중국 공산당 100년 적폐, 공산당 마귀 도살자

 

신장 지역에서 행한 핵폭탄 실험, 그 후유증으로 수 만의 생명이 죽고 기형아 탄생

 

 

 

 

 

인류 최대의 학살자 중국 공산당과 모택동

Remembering the biggest mass murder in the history of the world

 

Ilya Somin

August 4, 2016 at 12:05 a.m. GMT+9

 

누가 인류 역사상 최대 학살자였나? 대개는 아돌프 히틀러의 유대인 대학살을 생각할 것이다. 어떤 이들은 아마 요셉 스탈린이 히틀러보더 더 무죄한 백성까지 학살했다고 생각할 것이다. 스탈린 치하에서 나치의 유대인 학살보다 더 많은 생명이 죽어 갔다. 그러나 히틀러나 스탈린을 능가하는 인민 도살자가 있었으니 바로 중국 공산당과 모택동이었다. 1958년부터 1962년까지 대 약진 운동으로 4천 5백만 인민이 죽어갔다. 가히 인류 역사상 최대의 학살이라 아니할 수 없다. 

Who was the biggest mass murderer in the history of the world? Most people probably assume that the answer is Adolf Hitler, architect of the Holocaust. Others might guess Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, who may indeed have managed to kill even more innocent people than Hitler did, many of them as part of a terror famine that likely took more lives than the Holocaust* (이 부분은 아래서 참조) But both Hitler and Stalin were outdone by Mao Zedong. From 1958 to 1962, his Great Leap Forward policy led to the deaths of up to 45 million people – easily making it the biggest episode of mass murder ever recorded.

 

'모택동의 대 기근'의 저자 역사가 프랭크 디쾨터는 '히스토리 투데이'에 기고한 한 글에서 다음과 같이 무슨 일이 일어났었는지를 요약해 주었다. Historian Frank Dikötter, author of the important book Mao’s Great Famine recently published an article in History Today, summarizing what happened:

모택동은 전국 농촌 마을 사람들을 집단 농장들에 (인민공사 人民公社) 몰아 넣음으로 경쟁 국가들을 제치고 중공을 도약시킬 수 있다고 생각했다. 유토피아 낙원을 추구하여 모든 것이 집단화되었다. 인민의 노동, 가정, 토지, 소유물, 생계비 등은 모두 빼앗겼다. 집단 간이 식당/매점에서 공로에 따라 숫갈로 배분된 음식이 공산당의 모든 지시를 따르도록 강제하는 무기가 되었다. 일할 동기가 사라짐에 따라, 공산당은 강압과 폭력으로 굶주린 농민들을 내몰아, 들판은 소홀하게 버려진 반면, 엉성하게 짜인 관개 프로젝트들에 투입하였다. Mao thought that he could catapult his country past its competitors by herding villagers across the country into giant people’s communes. In pursuit of a utopian paradise, everything was collectivised. People had their work, homes, land, belongings and livelihoods taken from them. In collective canteens, food, distributed by the spoonful according to merit, became a weapon used to force people to follow the party’s every dictate. As incentives to work were removed, coercion and violence were used instead to compel famished farmers to perform labour on poorly planned irrigation projects while fields were neglected.

 

엄청난 규모의 재앙이 뒤 따랐다. 출간된 인구 통계들에서 추출하여, 역사가들은 수 천만 인민이 아사하였다고 추정하였다. 그러나 무슨 일이 일어났는지 실상은 이제야 공산당 자신이 그 기근 동안 기록했던 세세한 보고들 때문에 백일하에 들어나게 되었다. A catastrophe of gargantuan proportions ensued. Extrapolating from published population statistics, historians have speculated that tens of millions of people died of starvation. But the true dimensions of what happened are only now coming to light thanks to the meticulous reports the party itself compiled during the famine….

