|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil Liberties
Commentary
EconomicsPolitics |
The history of 20th Century Central & Eastern Europe explained…March 10th, 2026 |
 23 comments to The history of 20th Century Central & Eastern Europe explained…Leave a Reply |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
That second to last image is so on-point I literally LOLed
Some 25 years ago I conducted oral history interviews with dozens of Polish Home Army veterans. There were, back then, still many Home Army veterans still around, especially in Chicago (where I lived). Many if not most were quite young, relatively speaking, indicative of their having joined the resistance when they were teenagers or even younger. I made it a point of asking my interviewees the difference between Russians and Germans. Inevitably I got a reply that went something like this:
“The Russians will come up to you and smile and put their arms around your shoulders and profess their undying friendship with Poland and the Polish people. Then, they will stab you in the back. The Germans will march right up to your face and say, ‘I’m going to kill you.’ And then set about doing just that.”
I would note that these men and women who fought in the Warsaw uprising (Aug-Oct 44) told me that they treated captured Wehrmacht regulars honorably, feeding them and even tending their wounds. But they gave no quarter to captured SS men, Ukrainian auxiliaries, and members of the special action groups such as those belonging to Dirlewanger’s outfit. These were shot out of hand.
IrishOtter49: that reminds me of the Polish chap (I think it was a Polish general) who when asked if he had to pick who to fight between the Germans & the Russians, replied “The Germans, business before pleasure.”
Hah! That was exactly the sentiment of my Home Army interviewees.
They really really really hated the Russians.
I know some of you will know this, but it always gives me a laugh:
Rafał Gan-Ganowicz, a Polish mercenary, reportedly responded to a question about how it felt to take human life with the statement: “I wouldn’t know, I’ve only ever killed Communists.”
The joke is told, (and forgive me, I’m pretty sure I’ve told this one here before, but it’s my only ‘clean’ joke) concerning the deep, brotherly love between Polish and Russian communists:
A Polish communist is stumbling along a drainage ditch, and sees a booze bottle poking out of some dried mud. He pulls it out of the mud and, while wiping the mud off to see if there’s any booze left in there, he rubs it. A genie pops out; “I am the genie of the muddy wine bottle. I grant you three wishes.”
“Hmm, wishes eh? Well, I want China to invade Poland.” “Granted! You have two wishes left.”
“Well, what I REALLY want, is for China to invade Poland.” The genie, looking a mite perplexed, replies “Granted! You have one wish left.”
The Pole looks introspective, and then says “Hmmm… okay, I wish for China to invade Poland.” The genie shrugs and says “Well, granted! You’ve destroyed your country three times – may I ask why?”
The Pole grins. “For the Chinese to invade Poland THREE times, they had to cross Russia SIX times!”
The real history, especially, of the lead-up to WWI (from which all follows) is moustaches… If Only King Gillette had got going sooner…
IrishOtter49 – in Russian culture to smile (unless among family or very close friends) is either a sign of stupidity (either inherent stupidity – or being drunkenly stupid), or of dishonesty. So smiling is not a good sign. Being forced to smile and “be happy” was one of the great humiliations of Soviet Socialist rule – very much “you will own nothing, and you will be happy – or we will smash your knee caps”.
The alliance between the German National Socialists and the Soviet Marxist Socialists is not as well known as it should be – as it has been covered up by the international establishment since 1941.
What is baffling is the failure of Britain and France to declare war on the Soviet Union in 1939 – when it invaded Poland, it also invaded Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, part of Romania, and Finland – and there was still no Declaration of War from the Britain and France.
“If we had declared war, the Soviets would have helped the Nazis” – they did anyway, they gave Nazi Germany massive support from 1939 to 1941 and organised union strikes and other sabotage in France and other nations.
To declare war on a country for invading a country and NOT to declare war on another country who has also invaded that country (Poland) – is insane, but generations have been indoctrinated, for the best part of a century, not to see the insanity.
By the way – in spite of most of the German army and air force being committed in the east in 1939 (the invasion of Poland), British and French forces just sat in their positions and did nothing – they could have walked into the industrial heartland of Germany in 1939 – but they did nothing.
Declare war on one power, but not the other power, who has invaded Poland (even though the other power has also invaded lots of other countries), and do not even take the war with the power you have declared war on, seriously – just sit there, even though most of their air and land forces are committed in the east, rather than advance into their industrial heartland and defeat them.
It is all baffling. And it is not “hindsight” – some people pointed it out at the time, and were told, by the establishment, to shut-up.
I suspect that the intellectual corruption of the establishment goes back a lot further than is normally supposed.
Paul Marks said in Russian culture to smile (unless among family or very close friends) is either a sign of stupidity (either inherent stupidity – or being drunkenly stupid), or of dishonesty. So smiling is not a good sign.
Yes, I knew that, of course. And so did the Poles.
I should think that the alliance between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union in 1939 through June 22 1941 is well known to everyone with even a passing familiarity in the history of the Second World War. I am unaware of any attempt to cover it up. Rather, both nations trumpeted the conclusion of the alliance to the entire world. It was no secret.
