring it into NATO,
6) Provoke/malign Russia,
7) Drive a wedge in relations between EU and Russia,
8) ...?

I think they are down malign and wedge at this point - empire of chaos.

It's a bit ironic - In a sense Ukraine is western Russia.
So the US is partnering with Russia to malign Russia.

There is some question as to what extent Zelensky has control of anything.

Posted by: jared | Apr 29 2021 18:28 utc | 19


The Google Translate translation of Feldhusen’s Ukrainian-language‍—not Russian-language!‍—tweet

Waffen CC units were involved in the most serious war crimes and the Holocaust during World War II. No volunteer organization that is fighting and working for Ukraine today should be associated with them.

is also wrong.

The correct translation is:

Waffen SS units took part in the gravest war crimes and the Holocaust during World War II. Not a single volunteer organization that is fighting and working for Ukraine today should associate with them.

What she’s saying is that no Ukrainian volunteer organizations should get involved in any way with those who took part in the Waffen-SS Division “Galicia” commemoration march.

Posted by: S | Apr 29 2021 18:29 utc | 20

Poutine Poutine Poutine. It's always about Poutine. A true a crime by gravy.

Posted by: robin | Apr 29 2021 18:38 utc | 21

So, marching is bad, but wearing a Nazi uniform inside during sex is still okay, right?

Asking for a friend.

Posted by: mi | Apr 29 2021 18:59 utc | 22

jared @19

As far as America is concerned the conflict between the Ukraine and Russia is a bum fight. Just because you pay off one bum to fight another bum doesn't mean you are that bum's partner. The US doesn't care if the bum they paid gets destroyed in the fight as the US wants to see them both wrecked.

Posted by: William Gruff | Apr 29 2021 19:30 utc | 23

So, marching is bad, but wearing a Nazi uniform inside during sex is still okay, right?

Asking for a friend.

Posted by: mi | Apr 29 2021 18:59 utc | 22

I had a difficulty parsing what is "still OK" -- condoms with swastikas? When you mix "inside/outside" dichotomy and "sex", different meanings come to mind.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Apr 29 2021 19:31 utc | 24

BTW, Cyrillic alphabet has a different version for every language that uses it, and to the best of my knowledge, і and ї are used only in Ukrainian. I wonder how to easily recognize the other...

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Apr 29 2021 19:39 utc | 25

jayc | Apr 29 2021 17:44 utc | 16

The concept that the Donbass (and Crimea) are merely "temporarily occupied" and that all political disputes are not negotiable until the so-called "occupation" is reversed is hardening towards a "red line".
That is what Russia is doing now, 'We do not have anything to do with the conflict in Ukraine', they are just there to try to mediate in external problems in which they do not intervene directly

Clearly what they would like is to change the present obligation for Ukrain to take specified steps, - into Russia doing all the stepping and retreat. The Minsk accords were for Ukraine to carry out, and the Russian argument was that they have not done anything about those that they agreed to.

Russia is only an "observer" as are France and Germany. It is unlikely that Russia is going to agree to this. What I suspect is that the Zelensky camp think they have a unbeatable blackmail to use with the water supply. Russia won't separate again from Crimea. However, using their incorporation of it as an excuse and (no longer military) threats, that the subject can be used to inflict more sanctions. Increasing the US effort to separate Russia and China from the EU. The list of the newest EU ones; cutting swift, NS2, etc. would have been instantly used had Russia "invaded" to support Donbas. At the moment they are "provisional".

I think that the "increase" in tensions actually worried Borell and NATO, as totally unexpected.


jared | Apr 29 2021 18:28 utc | 19

We haven't seen much of the Numbers 1, 2 and 3 and I doubt that we will. If not Oligarchs (local) then it has been corporate picnic time.

While tripping around in a mudhole pretending to be Napoleon, Zelensky doesn't have to look after the counrty or the rest of the population.

Posted by: Stonebird | Apr 29 2021 20:24 utc | 26

Can´t listen to the damn damnation of Ukrainian SS anymore. Soviets came in in 1939, deported 10% of population to Siberia and shot tens of thousands of prisoners when Germans invaded in 1941. Not to mention that millions died during the forced collectivisation at the beginning of the 30s. Ukrainians were throroughly brutalised and became brutal themselves. Thats why they joined the SS. Sure they killed lots of civilians. And so did the Soviets. Then the Ukies lost the war and now they are the bad ones. Nothing but a cynical use of atrocities long gone by.

Posted by: Tom67 | Apr 29 2021 20:41 utc | 27

So what DID Pompeo say in his address, was he in good form?
It was an opportunity for him diversify his historical analogies and not have to just talk about king Cyrus.

Posted by: Christian J. Chuba | Apr 29 2021 21:10 utc | 28

I just noticed that there is a hoax article on Wikipedia on a "Russo-Ukrainian War."

The content is a hoax. There is no war between Ukraine and Russia and never has been. Nor is Russia a party in any ceasefire agreements Ukraine has signed (Minsk 1 and 2). Russia and Ukraine maintain diplomatic relations and I think Russia is still Ukraine's largest trading partner.

Here, see for yourself:

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Apr 29 2021 21:12 utc | 29

Tom67@27 Sanity is offered in the brackets. "Soviets came in in 1939, [Incorrect, except for the part of Ukraine Poland stole after it invaded Russia in 1920. The USSR moved its border westward to what was called the Curzon line, meant to demarcate majority Polish lands to the west of it from the very highly mixed populations of western Ukraine and Belarus. This line was named after Lord Curzon, an Englishman. Such boundaries are never perfect, but as these things go, this one was pretty good, i.e,, a reasonable boundary for Poland, unlike the one the greedy and murderous Polish government settled for.]

deported 10% of population to Siberia [almost certainly not even true of the newly restored Ukrainian lands]

and shot tens of thousands of prisoners when Germans invaded in 1941. [almost certainly not true because finding the time when being invaded is tough, finding someplace to bury them even tougher and Ukrainians as such were not enemies. This is probably an attempt to steal the "glory" of Katyn, where enemy prisoners of war were in fact massacred.]

Not to mention that millions died during the forced collectivisation at the beginning of the 30s. [There was a massive famine in Russia, including Ukraine, in the early Thirties, while the USSR's ability to export and import was restricted, because, anticommunism. Collectivization began in 1929, went backwards some in 1930, but the famine didn't really hit until 1932-33. There simply is not direct relationship between collectivization and the famine, nore was it directed at Ukrainians alone. This is simply an arbitrary claim that, unlike the numerous famines in imperial Russia, the famine was somehow "man-made." This is propaganda. There was a radical decrease in the number of farm animals because the peasants/farmers slaughtered them. Blaming Stalin/Communism for that means upholding the "right" of landowners to starve the sinful landless in cities. In my opinion this is morally backward, to say the least.]

Ukrainians were throroughly brutalised and became brutal themselves.[The implication that this was a response to collectivization is dishonest. The brutalization of war began in 1914, under the Tsar's imperialist war for the Dardanelles etc. It continued under the White counter-revolution. The anarchist rebellions were rather brutal as well, in the tradition of peasant rebellions like Pugachev and Stenka Razin. Plus the Cossacks had a powerful tradition of brutality.]

The Ukrainians were quite brutal in the civil war Thats why they joined the SS. [They joined the SS because they shared so many values, including anti-Semitism.]

Sure they killed lots of civilians. And so did the Soviets. [The term "whataboutism" is commonly misused, but this is a genuine example. The primary issue is, who invaded? It was the Nazis. The Ukrainians who collaborated with them were politically, spiritually, morally kin, however you want to put it.]

Then the Ukies lost the war and now they are the bad ones.[The Ukrainians who joined the Nazis were the *minority.* This presumes the true Ukrainian is a Nazi sympathizer! It is pleading guilty, guilty, guilty. Truly committed fascists in Ukraine are probably still the minority, despite Tom67's love and admiration.]

Nothing but a cynical use of atrocities long gone by. [It is indeed cynical. But it is the Ukrainians who exalt this cynicism, somehow turning it in their minds into a glorious moral principle. The slogans chanted by the Nazi-lovers are exactly the cynicism that Tom67 pretends to despise. Tom67's comment is an exercise in depravity.]

Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 29 2021 21:40 utc | 30


millions died during the forced collectivisation at the beginning of the 30s.

Are you talking about Ukrainians or all Soviets? 1.35 million Ukrainians died during the 1932–1933 Soviet famine. Claims of 6–7 millions or even 10 millions are propaganda. Interestingly, Ukrainians were also dying of hunger in Poland-controlled Western Ukraine, where obviously no collectivization was taking place.