 

이 방대하고 세세한 사건 기록에서 드러나는 바는 공포 이야기 자체이다. 모택동은 그 기록에서 역사에 전대미문의 최대 대량 도살자들 중 하나로 부상한다. 모택동은 1958년에서 1962년 어간에 최소한 4천 5백만 인민을 죽음으로 내몰았다. What comes out of this massive and detailed dossier is a tale of horror in which Mao emerges as one of the greatest mass murderers in history, responsible for the deaths of at least 45 million people between 1958 and 1962.

 

이 보고서가 세상에 알려지기 전에 추정했던 그 재앙의 정도는 보고서로 인하여 난장이가 되었지만, 수 많은 인민이 죽임당한 방식도 가히 상상을 초월하게 잔인하였다: 200만 내지 300만 인민이 고문 치사당하거나 즉결 처단되었고, 죄명도 경미한 위반에 불과하였다. 한 소년이 후난 마을에서 한 줌 곡식을 훔쳤다고, 지역 공산당 책임자 시옹 드창은 熊德昌 그의 아버지로 하여금 그 소년을 산채로 생매장하게 만들었다. 그 부친도 며칠 후에 슬픔 때문에 죽고 말았다. 왕즈요우 王子游 사건은 중앙당에 보고되었다: 그의 두 귀중 하나가 잘렸고 그의 두 다리를 철사로 묶고 10킬로 돌 하나가 그의 등짝에 떨어졌다. 그는 불에 달군 지글거리는 도구로 도장이 찍혔다. 그런 처벌은 감자 하나를 캔 죄 때문이었다. It is not merely the extent of the catastrophe that dwarfs earlier estimates, but also the manner in which many people died: between two and three million victims were tortured to death or summarily killed, often for the slightest infraction. When a boy stole a handful of grain in a Hunan village, local boss Xiong Dechang forced his father to bury him alive. The father died of grief a few days later. The case of Wang Ziyou was reported to the central leadership: one of his ears was chopped off, his legs were tied with iron wire, a ten kilogram stone was dropped on his back and then he was branded with a sizzling tool – punishment for digging up a potato.

 

The basic facts of the Great Leap Forward have long been known to scholars. Dikötter’s work is noteworthy for demonstrating that the number of victims may have been even greater than previously thought, and that the mass murder was more clearly intentional on Mao’s part, and included large numbers of victims who were executed or tortured, as opposed to “merely” starved to death. Even the previously standard estimates of 30 million or more, would still make this the greatest mass murder in history.

 

While the horrors of the Great Leap Forward are well known to experts on communism and Chinese history, they are rarely remembered by ordinary people outside China, and have had only a modest cultural impact. When Westerners think of the great evils of world history, they rarely think of this one. In contrast to the numerous books, movies, museums, and and remembrance days dedicated to the Holocaust, we make little effort to recall the Great Leap Forward, or to make sure that society has learned its lessons. When we vow “never again,” we don’t often recall that it should apply to this type of atrocity, as well as those motivated by racism or anti-semitism.

 

The fact that Mao’s atrocities resulted in many more deaths than those of Hitler does not necessarily mean he was the more evil of the two. The greater death toll is partly the result of the fact that Mao ruled over a much larger population for a much longer time. I lost several relatives in the Holocaust myself, and have no wish to diminish its significance. But the vast scale of Chinese communist atrocities puts them in the same general ballpark. At the very least, they deserve far more recognition than they currently receive.

 

I. Why We so Rarely Look Back on the Great Leap Forward

What accounts for this neglect? One possible answer is that most of the victims were Chinese peasants – people who are culturally and socially distant from the Western intellectuals and media figures who have the greatest influence over our historical consciousness and popular culture. As a general rule, it is easier to empathize with victims who seem similar to ourselves.

 

But an even bigger factor in our relative neglect of the Great Leap Forward is that it is part of the general tendency to downplay crimes committed by communist regimes, as opposed to right-wing authoritarians. Unlike in the days of Mao, today very few western intellectuals actually sympathize with communism. But many are reluctant to fully accept what a great evil it was, fearful – perhaps – that other left-wing causes might be tainted by association.

