From Hatred to Annihilation
Consistent devaluing of non-European humanity is a recurring theme in the writings of Marx and Engels. With respect to those events in Europe where smaller European nationalities were struggling for survival, the sympathies of Marx and Engels were clearly with the dominant definers of European supremacy. They saw the smaller nations in Europe as irritants to the progress of Europe towards the coming Marxist utopia. The irritants needed to be removed. They needed to be completely wiped out – not just defeat of the smaller nation but destruction of entire people. Engels wrote:
But at the first victorious uprising of the French proletariat, which Louis Napoleon is striving with all his might to conjure up, the Austrian Germans and Magyars will be set free and wreak a bloody revenge on the Slav barbarians. The general war which will then break out will smash this Slav Sonderbund and wipe out all these petty hidebound nations, down to their very names. The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth not only of reactionary classes and dynasties, but also of entire reactionary peoples. And that, too, is a step forward.
Here we also see a justification for anti-Slavism – another xenophobic prejudice endemic in the common psyche of the West. Again Engels justifies the prejudice and hatred. He provides an action plan – not just subjugation of Slavic nations but complete ‘disappearance from the face of the earth …of entire reactionary people’. Marx too had expressed with derision, the same desire for ‘annihilation’ towards ‘Croats, Pandurs, Czechs and similar scum.’
The very next month Engels further elaborated on the topic:
We repeat: apart from the Poles, the Russians, and at most the Turkish Slavs, no Slav people has a future, for the simple reason that all the other Slavs lack the primary historical, geographical, political and industrial conditions for independence and viability. Peoples which have never had a history of their own, which from the time when they achieved the first, most elementary stage of civilization already came under foreign sway, or which were forced to attain the first stage of civilization only by means of a foreign yoke, are not viable and will never be able to achieve any kind of independence. And that has been the fate of the Austrian Slavs….The same thing holds for the Southern Slavs proper….
Engels also vehemently denounced the appeal of Mikhail Bakunin, a socialist-anarchist from Russia who called for Slav emancipation. Here Engels replies to Bakunin:
…hatred of Russians was and still is the primary revolutionary passion among Germans; that since the revolution hatred of Czechs and Croats has been added, and that only by the most determined use of terror against these Slav peoples can we, jointly with the Poles and Magyars, safeguard the revolution…. there will be a struggle, an “inexorable life-and-death struggle”, against those Slavs who betray the revolution; an annihilating fight and ruthless terror — not in the interests of Germany, but in the interests of the revolution!
The irrational xeno-phobic hatred Europe in general and Germany in particular has for Slavic people, becomes transformed into an expression of “primary revolutionary passion” and the use of “annihilation and terror” against Slavic people – not just their political defeat- becomes necessary to safeguard the interests of revolution. In other words, Marxist founding fathers had provided how to justify hatred with theory and execute crimes against humanity all the while professing to advance the cause of humanity.
A Marxist blueprint for Hitler and Stalin
In 1849 Engels grudgingly accepted Poland as one of the three Slav nations that might have a future. But by 1851 he was convinced that Poland should disappear as a nation. He proceeded to provide a blueprint for the dissipation of Polish nation:
Conclusion: To take as much as possible away from the Poles in the West, to man their fortresses, especially Posen, with Germans on the pretext of defence, to let them stew in their own juice, send them into battle, gobble bare their land, fob them off with promises of Riga and Odessa and, should it be possible to get the Russians moving, to ally oneself with the latter and compel the Poles to give way…. A nation which can muster 20,000 to 30,000 men at most, is not entitled to a voice. And Poland certainly could not muster very much more.
History shows that the blueprint Engels expressed in his letter to Marx in 1851 was given a shape within the next hundred years. Stalin signed the notorious Munich agreement with Nazi Germany in 1939. The party line apologist argument in defense of this act of Stalin is that Stalin was being strategic and he prevented the Western powers trying to pit Nazi Germany against a newly developing Soviet Union. However a study of Soviet literature then, suggests a deeper cooperation between Nazis and Soviets particularly with respect to Poland despite Hitler’s visceral hatred for Communists.