As well, the cooperative military undertakings that took place in secret between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union in the interwar period, which e.g. saw Germans training and experimenting with armored warfare tactics and technology in the Soviet Union, is now widely known and has been for a long time. No reputable historian nor any member of the so-called international establishment (whatever that is) would argue otherwise.
IrishOtter49 – yes you know these things, for example the Soviet help Nazi Germany, but you would be astonished (and horrified), by how few people know these things.
I must agree with Paul Marks. When I moved to Poland 20 years ago (in my 40s), I wasn’t particularly aware that the Soviets had also invaded in 1939. I am also curious (or perhaps not) as to why this is not more widely known outside Poland. In fact, there’s a lot of European history that I’ve learnt in the last two decades that I was previously ignorant of, and my suspicions of who are the gatekeepers of history continue to deepen.
Unless one studies, thoroughly and instensively, a particular historical subject area one is unlikely to know much about it. That’s okay. We can’t all be historians, we can’t all be broadly knowledgeable about history. I, for example, know next to nothing about the Warring States period apart from the fact that it existed and that it involved a lot of states in ancient China warring with each other. Duh.
And there’s a whole heckuva lot of other things I know little or nothing about.
The reason why Britain (and France) did not declare war on the Soviet Union was that it would have been daft to do so. British (and before that English) foreign policy towards the continent has always been to try to prevent any continental power becoming a European hegemon. For any strong European power than is not a hegemon is unlikely to be an immediate danger to England / Britain. Because it has to be watching its back and so cannot prepare an invasion of Britain wholeheartedly. Hence the perennial British attempts to cuddle up to the second and third strongest European powers to prevent the most powerful achieving hegemon status.
Which explains English/British hostility to Spain, royalist France, revolutionary France, Imperial Germany and Nazi Germany. Whoever has plausible ambitions to be the Continental big dog – we’re agin ’em. This is why the French call us Perfidious Albion – they can’t work out why we’re sometimes on their side and sometimes against. What we do not do is recklessly try to fight the two most powerful European powers at the same time. Because it would be daft.
The reason why Britain offered a (completely worthless in terms of actual protection) guarantee to Poland was that it wanted to deter the Germans – given their sharp elbows and bellicosity, the biggest risk of hegemonic power – from using arms to increase the scope of their dominions. Sure the Soviet Union was a large and potentially dangerous power, but it was a long way away. The risk of it achieving hegemonic power in Europe required a great deal of extra marching across other people’s turf, compared to Germany. The distance from Germany to the English Channel is a couple of hundred miles. The distance from Russia is about six times as far. Britain did not offer Poland a guarantee because of its deep and abiding love for the Poles, but from self interest.
The secret protocol to the Agreement of Mutual Assistance between Britain and Poland makes it explicit that this was about Germany :
Secret Protocol attached to the Agreement of Mutual Assistance between the United Kingdom and Poland signed on the 25th August 1939
The Government of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and the Polish Government are agreed upon the following interpretation of the Agreement of Mutual Assistance signed this day as alone authentic and binding.
1. (a) By the expression “a European Power” employed in the Agreement is to be understood Germany. (b) In the event of action within the meaning of Article 1 or 2 of the Agreement by a European Power other than Germany, the Contracting Parties will consult together on the measures to be taken in common.
Lee Moore – the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics also wished to dominate Europe, indeed the world, indeed that is why it was named the “Union of Soviet Socialist Republics” (note that the word “Russia” is not even in the name). The Marxist Socialists had already murdered millions of people by 1939 – the German National Socialists were yet to do so in 1939 – although they later did.
By the way – the, oft-repeated, claim that people “did not know” is false, even my father (Harry Marks – in the early 1930s a member of the Communist Party – he left in a rather violent way, picking up the board table of the local group and throwing it at them, he was rather strong) knew that millions were being eliminated in the Soviet Union and that the Soviet aim of world conquest had NOT been dropped by “Stalin” – it is not reasonable to suppose that the British and French establishment “did not know” these things.
If it would have been “daft” to declare war on the Soviet Union for invading Poland then it would also be “daft” to declare war on some other power that invaded Poland in the same year, indeed the same month. The Soviet Union also invaded Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, part of Romania and Finland – and yet there was still no Declaration of War on the Soviet Union. By the way “Socialism in One Country” in no way meant that the Marxist Socialists had given up the desire for world conquest – as “Stalin” and others explained, the point was to build up the industrial and military power of the Soviet Union in order to achieve this objective.
And if, as you claim, the aim of the war was to defeat Germany – why, when most German air and land forces were committed in Poland, did British and French forces just sit in their positions – rather than advance into the almost undefended industrial heartland of Germany?
Later on (1941) vital support, both naval and air power, were denied to British forces in the Far East – so these military resources could, instead, be used to support the Soviet Union. British and allied forces were betrayed – they were left to death or captivity in Japanese hands (which many did not survive).
Neither British self-interest or a desire to help Poland seem to be connected with the policies that were followed – what the true motivation was, is unclear.
But the policies were clearly NOT the traditional British policy of opposing any power that wished to dominate Europe – the bizarre behaviour towards the Soviet Union shows this.