 

China's curious Cultural Revolution

A museum commemorates modern China's painful past as the 50th anniversary of the start of the Cultural Revolution. (Reuters)

In China, the regime has in recent years admitted that Mao made “mistakes” and allowed some degree of open discussion about this history. But the government is unwilling to admit that the mass murder was intentional and continues to occasionally suppress and persecute dissidents who point out the truth.

 

This reluctance is an obvious result of the fact that the Communist Party still rules China. Although they have repudiated many of Mao’s specific policies, the regime still derives much of its legitimacy from his legacy. I experienced China’s official ambivalence on this subject first-hand, when I gave a talk about the issue while teaching a course as a visiting professor at a Chinese university in 2014.

 

II. Why it Matters.

For both Chinese and westerners, failure to acknowledge the true nature of the Great Leap Forward carries serious costs. Some survivors of the Great Leap Forward are still alive today. They deserve far greater recognition of the horrible injustice they suffered. They also deserve compensation for their losses, and the infliction of appropriate punishment on the remaining perpetrators.

 

In addition, our continuing historical blind spot about the crimes of Mao and other communist rulers, leads us to underestimate the horrors of such policies, and makes it more likely that they might be revived in the future. The horrendous history of China, the USSR, and their imitators, should have permanently discredited socialism as completely as fascism was discredited by the Nazis. But it has not – so far – fully done so.

 

Just recently, the socialist government of Venezuela imposed forced labor on much of its population. Yet most of the media coverage of this injustice fails to note the connection to socialism, or that the policy has parallels in the history of the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, and other similar regimes. One analysis even claims that the real problem is not so much “socialism qua socialism,” but rather Venezuela’s “particular brand of socialism, which fuses bad economic ideas with a distinctive brand of strongman bullying,” and is prone to authoritarianism and “mismanagement.” The author simply ignores the fact that “strongman bullying” and “mismanagement” are typical of socialist states around the world. The Scandinavian nations – sometimes cited as examples of successful socialism- are not actually socialist at all, because they do not feature government ownership of the means of production, and in many ways have freer markets than most other western nations.

 

 

Venezuela’s tragic situation would not surprise anyone familiar with the history of the Great Leap Forward. We would do well to finally give history’s largest episode of mass murder the attention it deserves.

 

By Ilya Somin

Ilya Somin is a law professor at George Mason University. He coauthored an amicus brief in California v. Texas, with a cross-ideological group of legal scholars, arguing that the challenge to the ACA as a whole should be rejected.

 

-------------------------------

요셉 스탈린은 계획적 종족 청소/대량 학살을 자행했나?

Did Joseph Stalin Commit Genocide?

by Ilya Somin on November 23, 2010 3:14 am in Communism, Genocide, International Human Rights Law, International Law, Russia

 

In his excellent recent book Stalin’s Genocides, Stanford historian Norman Naimark argues that Joseph Stalin committed genocide and not “merely” mass murder. Few any longer deny that Stalin’s regime slaughtered millions of innocent people. But the Russian government and some Western writers continue to argue that these murders were not genocidal, and that Stalin therefore cannot be classed in a category with Adolf Hitler and others who slaughtered entire racial, ethnic, or religious groups.

 

Back in 2008, I blogged about the debate over the question of whether the Soviet terror famine of the early 1930s (in which some 6 to 10 million people died) was a case of genocide or mass murder (see here and here). Many Ukrainians and some Western scholars argue that this was a case of genocide because Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin specifically targeted Ukrainian peasants for extermination. By contrast, the Russian government claims that Stalin was an equal opportunity mass murderer. The distinction matters because international law defines mass murder as genocide only if it was the result of an “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such.” It also matters because of the ongoing debate over whether communist mass murders deserve as much opprobrium as those of the Nazis.

 

Naimark concludes that both the terror famine and various other Stalinist atrocities qualify as genocide. His book is the most thorough and compelling study of the subject so far. In the end, however, I am not so much persuaded that Stalin committed genocide as reaffirmed in my view that the genocide-mass murder distinction isn’t a morally meaningful one. Moreover, Naimark overstates Stalin’s personal role in the mass murders committed by his regime and understates the impact of the communist system.