Posted by: S | Apr 29 2021 22:04 utc | 31

@ Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 29 2021 21:40 utc | 30

Even taking into account the SS divisions, the vast majority of the Ukrainian population fought and supported the Soviet Union. Even col. David Glantz, who's considered to be the best American historian of WWII, promptly and unequivocally recognizes that.

The foreign Waffen SS divisions pale in numbers in comparison with the pro-USSR (pro-Allies) partizans. We should not exaggerate the scope and scale of the Waffen SS just because they were Nazism incarnate. Germany had to rely on its own citizens in the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe to fight the war, that's a certainty.

Posted by: vk | Apr 29 2021 22:16 utc | 32

@m #13:

250 participants is surprisingly few.

@jared #8:

Why is this march of 250 people significant?

It’s significant because of the 2015 Ukrainian law “On the condemnation of the communist and national socialist (Nazi) regimes, and prohibition of propaganda of their symbols”:

Ukraine bans Soviet symbols and criminalises sympathy for communism (The Guardian, Alec Luhn, May 21, 2015).

The false equalization of Nazis and Soviets is, of course, one of the Big Lies of the West, but that’s not the point of my comment. The point is that the application of the law during the next six years only affected Soviet symbols/toponyms/etc., while nothing happened to those who were displaying Nazi regalia.

Tens of thousands of streets, hundreds of villages, even large cities and oblasts were renamed. Not just “Lenin Street” and “Stalin Street,” but also streets like “Tereshkova Street,” named after the first woman in space Valentina Tereshkova, “Marshal Zhukov Avenue,” named after the legendary Soviet Marshal Georgiy Zhukov who was instrumental in the Soviet victory over Nazism and who is now being demonized in the Ukraine as “a butcher of the Ukrainian people” without any factual basis whatsoever, even “Yaroslav Halan Street,” named after Ukrainian anti-fascist writer Yaroslav Halan, that was curiously renamed to “Roman Shuhevich Street”—Roman Shuhevich being the deputy commander of Abwehr’s Special Group Nachtigall, the deputy commander of Abwehr’s Schutzmannschaft Battalion 201 and the leader of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) that carried out mass murders of Polish and Jewish civilians (as well as of fellow Ukrainians who didn’t subscribe to their fanatical ideology):

Odessa’s Marshal Zhukov Avenue renamed after the Heavenly Hundred (, May 26, 2016).

Ukrainians are being dragged to courts over Soviet memorabilia—baseball caps, T-shirts and other items displaying symbols of a country that existed for 74 years and is now being erased from the official Ukrainian history:

Coat of arms of the USSR: Ukrainian received a sentence for the wrong T-shirt (, Ivan Apuleev, October 27, 2019)

The Ukrainian was sentenced to one year probation for wearing a T-shirt with the Soviet emblem. A citizen of the country was found guilty of violating the ban on the demonstration of the “symbols of the communist totalitarian regime.” The violator must now report to the authorized bodies and not leave Ukraine without permission.

In early August, Ukrainian nationalists in Khmelnytsky cut a man’s clothes because of Russian symbols. The video shows how radicals demand from a visitor to a cafe to explain why he has a Russian flag on his shirt, the OMON inscription and a hammer and sickle. The frightened Ukrainian said that he bought the shirt in Spain and did not pay attention to the emblems.

After that, the nationalists took out a knife and began to cut off the stripes, after which they promised to buy the man a T-shirt in the colors of the Ukrainian flag. They also appealed to the Ukrainians, urging them to be “vigilant” and prevent the appearance of Russian symbols on the streets of Ukrainian cities.

In May, a minor girl was detained in Odessa because of the Soviet symbols banned in Ukraine on her clothes.

“On the Kulikovo field, the police stopped an underage girl with symbols prohibited by Ukrainian legislation on her clothes. The girl was taken to the territorial police department, where law enforcement officers carried out explanatory work with her,” the National Police said.

According to her, given the 15-year-old age of the girl, her father was brought to administrative responsibility “for failure to fulfill the duties of raising his daughter.”

At the same time, torchlight processions of Ukrainian nationalists and neo-Nazis began to take place in Ukraine much more often. In April 2018, in Lviv, about 1,000 people held the so-called “March of Greatness and Spirit” in honor of the memory of the SS Galicia Division.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian Nazis march through the streets of Kiev commemorating an SS division (for the first time in Kiev), displaying its symbols, and nothing happens to them.

That’s what’s significant here.

Posted by: S | Apr 29 2021 22:23 utc | 33

@Serg #34

This thread is about the Nazi march in Kiev and the German Ambassador’s reaction to it. Please post general news in the open thread.

Posted by: S | Apr 29 2021 22:28 utc | 34

@vk #32:

Even taking into account the SS divisions, the vast majority of the Ukrainian population fought and supported the Soviet Union.

Exactly. About 6 million Ukrainians fought in the Red Army against the Nazi Germany, whereas only 150,000–250,000 Ukrainians were members of UPA (about 2/3 of them previously serving in the Auxiliary Police, which was responsible for the majority of killings of Jews in the Ukraine—the Germans were too busy fighting the war). And yet, the hammer and sickle is banned in the Ukraine, while Nazi and Nazi collaborator symbols, although de jure also banned, de facto are proudly displayed by Ukrainian Nazis.

Posted by: S | Apr 29 2021 22:44 utc | 35

@30 stj

Lovely juxtaposition of your considered, reflective and historically nuanced rejoinder to a knee-jerk, unreflective tweet-style blurt. If only this service could be offered across the entire MSM which acts like a vast Tom67...

Posted by: Patroklos | Apr 29 2021 22:59 utc | 36

> "So, marching is bad, but wearing a Nazi uniform inside during sex is still okay, right?"
Yes marching is really bad! But if you friend prefer bad sex a lover wearing a Nazi uniform is a good start! LOL! SCNR!

Posted by: Wolle | Apr 29 2021 23:03 utc | 37

@S #36:

…about 2/3 of them previously serving in the Auxiliary Police…

I apologize. This is incorrect.

Ivan Katchanovski estimates that at least 46% of the officers (so, not the rank and file—only the officers) of OUN-B and UPA served in the Auxiliary Police, Abwehr’s Special Groups Nachtigall and Roland, SS Division Galicia, worked in local Nazi administrations, or studied in military and spy schools set up by Germans. Specifically, at least 23% served in the Auxiliary Police, Schutzmannschaft Battalion 201 and other police units, 18% in military and spy schools in Germany and occupied Poland, 11% in Abwehr’s Special Groups Nachtigall and Roland, 8% in district and local administrations in Nazi-occupied Ukraine, and 1% in SS Division Galicia.

Posted by: S | Apr 29 2021 23:11 utc | 38

Tom 67

"Can´t listen to the damn damnation of Ukrainian SS anymore."

Tom 67 if you think that the west actually gives a shit about Ukrainian SS then you got another think coming.

You are a tool to cause problems for Russia.

Posted by: arby | Apr 29 2021 23:57 utc | 39

Seems quite clear, she wants the nazis on the gravy train. What could be simpler.

Posted by: Geraldo | Apr 30 2021 0:11 utc | 40

Just a few things I have pointed out before, firstly mass famines which led to millions dying of starvation were not uncommon back in the tsarist days of Russia and occurred every couple of decades . One (Off the top of my head I think it was 1896 but could be wrong it may have been in the 1880's) was a deliberate famine caused by the landowners deciding to sell all crops overseas to get gold to pay for industrialisation, killed about 6 million humans.
Mostly these regular famines were brought about by drought and killed 4-6 million humans. It took a while for the soviets to get sufficient control of agriculture to prevent these regular famines and the USSR suffered one but that was it - after that expensive learning exercise there were no more famines which was a major since they had been happening at regular intervals for centuries in the tsarist era.

The other thing is it is a mistake to think that every uke who joined the SS was a nazi.

I have written before about a bloke I used to know in Darwin in the 70's, he was one of the 'long grass' (homeless) people I had befriended. Anyway he was Ukrainian and had been in the SS and his story was this.
At 14 the Red Army came to his village and rounded up all the young single blokes to join the army. I guess this would have been late 1941. He copped some training and was then sent off to fight. He was captured by the nazis - the first 12 months of the fascist invasion were not good, many millions of Red Army soldiers were captured and millions died. The nazis threw all the USSR POWs into huge open air barbed wire enclaves and didn't feed em. During WW2 Nazis captured over 5 million red army soldiers, 3.3 million died.

