i seriously cannot comprehend why kruschev was ever allowed to fuck the SU up so badly
i seriously cannot comprehend why kruschev was ever allowed to fuck the SU up so badly
I know historical hindsight is 20/20, but how did no one bully this guy into giving up his moronic "de-stalinisation" policy? Like the SU was built by Stalin and now suddenly hes satan incarnate? No wonder SU citizens lost faith in the party over time, how can you trust a bunch of weather vanes?
You're viewing a single thread.
ML parties sowing: Hell yes, The general secretary purging political enemies is based
ML parties reaping: WTF, why is everyone afraid to criticize the general secretary now?
Why wouldn't people just make good criticisms of the general secretary that would be received well? Are they stupid?
What sort of criticisms got purged?
Nikolai Vavilov, a hero of soviet science and creator of hardy strains of wheat, was purged for believing genetics was real
was purged for believing genetics was real
That's a pretty interesting claim and sounds pretty wild. Where can I read about the soviets purging genetics believers? You genetics guys gotta be careful ya know.
I would also be interested in more sources on this topic. The wikipedia page on Vavilov links this source on the Soviet view of genetics, but it has a very clear anti-communist bias and some obvious nonsense. I only realized this most of the way through typing my comment but apparently the author joined the USSR branch of Amnesty International in 1981, and was the chairman from 1985-1988. My favorites are claiming 10 million peasants were arrested and exiled or shot during collectivization (source: Winston Churchill, The Second World War, vol. 4) and this line:
Thus, Party leaders began doing what scientists always tried to avoid: turning scientific sessions into forums for resolving political tasks.
Anyways, the article is interesting even if I'm skeptical of it's accuracy. It seems as though there was a lot of debate around genetics in the Soviet Union at the time, which makes sense to me from a layperson's perspective at least. From what I understand, modern genetics was a relatively new science at the time, and considering the role of eugenics and Social Darwinism in Nazi ideology, I think it's reasonable that some Soviet scientists were skeptical. If I am incorrect here, I'd appreciate it if someone could correct me.
Vavilov himself certainly spoke highly of Soviet science. Here's a telegram he sent to The New York Times:
The lie about Soviet science and Soviet scientists conscientiously working for the cause of socialism has become the specialty of certain organs of the foreign press…. On many occasions I gave reports in the press and orally in many cities of the USA about Soviet science, about the exceptional possibilities granted to Soviet scientists, about the role of science in our country, and about the tremendous progress of science during the Soviet period.
From a small institution during the Tsarist period—the Bureau of Applied Botany—the Institute of Plant Industry that I am in charge of has grown during the Soviet period into a most prestigious scientific institution having few equals in scale in the world. Its staff of about 65 people during the Tsarist period at the present time has reached 1,700 when all its branches in the outlying areas are included. The institute’s budget has gone from 50 thousand rubles to 14 million rubles...
We argue, discuss existing theories in genetics and in selection [plant breeding—V.S.] methods, we summon each other to Socialist competition, and I have to tell you frankly, this is a great stimulus, which significantly increases the level of work…
I more than many other people am obliged to the government of the USSR for its great attention to the institute I head and to my personal work.
As a faithful son of the Soviet country, I consider it my duty and good fortune to work for the good of my native land and give my entire being to science in the USSR.
Sweeping aside as vile slander of dubious origin your report about me and the fabrications that in the USSR intellectual freedom allegedly does not exist, I insist on the publication of the present telegram in your newspaper.
Academician N. I. Vavilov (1936).
As for his imprisonment, it seems like he was arrested for foreign espionage and sabotage? It's pretty difficult for me to find a more concrete answer than this, as this story seems to be an anti-communist favorite and there are tons of articles propagandizing about Stalinism around it. Again if anyone has better sources, or if @GayTuckerCarlson@hexbear.net wants to link a source, I'd appreciate it. I got sucked into this and spent more time on it than I wanted to already.
Read about Trofim Lysenko. He said the concept of a gene was bourgeois.
In private, however, Stalin ridiculed Lysenko’s view that every science had a “class character”, writing on a report by Lysenko: “Ha-ha-ha…And Mathematics? And Darwinism?”
The guy was legitimately a dumbass I don't know why Stalin kept him around and edited his speeches. He caused a ton of harm to agriculture and genetics. His idea on grafting trees has to be one of the most foolish things I've read in a while. Even worse, Khrushchev got rid of him, then brought him back to do more damage for another decade, before getting rid of him again.
Source?
Editing Nature: Joseph Stalin and the "New" Soviet Biology in Isis vol. 84 (4) pp. 728-745 (1993) DOI: 10.1086/356638
https://libstc.cc/#/stc/id.nexus_id:9ko3mb04eo9nsyb1g6wp1by98
He sent this back to Lysenko to remove
Vavilov was awarded the Order of Lenin under Stalin and his research institute was established under Stalin as well (that Lysenko came up in).
There's unfortunately not a lot of easily accessible information on the investigation of Vavilov, but if:
- you're not a member of the party
- you spend a lot of time on international field trips to collect seeds
- you spend a lot of time in western countries for research collaboration, and
- you're the head of the USSR agricultural institute during the Soviet famine of 1930-33
You should probably have resigned and kept doing field work.
It's reported that Stalin was directly involved in Vavilov's arrest, intervening to support Lysenko, but it's unclear whether this was actually the case - 8 years later, Stalin edited a speech of Lysenko to remove references to what's considered a key factor in Lysenko's popularity
In his original manuscript Lysenko did portray genetics as "bourgeois science" and tried to reduce his conflict with geneticists to the contra-dictions inherent in class antagonisms. But in editing Lysenko's text Stalin deleted the discourse about the class character of science and completely eliminated the word bourgeois in reference to science (it was used in Lysenko's original text twenty-eight times).