 

I. Was it Genocide and Should it Matter if it Was?

There is no doubt that at least some of Stalin’s crimes were genocides. The deportation and partial extermination of ethnic groups such as the Crimean Tatars surely qualifies. These indisputably genocidal crimes, however, accounted for only a small fraction of Stalin’s victims. Naimark’s main objective is to prove that Stalin’s much greater mass murders – the terror famine, the killing of millions in Gulag slave labor camps, and the “Great Terror” of 1937-38 – should also be considered genocidal.

 

Here, Naimark runs into the problem that most of the people killed in these mass murders were targeted not on the basis of race, religion, or ethnicity, but because of economic class or political background – or just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. As he points out, the Soviet Union and its allies successfully worked to exclude “political” murder from the international law definition of genocide; they did so to insulate their own crimes from potential condemnation. This is one of the most blatant examples of the extent to which international human rights law has been perverted by the influence of nondemocratic and totalitarian governments . In effect, Naimark argues that the international law definition of genocide should be read to cover precisely the kinds of crimes that it was deliberately crafted to exclude. In legal terms, the text, original meaning, and legislative history of the international law definition are all against Naimark.

 

In the case of the early 1930s terror famine, Naimark also argues that Stalin intended to target the Ukrainians as an ethnic group. If so, then this counts as genocide even under the traditional view of international law. Naimark notes that the impact of the famine was greater in Ukraine than in most other parts of the USSR, and that the region was treated with special harshness. On the other hand, it is also true that the main goal of the famine was to exterminate the independent peasantry regardless of ethnicity and carry out the forced collectivization of agriculture. Ukraine may have been targeted as much because it was the USSR’s most important agricultural region as because it was populated by Ukrainians. Moreover Ukraine had large minority populations, including millions of ethnic Russians (my own grandmother, was one of the many non-Ukrainians living in the region during the famine). Many of these people also died in the famine. Stalin’s motives were probably mixed. His main goal was to crush the peasants and collectivize agriculture. But he was also happy to deal a preemptive blow to Ukrainian nationalist aspirations (which he feared because they were the USSR’s largest minority group).

 

Ultimately, the distinction between genocide and “mere” mass murder should not matter. For reasons I explained here and here, it doesn’t make any difference whether the Soviet regime killed millions of innocent people because they were “kulaks” and “class enemies,” because they were Ukrainian, or for some combination of both reasons. In all three scenarios, innocent people were slaughtered for no good reason, in most cases on the basis of immutable characteristics that they could not change (“kulak” status was determined primarily by family background).

 

II. The Role of Stalin.

Naimark’s book is also interesting in so far as he blames Stalin personally for most of the crimes committed by the Soviet government during his rule. Absent Stalin’s malign influence, Naimark contends, the regime probably would not have committed mass murder or genocide on such a large scale. There is little doubt that Stalin’s paranoia and sadism influenced Soviet policy. Nonetheless, I think Naimark overstates the importance of Stalin’s personal role. Most of the major repressive policies and institutions – including the secret police and the Gulag slave labor camps – of the Soviet state were begun by Lenin, not Stalin. As historians such as Richard Pipes have shown, even the terror famine was a reprise of the first Soviet effort to collectivize agriculture in 1918-21 (which also led to a famine in which millions died). Leon Trotsky, Stalin’s main rival for power after Lenin’s death, attacked Stalin on the grounds that his policies were too generous to “bourgeois” elements and otherwise not repressive enough. Had Trotsky defeated Stalin, life for most Soviet citizens might have been just as bad or even slightly worse. One of the very few ways in which Stalin was harsher than Trotsky was in his much greater willingness to kill and imprison members of the Communist Party elite. Here, Stalin’s extreme paranoia about possible rivals for power really did make a big difference. Under Trotsky, the party comrades would have suffered a lot less; the rest of the population would not have been so fortunate.