Stefan (my friend) had been in the camp for a few months slowly starving to death and cannibalism was becoming a thing though he said that scared him most of all that he would get into that and the fact he was so young 15 or 16 by now, that he was worried one of the cannibal gangs would grab him, when a bunch of Ukrainians looking well fed and smart in their black SS uniforms came to the camp. Their leader gave a speech about how well they lived now that they had changed sides blah blah. He recognised one of the blokes in the SS squad as someone from his village, got talking to him and thought "WTF anything has to be better than here" so he volunteered. Stefan will be long dead now and in the time I knew him he was a total lost soul a fierce alcoholic with nothing to his name apart from tales of being used by a range of nations as a soldier as a young man. When the fascists were obviously losing he moved west and when he was picked up and checked out he would be offered the same deal "join our army or go back to the USSR". He didn't imagine going back to the USSR would get him a heroes welcome so he ended up fighting long after WW2 had ended. His last tour was with the French in Vietnam that didn't go well at all so he deserted and basically walked cross Laos into Thailand and down to Singapore, then managed to hitch a ride on a boat to Darwin where he had lived ever since.

There was nothing nazi or racist about his behaviour and he could be a pain in the arse- like he always knew when it was public service payday and would stick his hand out for a few bucks after laying in wait for me and a coupla other blokes he knew, one of whom eventually sorted out his immigration status - and in the process discovered his story was correct.
If these 3rd & 4th generation idiots imagine the Ukrainians who fought for the nazis were somehow heroic or idealistic they have truly got the wrong end of the stick. These were just humans stuck in the middle of something much bigger than them who did what they had to to survive.
It is likely that those who were captured and returned to the USSR did make up a line of bulldust to tell their families once they got back from their lag in Siberia, their peers who had witnessed the madness of barbarossa, case bleu & citadel probably had a good idea they were talking nonsense but didn't call them out as few were models of good behaviour during the insane brutality of the nazi invasion. Unfortunately that generation is all dead but their children & great grandchildren lapped it up and here we are.
War, what is it good for? Nothin'

Posted by: Debsisdead | Apr 30 2021 0:21 utc | 41

Posted by: Tom67 | Apr 29 2021 20:41 utc | 27

Ah. A new Nazi apologist showing up in MoA masquerading as a friend of the Ukrainian people.

Well, in this load of Russophobic, fascistic horsecrap you spouted on your post, you conflated the Soviet Ukrainians with the Ukro-Nazis from Galicia. Apart from the part that the numbers you tossed around are referenced out of your anus, the Soviet Ukrainians who had actually suffered from the 1932-33 famine did not provide Nazi collaborators but millions of patriots who served as Red Army personnel or partisans. It was from Galicia, where the Ukrainianized Rusyn that didn't suffer from any famine, that the collaborating scum were recruited. Indeed, the 14th Waffen SS Division was called "Halyschyna".

And what is the excuse of these scumbags for topping the list of pogrom-executors in the Civil War? None at all, especially as most of them were not even from Ukraine.

So, stuff your Russophobia and Nazi apologetics up yours. The Ukrainian collaborators supported Nazi Germany whose ideology treated the people of Ukraine as subhumans and aimed in placing them in the position of literal slaves serving German colonization of the land as your beloved Adolf explicitly drew his inspiration from the treatment of the Ante-Bellum black slaves and the reservation bound Native Americans. That's what these treasonous Ukro-Nazis fought for.

Posted by: Constantine | Apr 30 2021 0:42 utc | 42

Google's translate service is so yesterday - almost always wrong and most often useless if one wants to understand something in a language one doesn's speak nor read. No wonder big part of this thread is wasted on bringing sense to Google's translation of Anka Feldhusen's thoughtful tweet on the commemorative march honoring the SS Division "Galicia". Kudos go to my fellow philologist Piotr Berman for a very good linguistic analysis of her tweet.

I fed Anka's 2 pregnant sentences to the Yandex translation service at
(Підрозділи... ) and sure enough it spat out the correct translation along Piotr's lines of thought:

Јединице Ваффен ЦЦ учествовале су у најтежим ратним злочинима и холокаусту током Другог светског рата. Ниједна волонтерска организација која се данас бори и ради за Украјину не би требало да буде повезана са њима.

It even guessed correctly my family's dialect, but the "CC" was wrongly transliterated as "ЦЦ" instead of the more correct "CC" due to the fact that the cyrillic letters for the sibilant "S" appear to be identical to latin letters for "C".

Yandex also provided almost perfect translation into English:

Waffen CC units were involved in the most serious war crimes and the Holocaust during World War II. No volunteer organizations that are currently fighting and working for Ukraine should be associated with them.

Yandex however made the same mistake as Google when I asked it to translate Anka's thoughts into both Bosnian and Croatian dialects of our common Serbo-Croatian language. Nobody's perfect I guess, though some are less imperfect than others.

By the way, Ukrainian is actually a dialect of Ukro-Russian. But if someone wants to call it Ukrainian, it's also OK, 'cause Russian might just as well be a Ukrainian dialect, if you squint your ears tight enough.

The lesson learned is that one should not rely on Google just because Yandex is Russian, lest one commits tha same mistake all of EU is making today by letting the dead bodies pile thousands high just to spite Putin.

Posted by: karlo | Apr 30 2021 1:49 utc | 43

@S #20, @karlo #44

On second thought, both translations seem possible:

No volunteer organizations that are currently fighting and working for Ukraine should be associated with them.
No volunteer organizations that are currently fighting and working for Ukraine should associate with them.

The meanings are different. In the first case, she’s cautioning someone, say, journalists, against wrongfully associating the volunteer organizations with the neo-Nazis. In the second case, she’s warning the volunteer organizations against associating (having contacts) with the neo-Nazis.

We need someone who is fluent in Ukrainian to tell us what was meant here. Although, looking at her other tweets in which she’s exalting the amazing successes of Ukrainian democracy, I’d say she meant the first one.

Posted by: S | Apr 30 2021 2:43 utc | 44

Posted by: Debsisdead | Apr 30 2021 0:21 utc | 42

Thanks for your informative comment. I haven't heard of the term 'long grass people' for a long time. Probably since I was in the NT. BTW did you ever visit Lameroo Beach in the 70's? Interesting.

Your comment reminded me of a long dead old friend. He was Slovenian. He was a supporter of pan Slavic unity in the form of Yugoslavia in his youth. Although he later regretted it in practice as the greater majority state, Serbia, dominated the union.

As a young man, following the declaration of war, he volunteered to join the Royal Yugoslav Army of King Peter although he deplored the coup leaders in Belgrade and would have preferred peace to war.

Some weeks later he was captured by the Wehrmacht and thrown into a concentration camp. The Wehrmacht had other fish to fry and later handed him over to the Italians who put him in one of their concentration camps in Italy. There was starvation.

Eventually the Yugoslavs were allowed to return home. Later the Tito partizans waged a brutal civil war causing damage and death to the Wehrmacht and the local Yugoslavs. General Muhalivich [a Serb] waged a war against both the Whermact and the British supported Titoists.

My friend joined the Slovenian Home Guard to defend innocent people from Titoists.

At the end of the war he was thrown in to a British concentration camp and was lucky not to be deported to the Soviets and Titoists, who murdered many thousands who they called Nazis. I think this disgraceful episode, approved by Churchill, was called Operation Keelhaul.

My friend made it to Australia and led a successful and constructive life. He told methe reason many Russians and other eastern Europeans became Nazi collaborators was because of the Soviet campaign to eliminate the Kulaks, or small farmers and the Soviet forced famine of the Ukraine. Millions died.

They couldn't help noticing the fact that when communism came the overwhelming number of commissars were jewish. To them the Nazis were the answer. My friend was not a Nazi or a Nazi sympathiser. When Slovenia finally became free he was hailed as a returning hero. Of course he was opposed to the Iraq war for the right reasons.

Let us put this in context.

Posted by: Paul | Apr 30 2021 3:21 utc | 45

That tweet is in Ukrainian, not Russian.

Posted by: Biswapriya Purkayast | Apr 30 2021 4:24 utc | 46

re Paul | Apr 30 2021 3:21 utc | 46
Yeah I knew a little of the Lameroo scene when I first got to Darwin but mayor 'Tiger' Brennan closed it down not long after I arrived, something which we berated Brennan about & which he said later he realised it was a mistake.

I guess I'm a little more cynical about Slovenia than you, I also had a friend from there I met in Darwin and while he was a lovely fella, I have to say that the whole Slovene independence thing struck me as a bit opportunistic especially with regard to Serbia. That is to say they picked some terrible 'allies', basically anyone who fights Serbia is our friend. There is also an ugly element to the way Slovenes consider Serbians to be Slavs, but they are not, according to themselves Slovenes are germanic with a touch of Italian.
The Balkans are a mess now just as they have been for centuries, the result of being the meat in a three way sandwich between xtian Europe to the west, orthodox xtian from the north and Islam from the south. All three cultures have had their turn dominating the other two leaving a common language spoken by all, but that seems to divide them rather than join them. Feuds going back centuries are rekindled by opportunistic wannabe politicians.

