Does it? I thought it was only unborn soviets (and chinese?) (counted because people don't have kids during a famine) and nazis killed by the soviets.

I want to preface this by saying I am in near complete agreement with you and appreciate your comments in this thread.  But the "unborn Nazi's" thing is more than a little offputting, and I understand why whatever mod decided to remove your other comment containing that term did so.  

Even if it is not how you intended it, phrasing it as "unborn Nazis" implies that an unborn person can be Nazi.  They can't.  Nazism is something that a person is infected with only after they have the cognitive apparatus to absorb and host ideology.  Using the phrase as you did makes it sound like you think that the offspring of Nazis must also inherently be Nazis.  That would be a rather vile belief, which is why I don't think you actually meant it that way, but nevertheless it is how that phrase comes across.  It wouldn't be above the liberals or Nazis themselves to claim such a thing, but I really don't think even they would do so in this case because it's contrary to the kind of picture they're trying to paint with all their lies in the Black Book.  They want people to think it was only smol bean innocents that were "victims" of communism and try to obscure the fact that it was literal Nazis targeted by the Soviets, and they want to obscure the fact that their numbers are made up of many potential aka unborn people.  So when you use that phrase, it does sound like you believe "any spawn of Nazis must also be Nazis" which ironically is a very Nazi kind of thing to believe.  

Anyway, I understand what you were getting at over all, and I'm in agreement with it.  But I think pointing out your wording there is a fair nit to pick out of the rest of your otherwise good commentary.