 

More generally, Stalin’s policies were far from unique in the communist world. Almost every other communist regime engaged in very similar mass murders, including in countries like China and Cuba where the rulers had a high degree of autonomy from Soviet control.

 

In sum, evidence from both the Soviet Union and elsewhere suggests that Stalin’s deranged personality was probably only a secondary factor in explaining the crimes of his regime. “Without Stalin,” Naimark writes, “it is hard to imagine the genocidal [Soviet] actions of the 1930s.” By contrast, I find it all too easy to imagine communist mass murder even with a less maniacal leader at the helm. In fact, not a lot of imagination is necessary, since the same policies were promoted by Lenin, Trotsky, and other communist leaders with very different personalities.

 

Despite these reservations, Naimark’s book is a great analysis of both Stalin’s crimes and the debate over the meaning of genocide under international law. Anyone interested in the subject should definitely check it out.

 

요 8:44 너희는 너희 아비 마귀에게서 났으니 

너희 아비의 욕심을 너희도 행하고자 하느니라 

저는 처음부터 살인한 자요 

진리가 그 속에 없으므로 진리에 서지 못하고 

거짓을 말할 때마다 제 것으로 말하나니 

이는 저가 거짓말장이요 거짓의 아비가 되었음이니라

ὑμεῖς ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ διαβόλου ἐστὲ καὶ τὰς ἐπιθυμίας τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν θέλετε ποιεῖν. 

ἐκεῖνος ἀνθρωποκτόνος ἦν ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς 

καὶ ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ οὐκ ἔστηκεν, ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν ἀλήθεια ἐν αὐτῷ. 

ὅταν λαλῇ τὸ ψεῦδος, ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων λαλεῖ,

Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature 

ὅτι ψεύστης ἐστὶν καὶ ὁ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ. 

 

마귀 =살인자 ἀνθρωποκτόνος (kteinw, to kill) - a manslayer, murderer

공산당 =마귀 = 살인자 

공산당 =마귀 = 거짓말쟁이 

 

캄보디아 집단학살 (Cambodian genocide) - Wiki

1975년에서 1979년의 5년동안 민주 캄푸치아의 크메르 루주 정권이 1백 5십만 명 ~ 3백만 명을 죽인 일이다. 크메르 루주는 스탈린주의와 마오주의에 기반한 농업사회주의 국가를 건설하려 했고, 도시 인구를 강제이주시키고, 저항하는 자에 대해서는 고문, 학살, 노역이 가해졌다. 그러면서 농업정책도 실패하여 캄보디아 인구의 25퍼센트가 크메르 루주의 학살 및 기아와 질병으로 사망했다. 1979년 베트남이 캄보디아를 침공하여 크메르 루주를 실각시킴으로써 집단학살은 끝났다. 현재까지 20,000 개가 넘는 집단매장지가 발굴되었으며, 이러한 집단매장지를 소위 킬링필드라고 부른다.

 

크메르 루주 지도부는 학살이 시작된 것이 “인구의 정화”를 위한 것이었다고 주장했다. 2001년 1월 2일 캄보디아 정부는 크메르 루주 지도부 일부를 심판대에 세우기 위한 법안을 통과시켰다. 2009년 2월 17일부터 공판이 시작되었고, 2014년 8월 7일 누온 찌어와 키우 삼판에게 반인륜범죄 혐의에 대한 유죄 및 종신형이 선고되었다.

 

캄보디아 공산당이 200내지 300만을 도살했다.

베트남 공산당이 자유 월남 패망시키고, 줄잡아 300내지 400만을 학살 내지 수용소에 보내 죽게 했다. 

중국 공산당 모택동이 8천만을 도살했다

소련 공산당 스탈린이 수백만을 도살했다.

북한 공산당 김일성 정일 정은이 수 백만을 (고난의 대행군 시기 기아) 도살했다.

공산당 = 인민 도살자 = 마귀