Churchill backed the Serbians, led by a Croat (Tito) because they were the only group who rated the nazis & Ustaše fascists as enemy #1, the other groups if they weren't outright siding with the nazis, were more interested in killing some other Balkan faction ahead of killing nazis. A promise was made to Tito & the serbs and there was no way Churchill could have got the brits on the ground working with the partisans to back any other play.

The Greek partisans had no such luck as although communists made up the bulk of the resistance to the nazis, Churchill turned on them at the end of the war and had Brit soldiers siding with former enemies (greek fascist sympathisers) against the englanders' former allies, the Greek communists.
Churchill reckoned that he only did it as payback over Poland, where he reckoned Joe had rorted him, but that isn't really correct, at one of the last Yalta meetings Churchill gave Joe a map that had poland a Soviet area of interest and Greece an englander area of interest.
Churchill couldn't be seen to agree that Poland was a Soviet sphere because in 1939 it was the invasion of Poland by the nazis which caused england to declare war on Germany "in the name of freeing Poland".
I have no faith in the Kulak story as western propaganda beat up the deaths from the famine into a conflict over collectivisation and I don't see how any Slovene could have any direct knowledge as there is more than 1,000 kilometres and several nations between Ukraine and Slovenia.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Apr 30 2021 5:36 utc | 47

Posted by: Debsisdead | Apr 30 2021 5:36 utc | 48

I tried to give a detailed reply but I was timed out. What 'refresh' button? Where is it?

Posted by: Paul | Apr 30 2021 9:39 utc | 48

As a former EFL (English as a Foreign Language) teacher, I can confirm that non-English speakers (NESs) often have trouble distinguishing between some/any/no. Since 'any' is most often used in questions and negative sentences ('not...any'), NESs frequently assume that 'any' and 'no' are equivalent. The example cited by b in his article is clearly an unintended mistake, not a deliberate mistranslation.

A bit OT, but I have been surprised by the lack of Western media reaction to Putin's speech to Russian parliamentarians last week. Putin used - for him - uncharacteristically strong terms in talking about Russia's red lines and how Russia would react to their being crossed. A commentator I saw on Al Jazeera actually said that Putin had suffered a major humiliation by withdrawing his troops from the Donbass border, allegedly bowing to NATO pressure, whereas it seems to me that Russia had made its point and that it was the Ukraine which had been shown that any military attack on the LNR and DNR would be met with lethal force.

Another (non-)event Western MSM have also ignored was the poor turnout in the pro-Navalny rallies, though they are currently making a big song and dance about the court actions against his organisation.

Posted by: B. Wildered | Apr 30 2021 10:12 utc | 49

The low number of participants in such events is deceptive, in the sense that a casual observer might expect a correlation between the number of people present and their potential for political power and influence. One has to take into account certain aspects that aren't readily apparent, in order to get a comprehensive picture.

That the event enjoys full police protection, despite being illegal as previously mentioned by S@33, is a surface level discrepancy. That the event has been organized in association with the Kiev City Council, and thus presumably funded with tax money as an official event, is perhaps more significant but less apparent. This seems to be the case according to Шарий, whose journalists also demonstrate the reaction of political figures from the current ruling party to news of the event, which I would interpret as tacit support.

As such, I would suggest that the relatively low number of participants of such events is indicative of the overall low public support for Nazi-affiliated events and organizations, coupled with the abysmal poll numbers such organizations generally enjoy, but their influence on law enforcement structures, mainstream politics and political discourse within the country is obviously not trivial, and potentially more significant than one might expect.

The way it is now already complicates international support for Ukraine. Although neo-nazis may appear to be of neanderthal intelligence, there's bound to be enough cunning among these structures to understand that a modicum of subterfuge may be necessary to achieve their stated goals that much easier.

Posted by: Skiffer | Apr 30 2021 10:46 utc | 50

Posted BY Debsisdead @ 48

Here is another attempt to beat the clock:

I think Slovenes and anyone else has the right to resist any alien ideology imposed on them. 

The Slovenes are surrounded by mountains and have their own distinct language, culture and history. Most Slovenes can understand Serbo-Croatian. They do not regard themselves as Germanic or Italian. Yugoslavia means 'Southern Slavs.'

The Reich 'allegedly' annexed some northern provinces during WW11 and began conscripting the locals. 

The Slovene province of Carinthia is in today's  Austria.
WW11 Croatian leader Dr Pavlich 'allegedly' annexed some Slovenian Adriatic coastline. 
Italy 'allegedly' annexed Trieste. 

Surely the US State Department is aware the Geneva Conventions were upgraded following WW11 to reflect the abhorrence of these 'alleged' annexations. Therefore the bandit state's 'alleged' annexation of Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Syrian Golan Heights and the Lebanese Shebaa Farms will not last according to international law.
I met an elderly Slovene who showed me a photo of himself in Wehrmacht uniform. He defected and joined Tito's partizans. I also saw a photo of him in Titoist uniform after the war. He became disgusted by their barbarism and defected again. He eventually made it to Australia. He was delighted by the end of 'Bolshevism' in his homeland.
Some Serbs regard Slovenes as 'Mountain Serbs' much the same as some Russians regard Ukranians as 'Little Russians.' 

The ancient Germanic Hanseatic League city of Danzig was never in Poland. Nor was the German province of Brandenburg. These and other Austro Hungarian and German areas were 'given' after the 'armistice' supposedly ending WW1. This happened at the misnamed Paris 'Peace' Conference of 1919 setting in train the rise of Hitler and eventually WW11. This conference also dismembered and divided the homelands of their Arab 'allies' possibly setting in train WW111.

The Arab 'allies' were not given a seat at the conference table or allowed to state their legitimate case as belligerents. The World Zionist Organisation were honoured guests at the negotiating table, despite not being allies or belligerents.They were 'given' a beach head for further expansion in Palestine. Prior British 'promises' to the Arabs were brushed aside. US Zionists dominated president Wilson's entourage. So much for his famous 14 points.
The Chinese 'allies' refused to sign the final communique because part of their province of Manchuria, formally a German concession, was 'given' instead to the Japanese, who promptly expanded their beach head, beginning WW11 in Asia. Of course, the British kept Hong Kong. 

Was there a quid pro quo? I'll 'give' you this if you agree to that. 

Doesn't it strike you as peculiar that Churchill claimed to defend 'Poland' while Hitler and Stalin divided it between themselves? Only to hand it all over to Stalin at Yalta. 

Posted by: Paul | Apr 30 2021 10:59 utc | 51

To clarify my last point beyond mere suggestion, there's no doubt in my mind that neo-nazi organizations took control of Ukrainian deep-state structures in the Maidan coup, and subsequent political theater has been allowed to take place within the framework of their goals for the country. Although the subservience of these superstructures to foreign powers is probable, the degree of control that they can exert over such extreme elements is uncertain. Thinking back to Biden's call to Poroshenko after the incident in the Kerch strait, it appears plausible that their independent plans and actions are a constant source of friction between them and their backers abroad.

Posted by: Skiffer | Apr 30 2021 11:03 utc | 52

Addendum to 52

the Ukrainian forced famine and mass murder of the Kulaks was known across the world. Incredibly Walter Durante of the NYT won a Pulitzer Prize for his failure to report it. Many others
did cover it.Here is a review of a film about It. It was well known in Europe at the time.

"Harvest of Despair" documents the Ukrainian terror famine of 1932-33, which caused the deaths of 7,000,000 people. Using interviews with survivors and scholars to supplement rare photographic evidence, it established that the terror famine was deliberately created by the Soviet Government as part of Stalin's decades-long effort to destroy the Ukrainian peasantry, who resisted the forced collectivization of their lands. Since its original release, it has received many international awards (including an Academy Award nomination) and has been featured on William F. Buckley's Firing Line program on the PBS television network. A powerful film, "Harvest of Despair" provides rare insight into one of this century's least-known but most vicious genocides."

Posted by: Paul | Apr 30 2021 11:53 utc | 53

@ Posted by: Paul | Apr 30 2021 11:53 utc | 54

The original kulaks disappeared with the fall of the Tsar after October 1917. The land decree of October 26/November 8 1917 merely legalized what was already happened with the fall of the Russian Empire: the vast mass of landless peasants were taking over the land of the kulaks, who either fled or were killed resisting it. Later data, albeit incomplete, gives us a very clear picture: middle to mid-large properties essentially disappeared, giving way to small properties.

So, the kulaks already were spontaneously exterminated as a class by the time the Bolsheviks reunified the Russian territory at 1920.