France is much the same – in spite of the French government knowing that the Soviet Union was organizing strikes and other sabotage in France, the pro Moscow parties in France were not banned, and the Trade Union organizers were not interned.
France was left wide open to enemy, Soviet, strikes and other sabotage in 1940 – actions that were conducted in support of Nazi Germany.
This was clearly “daft” – but nothing was done about it, in France or Britain.
Two powers – both of whom wish to dominate Europe (indeed the world) invade Poland in September 1939 – to declare war on one, but not the other, makes no sense – especially when the power one has NOT declared war upon, then proceeds to invade various other countries (still without a Declaration of War from Britain and France) and proceeds to give massive support (raw materials and so on) to Nazi Germany, and to organize strikes and other sabotage in France.
There was something very wrong with the establishment in France and Britain – they were not behaving rationally, or according to any consistent moral or strategic principle, and, again, British and French forces just sat in their positions when most German air and land forces were committed in Poland – rather than advancing into the industrial heartland of Germany. And known pro Soviet figures in Britain and France were NOT interned.
Neither helping Poland or defeating Germany seem to have been the motivations of policy.
The attitudes of even “conservative” members of the establishment were very strange.
For example, Lord Halifax (later denounced for Appeasement of Nazi Germany) believed that the “interests of the community” must always be held to be more important private property rights (and other basic individual liberties) – his speeches and writings caused some amusement given his well-known meanness with his own money (he was not a generous person – to put the matter mildly), but his Collectivism was quite sincere – and he even urged Prime Minister Chamberlain to include members of the Labour Party into the government, and this was BEFORE the war.
Prime Minister Chamberlain himself was famous (or infamous) for his pushing of endless government services and benefits in the 1920s and early 1930s (following the tradition of his father – “Radical Joe” Chamberlain), this was NOT a roll-back-the-state person.
When P.E. Moore (the old tutor of T.S. Elliot in the United States) visited Britain in the 1930s he came to the conclusion that there were no Conservatives, in the sense of American Republicans, in the British establishment – including in the Conservative Party. That everyone in the British establishment wanted a bigger (not smaller) government – the only debate being over how fast the transformation should be.
Perhaps it is no wonder that such people as “Kim” Philby did not seem out of the ordinary in their attitudes (which were the same as his father – who was also given a senior position in the British intelligence service, before spending his last years organizing various anti Western plots in Beirut – “Kim” was on good terms with his traitor socialist father, and went to visit him, and no one seems to have thought this a bad sign) – ditto Burgess, Maclean, Caincross, George Blake, – and on, and on, and on.
Even as a child (very many decades ago) it was obvious to me that the author “John Le Carre” was a socialist – the traitor characters in his spy books produced socialist arguments and “George Smiley” (the hero figure – perhaps a self insert by the author) never contradicted any of their false statements, and nor did anyone else contradict the false statements (the reader was presented these false statements, this agitprop, as-if they were the truth) – it was clear that the author (yes the author – not just characters in the books) agreed with the socialist agitprop of the traitor characters.
Yet “John Le Carre” had a position in the security and intelligence services – when he was exactly the sort of person they are supposed to be fighting.
John Brennan, former Director of the CIA (and supporter of the Communist Party), and the new Governor of Virginia (another leftist) spring to mind.
“Who is the custodian of the custodians?”
Who guards the guards?
To give an example – the known Soviet agent (he was not only a Soviet agent of influence – he made no effort to hide the fact) Sir Stafford Cripps was appointed Ambassador to Moscow in May 1940. And given various other senior government positions – ending up as Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Why not just ask the NKVD who they wanted?
And this is not a matter of the “interpretation” of Clause Four (written on every Labour Party membership card – carried by Labour Party members) with its demand for the “democratic control” of the “means of production, distribution and control” – Sir Stafford Cripps was openly pro Soviet in the 1930s (at a time when the Soviets were eliminating millions of people) – I know I have said this above, but it warrants being said again. And there were many others.
Ditto Sidney and Beatrice Webb (authors of the book claiming that the Soviet Union was a wonderful new civilization) – they were given senior positions writing government reports – reports that were acted upon.
The insanity, utter insanity, of the situation – is hard to exaggerate.
The attitude seems to have been that such people might be “taking things too far, too fast” – but that their hearts were in the right place and that their aims were noble.
The fact that they were utterly evil and that their objective was tyranny (tyranny – total and absolute) does not seem to have registered with the British establishment.
But then even the sickening evil of Mr Wells and Mr Shaw (see above for their open support of mass murder) did not register with the British establishment.
As far as the British establishment were concerned – if you spoke nicely (did not shout and scream like the Austrian senior private) then you were a nice person – no matter that you wanted to steal everything and murder millions of people.
General observation:
The core of Brit “spook” agencies were loaded to the gunwales with “socialists / soviet sympathizers.
The behaviour of some of these led to the systematic “neutralization of several SOE operations during the war
Also consider the post WW2 activities of Blunt, Philby, et al.
How many decades until the “inheritors” of the “Blunt, Philby, McLean” era are quietly acknowledged?
Maybe some point after 2029 if all goes well.
Bruce – yes indeed.
Perry – I hope you are correct.