this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2023
17 points (90.5% liked)

Ask Lemmygrad

808 readers
24 users here now

A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Saw a lot of people call the deportations of Tatars in the USSR a genocide. I know that the Tatars collaborated with the Axis but was it necessary to deport so many of them? Many of them not having directly collaborated with the Axis. Im on board with punishing those who actively collaborated with the Nazis but from what i have heard of, this was unnecessary

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I can't recall whether this applies to Tatars.

According to Grover Furr, some mass deportations in the USSR during WWII were intended to prevent genocide.

The logic being that if you only relocate the young men who are liable to e.g. fight for the Axis powers or sabotage the Allied effort, you would effectively destroy the people. The young women would not be able to have children or marry, etc, unless they partnered with young men from a different ethnicity, tribe, culture, etc, which may involves abandoning or changing traditions, languages, practices, cuisine.

To keep a way of life alive, so to speak, the only way is to keep those people together. If one or two of the group need to be relocated, fine. What do you do when e.g. 10,000 young men out of 100,000 total population need to be kept away from Nazi influence? Just relocating the 10,000 likely means a massively reduced birthrate for however long. And if the timing is misjudged, no more group. I.e. they've become victims of genocide.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

It is about Crimean Tatars, not the Tatars from Tatarstan.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

oh that makes more sense