The kulaks from Stalin's era have a different origin: after the collapse of war communism in 1921, NEP was implemented. The goal of NEP was to appease the peasants, who were growing dissatisfied with the requisitions enforced by war communism. The NEP essentially reconverted the USSR to capitalism in many aspects, and, on the agrarian question, restarted the process of land inequality from the Tsarist times - thus "rekulakizating" Russia (the old territories of the Russian Empire). The very good harvest of 1922 masked the problem, but it soon arose again, until the vast mass of unemployed and subsequent bad harvests collapsed the NEP in 1926 (the whole thing was already dead by 1924, but it still managed to cling on for two more years).

So, what happened in the USSR was that neither the individual peasant, nor the kulak could happen the Soviet agrarian problems.

The 7 million figure is certainly a late Western fabrication. Besides, as some have noticed here, Russia has suffered 500 famines in its history before the consolidation of the USSR. Gogol famously wrote a novel about that macabre routine (Dead Souls).

Posted by: vk | Apr 30 2021 12:39 utc | 54

Posted by: vk | Apr 30 2021 12:39 utc | 55

So the Kulaks 'fled' much like the Palestinians 'fled' probably on orders received from their 'leaders' by texts on their cell phones.

Here we have Professor Carroll Quigley on "Stalinism 1924 -1939 In his book Tragedy and Hope. Sorry it's not VI Lenin or Trotsky.

"Distinctions of wealth reappeared among the peasants, the richer ones (called Kulaks) being regarded with suspicion by the regime and with envy by their less fortunate neighbours."

Hang on vk told us they had already 'fled' Now I am confused , who to believe? Professor Quigley or vk.

Let the reader be the judge. I cant stop laughing. Remember the great man, Dr Timothy Leary, said 'laughing is an anti state activity' but don't tell vk, I might end up in Siberia with Navalny, a fate worse than death, bored to death.

Posted by: Paul | Apr 30 2021 13:02 utc | 55

@ Posted by: Paul | Apr 30 2021 13:02 utc | 57

The kulak was a creation of the Tsarist regime. There was a forced redistribution of land during the capitalist reforms of 1861-1868, which greatly concentrated land in the hands of a few peasants. Those peasants became the kulaks. The kulaks didn't arise from meritocracy or hard work: they arose by the violence of the Tsarist army.

When the Tsarist Empire disintegrated during WWI (the Bolsheviks had nothing to do with it, the October Revolution was won by W.O.), the peasants revolted and made justice with their own hands. There was no Tsarist Army to protect the kulaks anymore, so the peasants too back the land they lost in 1861.

It is a myth the kulak is some kind of natural, the legitimate heir and soul of Russia. They were a class of opportunists, fruit of the imagination of a delusional emperor. They were an abortion of History, a glitch resulted from a lame attempt to create a late mixed system between feudalism and capitalism.

Long story short: the social order that sustained the kulaks crumbled; with it, the kulaks collapsed. It was by mere chance that the horror imposed by the imperialist powers (Civil War) forced the Bolsheviks to "rekulakize" Russia. But it was not destined to last, as the Scissors Crisis were to demonstrate just two years after the implementation of NEP.

The Anglo-Saxon historians about the subject are not reliable sources. They are mostly Cold War/Red Scare era propaganda. The exception that proves the rule is Edward H. Carr, but his 14-volume history of the USSR only goes until 1929.

Posted by: vk | Apr 30 2021 14:07 utc | 56

Paul @57

Sure, and Iraq had WMD programs when the US invaded, Libya had "rape rooms", and the Syrian military gassed civilians in Douma, right?

Looking at the Ukraine now there seems to still be a lot of Nazis there, so if Stalin was trying to kill them all he failed. But if Stalin was willing to kill 7 million, then why didn't he keep going and kill another 7 million? And then another 7 million after that if the Nazis were not eradicated yet? Why were there no more famines after the Soviet Union modernized agriculture if the famines were deliberate and the Ukrainians that Stalin supposedly wanted to genocide still existed?

The whole "deliberate famine" forced meme is nonsense brainwashing that cannot hold up once you look at it rationally.

Posted by: William Gruff | Apr 30 2021 14:16 utc | 57

Hi all you counterposters. One of the best men I have ever met was a Siberian. He had originally been from Belorussia. When he was 14 the Germans invaded and his sister joined the partisans. He was interned in a concentration camp in Latvia. After liberation he was whisked of to Norilsk where he slaved away in a labour camp. The reason? He had been on the wrong side of the line during the war. Like him millions were deported after the war and hundreds of thousands if not millions died in Siberia. People whose only fault had been to unvolutarily having been under German control during the war. Anyhow my friend wasn´t bitter. Just before his death he told his granddaughter that people start to kill each other when there´s not enough food to go around. According to Richard Grunbergers "the twelve year reich"in 1938 Germans had between 50% and 75% of high protein food like eggs meat or milk that Brits had. And the Russians had even less.
I find it annoying to ascribe some "good" or "bad" role to people who just happened to have been born on the other side of some arbitrary line. If it is allowed for Russians to celebrate their soldiers Ukrainians should be allowed to celebrate their own as well. Even if one has won and the other has lost the war. And just to infer from some long gone conflict that one side is today inerhently good and the other inherently bad is pure stupidity. From a purely neutral point of view I believe the West should forthwith stop all meddling in the Ukraine. It is clear that Russia ´s overarching goal is the prevention of Ukraine joining Nato. A completely fair goal and if this is clear by all sides than the Ukrainian conflict becomes solvable. By postulating a federated Ukraine the Steinmeier formula indirectly amounts to just that.

Posted by: Tom67 | Apr 30 2021 14:22 utc | 58

@ Posted by: Tom67 | Apr 30 2021 14:22 utc | 60

You're missing the big picture here.

Ukraine is irrelevant. What matters here is the USA and Russia. The USA claims they're supporting a liberal-democratic government in the Ukraine. That's evidently false, as the Nazis - whatever your moral considerations - are not liberal-democrats by any definition of the term (they are liberals, but not liberal-democratic). That's the discussion and nothing else; no one is judging here if those 250 people who marched for the SS Galicia should or should not feel pride for their Nazi ancestors.

I wasn't in the East Front. All I have is the historical documents. And those documents leave no doubt: the vast majority of the Eastern European peoples supported and chose to fight (for whatever reasons) for the Soviet Union/Allies. Hitler kinda made some room for his relatively few admirers by creating the Waffen SS divisions for non-Aryans (e.g. it was a French Waffen SS division who defended Berlin to the last moment), but, in reality, Nazism was not an attractive ideology for non-Aryans (for obvious reasons) and Hitler never cared about it to being with.

Does this mean every partizan in Eastern Europe was a graduated Marxist and a convinced communist? Of course not. But that's not how History works either way. In the War of Secession (American Civil War), most of the soldiers who fought for the Union ("North") only did so for the salary (if memory doesn't fail me, it was USD 12.00 or USD 20.00) and the food (we know that because a lot of letters of these soldiers survived) - not because they shared Abraham Lincoln's ideals of the union and freedom. In fact, during the later stages of the war, many of the Union's soldiers were recently arrived Irish immigrants.

Posted by: vk | Apr 30 2021 14:51 utc | 59

@vk 61,
RE: the American civil war: Actually, there were multiple 'draft riots' in the North. Including the real big one in NYC, where Union troops used artillery against the rioters - or should I say: protestors?

Posted by: Mao Cheng Ji | Apr 30 2021 15:57 utc | 60

Mao Cheng Ji@62 "RE: the American civil war: Actually, there were multiple 'draft riots' in the North. Including the real big one in NYC, where Union troops used artillery against the rioters - or should I say: protestors?"

Such marvelous concision in portraying the sympathies borders on true eloquence, I think. Mao Cheng Ji maybe learns "history" from assholes like Martin Scorsese (Gangs of New York..."auteur" is French for "artistic fraud.") Or if a SF fan, maybe a browncoat who thinks the TV series Firefly showed us how totalitarian the union is/was, beneath the SF tropes? One of the noble ideals Mao Cheng Ji admires so much was epitomized when the beloved (by Mao Cheng Ji, not me) protestors set fire to the Colored Orphans Asylum. New York City was always a key emporium in the South's international trade, which is why there was always so many sympathizers for empire. This was true in the days of the Revolution, when the English found many friends. And it was true in the days of the Civil War, when mayor Fernando Wood bloviated about secession of the city. Fernando Wood was the congressman played by Lee Pace in the vastly superior movie Lincoln, by the way. Scorsese is a turd, so despite the universal agreement among the critics he is superior to Spielberg. The movie Lincoln shows you a much more correct version of the protest against the draft. If you watch the movie and see Lee Pace/Fernando Wood, think "Mao Cheng Ji!"

Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 30 2021 16:20 utc | 61

@ Posted by: Tom67 | Apr 30 2021 14:22 utc | 60

It is clear that Russia´s overarching goal is the prevention of Ukraine joining Nato.

And the way to do that would have been to go into the Ukraine and get involved in a constructive way when they had the means to do so.

But Putin wants everything a low cost - playing chess.
Now it is more difficult.

This pipeline is costing him, dearly.

Posted by: jared | Apr 30 2021 16:25 utc | 62

@ Posted by: Mao Cheng Ji | Apr 30 2021 15:57 utc | 62

Yes, but, ultimately, the economic laws of capitalism imposed their will on the populace, and, combined with the endless influx of immigrants, the North essentially enjoyed unlimited manpower in relation to the South in the later half of the war. Which, dialectically, just demonstrated the Union had the superior system to the Confederacy: the Confederates suffered from grave depletion of manpower, as they couldn't send the slaves to war (they were worth a fortune in the slave market, plus giving them weapons could trigger a slave revolt). I think that, at one point, the North outnumbered the South 10:1 if we count the reserves.

In the later stages of the war, the Confederacy had to resort to the desperate policy of sending the small slaveowners (those who owned less than 10 slaves) to the war, in order to protect the interests of the larger slaveowners. This was the drop that broke the camel's back, as the veil of the Herrenvolk Democracy was torn down, and it became clear that the Confederacy wasn't a bucolic paradise for the master race, but a plain capitalist nation where big business also exploited small business. A wave of desertions followed and the South quickly collapsed.

Posted by: vk | Apr 30 2021 17:05 utc | 63

Tom67@60 "If it is allowed for Russians to celebrate their soldiers Ukrainians should be allowed to celebrate their own as well. Even if one has won and the other has lost the war."

Ukrainians who wish to celebrate their victorious ancestors, the absolute majority of which fought in the ranks of the red army, are not allotted the same protection as those who celebrate Nazi collaborators and subsequently face harassment. Additionally, it's difficult to think of SS Galicia as soldiers, seeing as they rarely saw combat against an armed opponent and mainly faced off against unarmed civilians in so-called anti-partisan or policing duties. By their deeds, they're closer to contemporary terrorist organizations, and to celebrate them is in some sense an endorsement of their methods and ideology.

Posted by: Skiffer | Apr 30 2021 18:24 utc | 64

Sure, the socioeconomic component of it is clear. And of course the Union had far more population. On the other hand, it was, after all, an invasion. I think that explains draft riots in the Union, and why the Confederacy managed to fight for as long as it did.

Posted by: Mao Cheng Ji | Apr 30 2021 18:25 utc | 65

After the Draft Riots in New York were put down, no more New Yorkers were drafted. Funds were somehow made available to pay for substitutes for those from New York City who would otherwise have been drafted.

So the riots in the end succeeded.

Posted by: lysias | Apr 30 2021 18:32 utc | 66

Posted by: Skiffer | Apr 30 2021 18:24 utc | 66

Exactly.. A good example was Maidan and the burning and clubbing to death of workers.

Posted by: arby | Apr 30 2021 18:41 utc | 67

If the South had been allowed to secede in peace, the U.S. would not have become the malignant superpower that it became, and 600,000 people would not have died.

Posted by: lysias | Apr 30 2021 18:45 utc | 68

The United States government did not invade the United States in 1861, no matter what the Klansman Mao Cheng Ji says.

lysias@68 seems to think that Black people were targeted because of resentment of conscription, instead of it being a racist pogrom by a minority. The Irish who were *not* anti-Black racists and did believe in democracy were often in the Army already, leaving the Irish rampaging through the streets unrepresentative. As an expression of the hatred on the part of some for Black people, the "Draft" riots did succeed. The fiscal demands had already made payment for substitutes widespread. Unless lysis can demonstrate, the funds "somehow" made available came from the government, the claim the riots succeeded is wrong.

One aspect of the pogrom is the anticipation of the guerrilla war against Black people fought by the early KKK and sister organizations. Lincoln's indifference to another rebellion is a depressing suggestion that he would have been reluctant to suppress racist violence during Reconstruction, that he would have been far too similar to Johnson if he hadn't been assassinated.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 30 2021 18:55 utc | 69

According to Iver Bernstein's book "The New York City Draft Riots," p. 65, the money for commuting New York City citizens' conscription notices was distributed to the conscripts (so that they could pay the $300 commutation fee) by party officials: Republican Chairman Blunt, Tammany Supervisors Purdy and Tweed, and Tammany Comptroller Blunt. I suspect the money was contributed by rich New Yorkers. The price of domestic peace.

Posted by: lysias | Apr 30 2021 20:08 utc | 70

stj@71 << but note that the KKK formed not as a "pogrom against blacks" but as a reaction to the northern carpetbaggers who appeared all over the south after the war using the newly vote franchised blacks. The KKK used its terror tactics against blacks to keep them fearful and break this alliance with the opportunist carpetbaggers...

Posted by: Simplicius | Apr 30 2021 20:09 utc | 71

Klansman lysias continues with the malicious nonsense. The planter-organized assault on Blacks in the south went into high gear with the properly infamous (or should be, save for Neoconfederate mythologists like lysias,) Black Codes, which attempted to re-institute forced labor and compel Blacks to stay where they were and so on. This was early, before suffrage for freedmen. If anything it was the murderous violence of the defeated rulers of the south that prompted northerners to overcome their own prejudices and expand the franchise.

It is uncertain who Republican Blunt is, as opposed to Tammany Comptroller Blunt. But Tammany Hall, which had been a political machine since the days when Aaron Burr had allied with Virginia slavers like Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson (who was *very* friendly to Burr in his travels west after murdering Hamilton,) and thus was Democratic Party. The Democratic Party was always the compromise with slavers'/slavers' themselves party. (Until the fight against Communism made open alliance impolitic, about 1948.)

Republicans emitted paper money from necessity, the famous "greenbacks," but substitution was a welcome source of revenue in a desperate war. If anything, however, substitution caused resentment among the poor who couldn't afford the disguised taxes in paying a substitute.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 30 2021 20:35 utc | 72

That sounds like a reluctant admission that I was right and that the draft stopped being enforced against New Yorkers.

I plead guilty of thinking that the Civil War that killed 600,000 people and helped to make the United States a superpower was a disaster.

Posted by: lysias | Apr 30 2021 20:42 utc | 73

Posted by: Tom67 | Apr 30 2021 14:22 utc | 60

Since you are so intent on pushing your Nazi-whitewashing Russophobic propaganda, try to provide some hard data at least to make it more believable.

Ukrainians were distinguished, collectively, as enemies of the Third Reich and as Soviet patriots. Period. Far right trash may try to present the collaboration of thoroughly indoctrinated fascist scum from Galicia as the sole representatives of the Ukrainians, but this is an offensive distortion. If anything, the Nazis treated the main Ukrainian population as "Russian untermenschen and further fueled the resistance against the invaders.

And once more, the Ukro-Nazis from Galicia didn't suffer from any famine in the 30s. Their indocrtination at the hands of the German/Austrian authorities had made them anti-Russian already from the end of WWI. So spare us with your NATOist, far-right BS. The only Ukrainians who have been denigrated recently are those who wish to honor the true patriots, that is those who fought against the invading Euro-German trash.

Posted by: Constantine | Apr 30 2021 20:52 utc | 74

Ukrainians who wish to celebrate their victorious ancestors, the absolute majority of which fought in the ranks of the red army, are not allotted the same protection as those who celebrate Nazi collaborators and subsequently face harassment. Additionally, it's difficult to think of SS Galicia as soldiers, seeing as they rarely saw combat against an armed opponent and mainly faced off against unarmed civilians in so-called anti-partisan or policing duties. By their deeds, they're closer to contemporary terrorist organizations, and to celebrate them is in some sense an endorsement of their methods and ideology.

Posted by: Skiffer | Apr 30 2021 18:24 utc | 66

I would add that SS Galicia acted much like other anti partisan forces in paces like South Vietnam, Guatemala, El Salvador, Iraq or Afghanistan, destroying the village to save the village. Watch the Belarus movie, Come and See and those Germans and local forces can easily transform into US and friend's SOF/advisors and local paramilitaries burning whole villages in churches. Guatemala had 626 villages destroyed by paramilitary/Guatemalan armed force with US aid. Belarus had 628 villages destroyed. The goal was the same, control the population through brutality.

VP Harris virtually met with Guatemalan President Alejandro Giammattei, "They agreed to explore innovative opportunities to create jobs and to improve the conditions for all people in Guatemala and the region, including by promoting transparency and combating crime," the statement said. So the US destroyed many countries and "transparency", created a lot of crime and now wants transparency, job creation and to fight crime. The best way to achieve these goals would be for the US to GTFO of other governments business. The US needs to work on transparency and crime at home first. There would be no refugees on US southern borders if it wasn't destroying countries to the south of them.

