The Soviet Story

The Soviets and the Chinese Communists killed about 100 million of their own peoples. There is not the slightest historical doubt about this. The fact that some imbecile here says this is propaganda and "why bother" since the USSR disintegrated 20 years ago merely amplifies one of the film's points -- that the history is being whitewashed. We continue to hear, almost daily, about Hitler this, Hitler that, Hitler the other thing ... and he was a freakin' pantywaist compared to the Soviets and Chicoms. It matters, particularly since the so-called intellectual left in the West was complicit, starting with Walter Duranty and his phony reporting for the NYT. It's a reminder that today's fathead libs don't want. I am also quite down on the GOP, so don't lump me with them. I am a libertarian, actually, and find nothing to respect in either major political party in the U.S. today. However, it's the left that bears the greatest complicity in the murder of millions, by providing cover for the killers. Screw 'em.

This is a sledge-hammer documentary that even the most partial viewers would find difficult and hard to digest - many simply cannot or refuse to endure it, the stuff being too heavy. It is important to observe, that the film is Latvian, it is written and directed by a Latvian, and Latvia has a special trauma from the Soviet days, having suffered more from the Soviet ethnic cleansing after the war than both Estonia and Lithuania, large parts of the population being simply abducted to Siberia and concentration camps in other remote parts of the union with no possibility of any return, since most of them died, like people usually do in concentration camps. These Soviet crimes against innocent Latvian people, the Russians have never been brought to account for, in contrast to the Nazis for their crimes, which is one of the major points of the film. Latvia was not alone. The Soviets did the same although on a lesser scale in Estonia and Lithuania and in most east European countries under Russian occupation and above all in Ukraine, where in a single year seven million were intentionally starved to death. Already Lenin started persecutions in Ukraine, but Stalin expanded them into a holocaust from fear of losing Ukraine, and he saw a major reduction of the population as a means of reducing that danger. Edvins Snore, who made the film, points out the fact, which few have been aware of, that already Karl Marx in 1849 professed it as a necessity that all parasites of society and lower races (like Basques and Scottish highlanders) should be cleansed out of humanity to provide room for abler people, an inhuman philosophy that even Bernard Shaw as a socialist advocated and which turned into a trademark for all kinds of socialism, Russian Bolsheviks first of all and later Nazis. The documentary actually shows how Bolsheviks and Nazis learned from each other and instructed each other, Stalin and Hitler collaberated closely all the way up to 1941, Stalin using the Ukrainian harvests for export abroad to let the Ukrainians starve, and Nazis showing Stalin how to organize death camps. There is a grotesque irony in the film, showing Bolsheviks and Nazis partying and toasting each other in one scene to in the next show the harvest of corpses of starvation in Ukraine - the film is full of such horrible social penetrations into the dictatorial system. The film is vital for its message of telling inconvenient truths that so far haven't been generally known and can be seen as actually a resounding cry for retribution for all those millions unknown and buried alive who were intentionally sacrificed to suit the inhuman long term strategy of this ideology and its dictatorships.

Of thousands of films, books, and plays on the communist experience, this one stands out above all the rest — a monument to millions of innocent victims and a charge against a bloodthirsty socialist theory that killed almost two hundred million people in the 20th century and continues its murderous trail into the 21st.

The film was directed by a talented Latvian producer Edvīns Šnore.

In its synopsis Šnore writes: This is a story of an Allied power, which helped the Nazis to fight Jews and which slaughtered its own people on an industrial scale. Assisted by the West, this power triumphed on May 9th, 1945. Its crimes were made taboo, and the complete story of Europe's most murderous regime has never been told.

The film argues that there were close philosophical, political, and military relations between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union before and during the early stages of World War II. It highlights the Great Famine: the infamous "holodomor" which wiped out seven million Ukrainians, the Great Purge in Moscow and elsewhere in the USSR with over eleven million murdered, as well as the Katyn massacre of tens of thousands of Polish officers.

The film sheds the light on Gestapo-NKVD collaboration in mass murder of Jews and German opposition, Soviet mass deportations, and inhuman medical experiments in the GULAG.

The Economist praises the film by saying: "Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems Those who keep a soft spot for Marxism may flinch to hear that the sage of Highgate referred to backward societies as Völkerabfälle (racial trash) who must "perish in the revolutionary holocaust." Or that the Nazi party in its early days idolised Lenin (Josef Goebbels said he was second only to Adolf Hitler in greatness).

This is a revelation for some. Ludwig Von Mises wrote about Nazism and communism as two forms of the same socialist tyranny for a long time. He analyzed "two patterns for the realization of socialism" when he wrote: The first pattern (we may call it the Lenin or the Russian pattern) is purely bureaucratic. All plants, shops and farms are formally nationalized (verstaatlicht); they are departments of the government operated by civil servants. Every unit of the apparatus of production stands in the same relation to the superior central organization, as does a local post office to the office of the postmaster general. The second pattern (we may call it the Hindenburg or German pattern) nominally and seemingly preserves private ownership of markets, prices, wages, and interest rates. There are, however, no longer entrepreneurs, but only shop managers (Betriebsfuhrer in the terminology of the Nazi legislation).

Both systems, as Von Mises pointed out, were inevitably doomed to result in "barbarism," as they promptly did.

The film features interviews with western and Russian historians such as Norman Davies and George Watson from Cambridge, Boris Sokolov, Russian writer Viktor Suvorov, Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky, members of the European Parliament and the participants, as well as the victims of Soviet and Nazi terror.