The treaty between Nazis and USSR was signed on August 23 1939. On September 1 1939 Germany invaded Poland. On September 17 1939 Govt. of USSR sent a ‘note’ to Poland ambassador in Moscow. The content of the ‘note’ was published the very next day in Soviet propaganda magazine Izvestia:
Mr., Ambassador, The Polish-German war has highlighted the internal bankruptcy of the Polish state….In view of this situation, the Soviet Government has instructed the Supreme Commander of the Red Army to order its troops to cross the border and to protect the lives and property of the Western Ukrain and Western Byelorussia. Simultaneously, the Soviet Government intends to take all the measures to save the Polish people from the ill-starred war into which they have been plunged by their unwise leaders and to enable them to live a peaceful life. 
There are striking similarities between the logic used by both USSR and Nazi Germany to justify their entering of Poland. If USSR was using the logic of ethnic minorities of Ukrainian and Byelorussian origin within Poland to justify its aggression, Nazi Germany to justified its invasion of Poland. Nazi propaganda magazine ‘Die Wehrmacht’ wrote of ‘the brutal suppression of ethnic Germans in Poland’. If Soviets blamed the ‘unwise leaders’ of Poland and not Hitler for the war, Nazis were more Marxist in their justification. ‘Die Wehrmacht’ reminding the Poles that they ‘were the only remaining Slavic vassal in Eastern Europe’ accused Poland of ‘desire to play the role of the big man’. Engels would have definitely empathized with the logic of ‘Die Wehrmacht.’
On September 28 1939 Soviet-Nazi treaty of friendship was concluded in Moscow. Izvestia reported the next day:
The Government of the USSR and the German Government following the disintegration of the Polish state … have come to an agreement with regard to the following: they establish as their boundary between their mutual state interests on the territory of the formal Polish state a line traced on the map…The necessary state restructuring on the territory west of the said line shall be carried out by the German Government, on the east of this line by the Government of the USSR.
In other words, it was the same plan Engels wrote to Marx in 1853 regarding the deconstruction of Poland, which was now getting executed by Hitler and Stalin. However it did not stop with simply the dismembering of Poland and its occupation by Soviet Union and Nazi Reich. Both Hitler and Stalin used their occupied territories to execute their enemies – the annihilation of ‘scum’ and ‘reactionary people’ as a whole as envisioned by Marx and Engels.
Katyn – the Soviet Auschwitz
With Soviet-Nazi pact, Nazi Gestapo and its dreaded Soviet counterpart NKVD started an era of close cooperation. Again this was initiated by Stalin himself. Historian George Stanford explains:
It emerged after [the Soviet-Nazi pact] as part of their growing cooperation to destroy Poland. Stalin had already provided Hitler with a sweetener by returning some hundred German communists who had sought refuge in the USSR to the tender mercies of Nazi concentration camps. Their handing over at Brest-Litovsk provided early practice for the NKVD and Gestapo to work out the technique of prisoner exchanges.
As soon as Soviet occupation of Poland with Nazi cooperation began in September 1939 14,500 Polish officers and policemen were taken prisoners by the Red Army and they continued to languish in three special NKVD run prisoner-of-war camps at three separate places. By mid-March 1940 all their contacts with outside world ceased and they disappeared without a trace. Another 7,300 Polish prisoners held in NKVD jails in the western regions of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic also similarly disappeared without a trace. Soon the notorious Beria – Stalin’s killer hand, sent a detailed report to Stalin to segregate the Polish PoWs according to occupation zone and 33000 Polish prisoners were subject to exchange with the Germans.
On 5-March-1940 Beria sent a top secret memorandum to Stalin. There had been a problem. In prisoner-of-war camps there were a great number of Polish prisoners who were “accursed enemies of Soviet power, filled with hate for the Soviet order.” So he suggested a solution in the memorandum:
The cases of the 14,700 former Polish officers, civil servants, landlords, policemen, intelligence officers, gendarmes and prison officers held in prisoner-of-war camps,….And also the cases of those arrested and held in camps in the western regions of the Ukraine and Belorussia numbering 11,000 people,… to examine them as a matter of urgency, with the application of the highest measure of punishment—shooting. To examine the cases without summoning those arrested and without presenting charges, stating the ending of the investigation and summing up…
It was not a private note that passed between Stalin and Beria. But from the declassified documents now, it is clear that within the next two days, by 5th March, Politburo of CPSU agreed to all proposals submitted by Beria. 25,700 prisoners of war would be tried in the absence of the accused themselves and would be executed by shooting as agreed before the trials. Author Prof. Richard Sakwa notes:
From notes on the first page of the report we know that Stalin, Molotov, Voroshilov and Mikoyan were directly involved in the decision, and from marginal notes that Kalinin and Kaganovich agreed to the action.