The Nazi's transported to North and South America after WW2 have had devastating effects, not only the physical destruction but also the poisoning of society. The west ignores the genocides they create and create myths of genocides of those they wish to rule over. I haven't seen any reporting of these marches in Kiev in the west. The Nazi's are now the good guys, fighting evil Russians and those pesky inhabitants of countries like Bolivia that want to hoard all that lithium and other natural resources and stop the march to the new utopia, the new green deal.

What will it take for those in the "west to experience what Pogo said, "I have seen the enemy, and the enemy is us. The "west are Nazi's. and have been for a long time. There was a short interlude when "a few bad apples" caused a little bit of trouble 1939-45 but that's behind us.

There is a monument to the SS Galicia division in Oakville Ontario, Canada. Someone vandalized it last year (spray painted "Nazi war monument" on it.) An investigation was opened for a hate crime. This is not the Onion. It's a crime to hate Nazi's, but it's ok to vandalize a monument to Canada's first Prime Minister. What goes on in Ukraine is ok for Canada because we have so many of the bastards over here infecting our body politic. We can't condemn these actions be they are us.

Posted by: Tom | Apr 30 2021 21:19 utc | 75

lysias@75 mourns the overthrow of slavery because, anti-imperialism. This is the kind of thing that proves the anti-imperialist rhetoric so common here is not to be taken at face value. Also, that democracy is the collaboration of classes within a nation, in alliance against other nations. Democracy is not internationalism. Imperialism and democracy have gone together since the days of the Athenian empire, and even more, the Roman Republic. Expecting true democracy to be pacifist is either terminal confusion or cold-blooded cynicism.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 30 2021 22:09 utc | 76

Posted by: Simplicius | Apr 30 2021 20:09 utc | 73

This drawing kind of confirms what you state.

but note that the KKK formed not as a "pogrom against blacks"

Posted by: arby | Apr 30 2021 22:41 utc | 77

Interesting discussion about Ukraine and the "bad" people. It is all b.s. People there vote and who gets elected ? Not the "bad" people . Take a guess !

Historical truths are hard to find. Paul @ 52,54 knows history well, is right on. VK @55,61 thinks he knows , but is blowing smoke. Simplicius @73 knows history well. The Confederate soldiers after the war were not allowed to vote.How many people know this ? Mr. Baruch himself wrote this. He was from the South.

Contrary to what Steven t Johnson writes @71 The North invaded the South. It had nothing to do with slavery. The Bank of France supported the South, the London Banks the North. It was about money just like today.

Posted by: Friar Ockham | Apr 30 2021 22:56 utc | 78

Like lysias, Simplicius, Paul, Friar Ockham are a crew that fits the commentariat here very well. The southern states revolted rather than accept the election of a president who would restrict the *growth* of slavery, after refusing to allow Lincoln to even run in their states. That has everything to do with slavery. Ordinances announcing secession explicitly cited the slavery issue. The new vice president of the confederacy called slavery the cornerstone of their freedom. They re-wrote the US Constitution to put slavery in explicitly. In short, despite the boasting about independent judgment and the endless abuse of fools who believe the MSM or work for the CIA, this crew lies.

And a minor detail, only government officials and commissioned officers were deprived of a franchise. And even they could petition for exemption.

The South was not another country. Invasion means marching into another country. This is merely the insolence of a liar confident that fellow liars are committed to the lie.

"It was about money just like today." This is the sort of thing that really does inspire contempt for so-called realistic, common sense thinking: Slavery was about money, big money.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 30 2021 23:23 utc | 79

@ Posted by: Friar Ockham | Apr 30 2021 22:56 utc | 80

Yes, as a capitalist economy, everything was ultimately due to money in the USA.

But it wasn't about who's right and who's wrong. The system established by the Founding Fathers was collapsing, the situation unsustainable. The North had six times the population of the South but only half the representation in both houses. The South was inexorably degenerating into a living fossil, and was becoming an obstacle to the projection of world power of the USA.

The slave system established by the South was clearly showing signs of exhaustion by the 1850s. For some geographical and climatic reasons, it was able to expand and flourish up to eastern Texas without much problem, but, as the expansion towards the West (Pacific) accelerated, the inferiority of the slave labor system vis-a-vis the wage labor system became glaring. This was finally demonstrated empirically by the fight over California: the North easily got there first, thanks to its superior population and to the dynamism and mobility of the wage labor system (slaves were cumbersome to transport).

The War of Secession was, ultimately, a last, desperate attempt of the South to survive against the inertial conquest by the North. It was, as Americans say nowadays, a "Hail Mary". But the loss of California had already sealed the South's - and the slave labor system's - fate. The only tiny ray of hope the Confederates had to win the war was if the British Empire entered into it on their side with their powerful Navy. They not only didn't do that, but continued to recognize the North as the official USA. a naval blockade and an incursion through New Orleans was the culmination of all that.

American historians like to parrot the fact that, by the beginning of the War of Secession (which they call "the Civil War"), the South was as rich as the North in money terms. Yes, but that was only because slaves were leveraged in the London financial markets. Wealth in money terms are not decisive at all in war, and the War of Secession is the textbook example of that: the Confederates never had any chance.

Posted by: vk | Apr 30 2021 23:24 utc | 80

Posted by: Friar Ockham | Apr 30 2021 22:56 utc | 80

Jeffrey Davies called the preservation of slavery "the issue of trancendent magnitude". Stevens described as the "cornerstone" of southern civilization and stated explicitly that slavery and racial superiority were the foundaional underpinings of the Confederacy. Every single secession by a southern state was accompanied by a declaration that placed primary importance on the grim institution considered under attack by a president elected democratically in a landslide victory.

Yet, internet personas with the historical knowledge of a racoon are convinced that the secessions took place for another reason against the very explicit declarations of the actual secessionists. Afterwars, they try to convince everyone else about the correctness of their hosecrap views.

Posted by: Constantine | May 1 2021 0:10 utc | 81

Did the Thirteen Colonies have any chance against the British Empire? Did Vietnam have any chance against the U.S.?

Posted by: lysias | May 1 2021 0:13 utc | 82

Lincoln's election by less than 40 percent of the vote was no landslide.

Posted by: lysias | May 1 2021 0:16 utc | 83

Posted by: lysias | May 1 2021 0:16 utc | 85

It was exactly that. And it was an election with massive turnout. In fact, it was precisely because of the scale of Lincoln's victory with a solid dominance in New England that made the champions of slavery to despair and move forward with secession.

The funny thing about it is that Lincoln had not been inaugurated as POTUS when the sore losers opted out.

As for your argument that the victory of the Union is responsible for the fact that the world today has to endure an utterly malevolent geopolitical globalist entity, it is bollocks. Not only people are responsible for their actions in every period and generation, but the Five-Eyed Anglo-American empire includes more than the US. To defend the cause of the Confederate champions of slavery as the means of potentially avoiding the current mess is pathetic.

Posted by: Constantine | May 1 2021 0:50 utc | 84

If the South had won its independence, it would presumably have continued to be an ally of Britain. That would probably have meant that the North would be the ally of whatever European power most challenged Britain, whether Germany or France.

I think that would have meant that whoever the United States allied itself with would have had much less power than the current Five Eyes, and might even have lost a world war.

I have only recently reached this conclusion about the Civil War, after seeing how evil the U.S. and its alliance have become. I used to be a true believer in the Cold War. I am a retired naval officer.

Posted by: lysias | May 1 2021 1:07 utc | 85

A United States which had lost the South because Britain had supported the Confederacy would have been much less likely to ally itself with Britain. If there had even been a Five Eyes, the South, not the North, would have been one of those Five Eyes.

And the United States, my country, would have allied itself with Germany, not Britain. And I think that would have been better, as an Irish-American who studied two years at Oxford and served two years as a German linguist in Berlin with the U.S. Air Force.

Posted by: lysias | May 1 2021 1:27 utc | 86

I didn't recognize until recently what Lincoln was doing in creating a superpower, but Edmund Wilson recognized it in his 1962 book "Patriotic Gore".

Posted by: lysias | May 1 2021 1:34 utc | 87

Posted by: lysias | May 1 2021 1:07 utc | 87

But don't you think that instead of looking for hypothetical what-ifs that could have averted the imperial ascendancy of the US, particularly as the primary component of the globalist Anglo-American empire, people should have been more responsible about the policies they supported? It is downright bizarre to imagine a more positive scenarion by hoping that the Confederate champions of slavery should have prevailed so that the US would not later degenerate into an imperial monstrosity.