Eminent British literary historian George Watson proved in his research that Karl Marx is "the ancestor of the modern political genocide." Marx used the term "racial trash" (Völkerabfälle) in relation to a number of some European ethnicities who were left behind by economic progress and should be "disposed of."

As former Soviet dissident (now a dissident again under the Putin regime) Vladimir Bukovsky explains: "When Communists come to power, it does not matter where, let it be in Russia, in Poland, in Cuba, in Nicaragua, in China, initially they destroy about ten percent of the population" in order to restructure the fabric of society. Then the "real work" begins with destruction of the designated target groups: priests, peasants, intellectuals, entrepreneurs, certain ethnicities – Ukrainians, Chechens, Jews, Crimean Tatars and others.

The making of the film is timely as the FSB/KGB regime in Russia increasingly embraces its Stalinist roots. Joe Bendel of The Epoch Times, mentioned that producer Edvīns Šnore was burned in effigy by Neo-Soviet Russians for his in-depth survey of Soviet crimes against humanity: It is an ominous badge of honor. This film that you are not supposed to see in Putin's Russia tells us how the ultimate government inevitably becomes the ultimate evil.

A couple of reviewers here tried to trash The Soviet Story as a propaganda movie. It is not. It is a very angry, but accurate film. Some footage, however, is somewhat repetitive. I can see why. Unlike their Nazi colleagues, Soviet mass murderers were trying to conceal their crimes and did not leave us many pictures or film about their crimes. Even officers in the Soviet Army were not permitted to own a camera. They could be shot as "spies" just for having one. Nazis, on the contrary, were proud of their crimes and left us with a lot of pictures and footage of their victims.

I do not care how accurate is the episode with a wheel barrow cited in one of negative reviews. If Soviets murdered 40-60 million people of all nationalities wouldn't they occasionally toss some corpses from a train car? It is believable to me.

I agree with reviewers that Mr. Šnore does not like the USSR and current Russian rulers. Should he? There is an ongoing hysterical campaign orchestrated from Kremlin against him, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland and "historical revisionism" i.e. exposure of socialist criminal regimes.

The Soviet Story is a must see for any friend of liberty. You can either watch The Soviet Story for free on YouTube or order a DVD from www.sovietstory.com.

For his in-depth survey of Soviet crimes against humanity, including Soviet cooperation with the Third Reich, Latvian director Edvins Snore was burned in effigy by Neo-Soviet Russians. It is an ominous badge of honor.

Soviet Story acts as an effective corrective to the popular notion that the Communist experiment only turned horrific when Stalin ascended to power. The film documents orders mandating mass executions, estimated in the tens of millions, originating with the father of the revolution, Lenin. Still, it is devilishly difficult to outdo Stalin's sheer capacity for terror. For instance, the deliberate use of famine to pacify Ukraine is explained here in chilling detail. In a crime against humanity largely ignored by the West, seven million Ukrainians were intentionally starved in the cordoned Republic, as foodstuffs were confiscated at gunpoint by the Red Army.

The heart of Soviet Story explores the close ideological similarities and barbaric collusion between the Soviet Socialists of Stalin and the National Socialists of Hitler. There is an eerie sequence juxtaposing thematically similar propaganda posters from both regimes, side-by-side on-screen. Even more damning are the documents Snore uncovers establishing close links between the SS and the Soviet NKVD (the precursor to the KGB), discussing among other issues, the "Jewish Question." They did not just talk—they carved up Poland between themselves, and at Stalin's prompting, staked their claims to the rest of Europe.

Soviet Story is most devastating when discussing the ways in which the more advanced Soviet killing machine served as the inspiration and model for the Holocaust. According former Soviet intelligence officer Viktor Suvorov: "A delegation of German Gestapo and SS came to the Soviet Union to learn how to build concentration camps." Snore has produced a chilling indictment of the Soviet experience with socialism. He calls some very convincing witnesses, including Bukovsky, and the eloquent Cambridge historians Norman Davies and George Watson. As evidence, he produces some shocking archival film and documents. However, as the film makes clear, none of those who did (and still do) the Soviet dirty work has ever faced justice for their crimes. All told, Snore has produced a passionate but thoroughly reasoned case against the Soviet regime.

The Soviet Story is a very important contribution for understanding a series of questions about leftism and Marxism outcomes. But other questions remain. First, _how_ is it possible at all that so many young people, as well as oldies, are still impressed by such ideologies? _How_ could it ever be possible that a historian such as Hobsbawn considers himself a communist socialist today, having declared not long ago that if it was not for being a Jew, in the 30s could very well have enthusiastically joined Nazism? With a huge lot of information and discussion nowadays freely available?

Many good comments on the documentary have already been made. But the main question that remains after it is: _how_ came that a Marxist "theory", that started copying the condolent humanitarians in the XIX century, defending egalitarianism ... terminated by practicing the most cruel and extensive genocides of the whole History of mankind?

Unfortunately, the answers to these questions are not short, and not without some work. And perhaps not bound to be contained in movie documentaries, however well performed as is this one. Only through some reading can we begin to see the answers, in analyses made clear along the last century by people such as Isaiah Berlin (as in 'Against the Current') and Karl Popper (as in 'The Open Society and It's Enemies'). Do enjoy them piecemeal.