It was an execution that would have pleased Engels.
Fortunately for Stalin, the massacre and mass graves were first discovered by Nazis. So it was conveniently dismissed as propaganda by Soviets and Communists for decades. Other allied powers also did not want to take up issues with Stalin as they were fighting the common enemy Hitler. But despite propaganda and denial, it was a well known secret among the Marxist power circles in Moscow. Yet they consistently denied Soviet authorship of this genocidal crime. It was only on April 13 1990, that Gorbachev admitted that Soviet NKVD was responsible for this mass murder which today goes by the name Katyn massacre. Even then he wanted to protect Communist Party of Soviet Union that he did not take the responsibility of Soviet government having ordered the murders of thousands of unarmed prisoners of war in cold blood. And the killing was a calculated genocidal step. Author Wesley Adamczyk points out, “…the Polish people “had lost about half of their homeland’s intellectual and military leadership”
It was only on 14 October 1992, half a century after the Marxist crime against humanity was perpetrated, that the original Russian documents about Katyn massacre were handed over to Walesa by Rudolf Pikhoya as the senior archivist of Russia under orders from Yelstein.
It was a Marxist crime against humanity – a direct line connects the massacre of unarmed Polish prisoners of war by Soviets with the ideas put forth by Marx and Engels just as how the racism of Nazis connect with the victims of Auschwitz.
Theology of Hatred continues
Even today the embedded racism of Marxist theology continues to haunt humanity. In the third world countries, Marxism creates in its adherents, self-negation and derisional depreciation of their native cultural traditons. Then they develop a chauvnism of westernized modernity around the rootless native identity usually in confrontation with other neighbouring cultural identities which they label as inferior. Thus Communist Party of China as early as in 1927 passed an official resolution that China was not an Asiatic society. This emotional uprootment from the spiritual and cultural matrix of China with decades of indoctrination in Marxism, paved way for ruthless destruction of all Buddhist monuments and treatises by Mao and his forces during the so-called cultural revolution.
Of course CPC does not officially and explicitly uphold Han nationalism. However the official policy is achieving a ‘final stage of integration’ where the nationalities should overcome their mutual alienation. Tim Oakes points out how this process effectively promotes Han superiority:
What would bring about this crystallization of the ‘collective body of the Chinese people’, the zhonghua minzu, was socialist modernization and cultural development, and in these the Han were the clear leaders.
In a totalitarian state where such racio-cultural supremacy gets a theoretical justification, devaluing of the humanity of others is blatant. In 1957, Zhou Enlai proclaimed:
Without mutual assistance, especially assistance from the Han people, the minority peoples will find it difficult to make significant progress on their own.
Educationists MacPherson and Beckett point out that such perceptions actively propagated by Marxist state, make ordinary Han Chinese think of Tibetians as a burden. This reflects exactly the sentiments expressed by Marx towards ‘Croats, Pandurs, Czechs and similar scum’, who he found deserving ‘annihilation’ for being thankless against the ‘civilizing mission’ of Germany. MacPherson & Beckett point out Han racism and Marxism reinforce each other:
This ethnic arrogance (Han chauvinism) is reinforced in the Marxist theory of progress by legitimating the subjugation of minorities to Han dominance in the name of “progress”.
The destruction of monasteries in Tibet, devaluing of Tibetian culture and religion, ethnic cleansing of Tibetians and creation of Han settlements by Chinese State as alleged by Tibetians – all these are accepted methodologies in Marxist creed. In conclusion, Marxism is as dangerous and evil as Nazism if not more, for Nazism is visibly evil, Marxism camouflages its evil with the promise of an Utopia but sledom does one know that the Utopia Marxism promises necessitates countless humans massacred on its way up and in the end when the doors of Utopia shut behind the pilgrim-revolutionary he finds himself not in a socialist heaven but deep inside the womb of a totalitarian hell. 
(References in the next page)
Share This Post
Recent Posts in Longform