I should point out that the initiative for the Anglo-American re-integration came from the British elites. This process became even more pronounced after the fatal weakening of the British empire after two world wars.

Posted by: Constantine | May 1 2021 2:06 utc | 88

I am not familiar with the German ambassador, and I don't follow German politics. I am also not familiar with the local and regional broadcast networks, and programs carried by them.
However, anyone who actually believes that our world needs more nazis probably needs to become more intimately acquainted with a firing squad.

Posted by: Josh | May 1 2021 2:08 utc | 89

lysias@85 is outraged that Lincoln didn't win the majority of votes, at a site where shameless buffoons regularly delight at the thought of their guy being president despite having *fewer* votes. Lincoln had the most votes, period. Dude was vastly more legitimate than Trump, or George W. Bush. If Lincoln hadn't been blocked from running in the South or if the South hadn't had a long tradition of censoring the mails or terrorizing its own citizens who didn't conform, Lincoln would likely have won even more votes.

Edmund Wilson was the literary critic who thought he shouldn't have to pay income taxes. My experience has been that people who don't believe in taxation *with* representation are anti-democratic, anti-republican, anti-civilization and confirmed assholes to boot. He was apparently a foot fetishist, though, so at least he was colorful?

Posted by: steven t johnson | May 1 2021 3:43 utc | 90

Posted by: lysias | Apr 30 2021 20:42 utc | 75

I see you are a retired naval man.

You are right about the war between the states being a disaster. US publishes more books about this war per year than any or the war or conflict.

Slavery was simply abhorrent, in any form , like Jim Crow also It had to go.

From a non US south seas point of view:

The other loss of this was to the US army doctrine.

US army leaders are indoctrinated by the Civil War history as cadets. They read that heavy losses in numerous battles occurred on both sides. Since then US army losses have been extravagant and indicate success.

We saw this crazy waste US army manpower in the US campaigns for Buna and Gona in New Guinea in WW11, see Morison. [Jims, grandfather]

Hubris is always fatal.

Posted by: Paul | May 1 2021 7:19 utc | 91

I hasten to add:

War is a Racket:

Posted by: Paul | May 1 2021 8:01 utc | 92

@vk, 82 "the War of Secession (which they call "the Civil War")"

It's a good point: Guerre de Sécession, as I remember from reading Jules Verne in my childhood years. They don't call the Korean war 'civil war'. 'Civil War', in this case, is a propaganda term.

Incidentally, slavery is still perfectly legal in the Union. All they have to do is convict you of a crime. Not a exactly a super-difficult task.

Posted by: Mao Cheng Ji | May 1 2021 8:49 utc | 93

The barflies have missed Macron in Chad for the burial of 30-years in power Idriss Deby (whom they had helped to kick out their former "ally", Issene Habre). He died in a battle with the opposition (and not against the Islamists, but this is usually left out from reports about the "rebels"). The guy had "won" the election with more than 80 % just days before.

Great pic with super-Macron not wearing a mask, as usual.
The next day, as the Chadian opposition tried to protest against the dynastic succession of Deby's son at the head of a military council "for 18 months", more than 7 people were killed.
Then yesterday, the Chadian army killed 100+ "rebels"(in fact, an alliance of some oppositions parties composed of former ministers, generals and even cousins of the Deby clan)...

Posted by: Mina | May 1 2021 10:49 utc | 94

Posted by: Mina | May 1 2021 10:49 utc | 96

My impression is that the politics of Chad, if you can call it "politics" are as follows. There are two basic zones: the north consists of Sahara plus a dry belt called Sahel where the population was traditionally nomadic and warlike, and savanna in the south where crop based agriculture is possible and where the bulk of the population lives. The power is always in the hands of northerners, and periodically changes hands between the warlike clans. Peaceful transitions of power are as frequent as in medieval Europe.

All the years of French influence did not bring Chad from the equivalent of French 12 century to 20-th. This makes me think that the failure of a similar conversion in Afghanistan is somewhat excusable. Except that the French "failed" with a much smaller budget.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | May 1 2021 12:25 utc | 95

Mao Cheng Ji@95 (and indirectly vk@82) The proper term for the US Civil War would be, the second revolution. Fastening on war of secession is misleading, deliberately so I'm sure on Mao Cheng Ji's part. The Biafran secession is routinely called a Nigerian civil war. For that matter, the attempted secession of the allies in the ancient Roman Republic is called the Social war and has never been regarded as just another war of conquest. The Korean war is not called a civil war for the good reason that the southern regime was the creation of the US, largely from the Japanese colonial apparatus, instead of a genuine part of the Korean polity. (Anyone claiming the north was the puppet of somebody, Mao, Stalin, is decisively refuted by the history of the war, where northern actions consistently were *not* ordered by Stalin or Mao...much to their displeasure on several occasions.)

Mao Cheng Ji apparently watched all of Ava DuVernay's 13, a silly fake-left "documentary" that claimed the Thirteenth Amendment was a racist attack on the black people. When the children born of today's prisons are kept in the prisons and put to labor when they get tall enough to do some sort of work, I'll agree that forced labor of prisoners is "slavery." Or when the managers of a prison can use the prisoners as collateral for a loan. Or when the prisoners are moved to another state where there is more profit to be made.

Posted by: steven t johnson | May 1 2021 12:50 utc | 96

>> "Harvest of Despair" documents the Ukrainian terror famine of 1932-33, which caused the deaths of 7,000,000 people. Using interviews with survivors and scholars to supplement rare photographic evidence,

In my lifetime alone, I’ve observed many Big Lies including at least one recent instance of an empire “documenting” a genocide that apparently didn’t happen. The “documentation” includes “eyewitness” testimonies. There is continuity in this empire’s policies of regularly creating Big Lies. Enough to make me look back at history very differently, I am confident this movie’s makers chose to lie to their viewers. Not just in small ways.

Posted by: oglalla | May 1 2021 16:16 utc | 97

@ Posted by: steven t johnson | May 1 2021 12:50 utc | 98

There are very good and important reasons why calling the American Civil War "the War of Secession" is more precise scientifically:

1) "civil war" is a very common name. Many countries had them, and many more than one of them. It would be the apex of inferiority complex to call the American Civil War "the Civil War" if you're a non-American historian;

2) it highlights the economic aspect of the war. The South wanted to secede because, after the "loss of California", they realized their slave labor system would never be able to compete against the wage labor system. The South opted for secession instead of conquest of the North because they knew they didn't have a chance to defeat and subjugate the North. The War of Secession represented the last grasp of the USA of the Founding Fathers, of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson; in fact, the similarities between it and WWI are somber: had the British Empire entered the War of Secession on behalf of the Confederation, WWI would have happened in 1861 and not in 1914. In this context, the War of Secession was part of the Liberal Wars, the wars of what Lenin would later call "Imperialism", war for private property on a global scale. Only the fact that the British Empire was still the world empire and still at its apex prevented the War of Secession from degenerating into a World War.

The Social War is name that way because the Romans called their client tribes "partners" (socii). It has nothing to do with "society". Nationalism didn't exist in Antiquity, so only wars fought between Romans themselves (from the city of Rome) are called civil wars by historians.

Posted by: vk | May 1 2021 16:57 utc | 98

Just a reminder to all; tomorrow, May 2, 2021, is the 7th anniversary of the heinous murder of dozens of pro-Russian demonstrators at the hands of Ukrainian fascist footballers and other Ukro-nazi thugs while locked inside the Odessa Trades Union building where many were beaten & tortured or leaped to their deaths from the upper floors while many others were burned alive by fires started by numerous Molotov cocktails thrown into the building by the fascist mob! LET US NEVER FORGET ALL THOSE MURDERED DURING THE ODESSA MASSACRE OF MAY 2, 2014!!

Posted by: Dr. William Fusfield | May 1 2021 18:09 utc | 99

vk@100 As to rebuttal 1)As Mao Cheng Ji notes, the name itself is a political choice. War of Secession is not as in-your-face as War of Northern Aggression, but yeah, it's about presupposing the south really was a separate country and it was about nationality/culture/Yankee greed and oppression, not about slavery. Everyone writing in a context outside of US history, as I recall, says the US civil war. There is no woke issue of colonialist oppression of the people of color here, sorry. Lastly, War of Secession is an even better name for the American Revolution, raising the issue of multiple wars even more strongly.

As to rebuttal 2)War of Secession covers up the economic issues, directing attention away from slavery. Insofar as it "highlights" economic issues, it is entirely subsidiary ones, like tariffs and Northern industrialism, sowing confusion on economics, not clarifying.

Posted by: steven t johnson | May 1 2021 19:45 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.