Nazi-symbol ?


In the last part of the movie thereĀ“s a person shooting with a softair-gun on targets. One of the targets is a painted man with a hat that carries a nazi-cross. I thought it was a bit strange that the russians in this movie already disliked/hated the german nazi-party many years before they even came to power (1933). I thought USSR was at the same side as the nazis in the beginning of the war (1939).

reply

As you can see, the swastika, aka what you've calling the "nazi cross," pre-dates the Nazis by at leat 2000 years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_cross

It's has for a very long time been a symbol of dynamism, life force, luck and energy. That is, positive ideals. The Nazis simply appropriated the symbol and applied nationalist meaning around it. (See also 'triskelion').

reply

As you can see, the swastika, aka what you've calling the "nazi cross," pre-dates the Nazis by at leat 2000 years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_cross

That is true, but the target featured a visage of Adolf Hitler, and when shot it popped open a sign saying (in Russian) "Father of Fascism".

reply

Ok there you are then, I guess - it was a swipe at Hitler.

To 9-1's earlier point: Russia and Germany signed a "non aggression pact" in 1939, dividing countries up between them and agreeing -- at least on paper -- not to go to war with each other. However, they were far from real allies, and it was clear Hitler wanted Russia, and Stalin knew it. Hitler not only didn't respect the Russian "races" but also loathed communism. The pact was a political game of Hitler's. In fact Russia's massive strategic lands and natural resources were irresistible to Germany, a country that needed to import virtually everything required - from steel and fuel to food -- to carry on the war of the magnitude Hitler envisioned. Japan, for very similar reasons (lack of enough resources), wanted China, among other countries.

I'm no historian but that's my understanding.

reply

The threat that the Nazis posed to the Russia was a ideological rather than physical; fascism is indeed the political polar opposite to communism. Even in the early stages of Stalin's leadership, way before there was any hint that Russia could be involved with another war, the "threat" of non-communist states was emphasised. The shooting range with the swastika was a tool used by Russian authorities to indoctrinate the people of Russia, to emphasise that the Nazis were a threat.

reply

My earlier error was a chronological one. What you say makes sense to me.
Still, one would have to admit that it went far beyond ideology by the time it was over!

reply

Correction: the sign saying "Father of Fascism" is in Ukrainian, as is much of the text (around 2/3 of the film is shot in Kiev and Odessa, during the Ukrainianization campaign; and the film was produced by the Ukrainian film studio VUFKU). Tsivian, or whoever subtitled this release, knew Ukrainian (the titles are all correct); earlier scholars didn't (e.g., Vlada Petric's fine book Constructivism in Film translates the sign as "Death to Fascism").

reply

No way that was the visage of Adolf Hitler. It is highly unlikely that in 1928/1929 when the film was made Adolf Hitler would have been known in Russia/Ukraine. By that time his party had a marginal 2.63% of the votes in Germany. His rise to power would gather steam only in 1929/1930 (18.3% in 1930):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_rise_to_power

reply

That's easily explained. Adolf Hitler was already the leader of the Nazi party and as we all know Nazism is more or less the same as Fascism. If there's one thing Communists hate it's Fascism. And as everybody knows Sovjet was a Communist state.

Somebody here has been drinking and I'm sad to say it ain't me - Allan Francis Doyle

reply

"Communist state" is a contradiction in terms.

reply

Why?

reply

one of the premises of Communism is the abolition of the state. USSR was actually ruled by the Communist Party, not by a state as we understand it.

reply

Communist party only builds communist society. It doesn't create communism automatically with its coming to power.

reply

Stalins version of "communism" wasn't too far from fascism (in its usual meaning).

Stalin persecuted and actively russianized ethnic minorities (many ethnic groups were moved to Siberia, worked to death and or scattered around USSR effectively destroying them.), he promoted nationalistic ethos (great patriotic war, historical hero figures of Russia), he militarized the nation, he started offensive territorial wars (he basically split eastern Europe with Nazi Germany: invaded Poland, Baltic states and Finland) and so forth.

He had more similarities to other fascist dictators than differences. :)

PS: I love the film. It's very well made propaganda. It doesn't lie, but instead among other things it tells a selective truth about good aspects of life in cities of early USSR. Director clearly promotes effects of introduction of 5-year plans by Stalin (1928), which focused on industrialization and he also uses much film for displaying health, joy and fitness of Soviet worker (very similar to some of Riefenstahl's work for Nazis).

reply

Stalinism, fascism and its derivatives are versions of liberalism, hence the tendency to lump Stalin and Hitler together - add the west European and transatlantic colonial empires to the analysis and you'll see what I mean.

Marlon, Claudia and Dimby the cats 1989-2005, 2007 and 2010.

reply

One cannot consider Stalin's regime as being true communism. It was a sort of absolutism as we could see in the tzar's times, pre-revolutionary France or, more recently in Saddam's Iraq or Kim Family's North Korea.
That is why the Communist Party created the "de-Stalinization" program after he was gone.

reply

When you break it down to it's base, you've got National Socialists on the German side and Marxist Socialists on the Soviet/Russian side.

reply

Stalin persecuted and actively russianized ethnic minorities

It was the opposite. Communists created all these minority republics and started developing their underdeveloped languages like Ukrainian, Belorussian (including the ones within Russia) and instilling them on Russians. Minority languages were supported and Russian was used in USSR as interethnic language as English is used today in internets. Do not forget that Stalin himself was "ethnic minority" and Russian for him was second language.

reply

I thought USSR was at the same side as the nazis in the beginning of the war (1939).
Then you need to stop watching the Western media. They were never, ever "on the same side". They had already fought a proxy war against each other in Spain by that time, with the Soviets backing the republic and the Germans backing the fascists. And the Soviets had already, for years, been trying to organize an anti-fascist alliance with Britain and France against Germany by that time. Britain and France refused, and the Soviets couldn't go to war against Germany alone. At one point Stalin offered to send a million troops through Poland against Germany while Britain and France invaded from the West. They refused. Because Britain and France, as capitalist and imperialist powers, opposed Soviet socialism because it threatened their class interests and saw Nazi Germany as a bulwark against the USSR. They only finally went to war with Germany when it became clear Hitler wasn't only going to threaten the Soviets but was going to threaten their own interests as well, that Germany was going to be an independent power. Because of British and French refusal to build an anti-fascist alliance with the USSR, the USSR signed a nonaggression pact with Germany to buy time to build up its own defenses. This is NOT an alliance. It is a nonaggression pact, and the Soviets signed it because they knew they couldn't face Germany alone, at least not without paying a tremendous and unacceptable price. Even after the next two years of military and industrial buildup, the USSR, though it won the war almost without any help (Lend-Lease was a negligible factor and the second front wasn't opened until well after the Soviets had already beaten the Germans in Stalingrad and Kursk) ended up losing 27 million of its people when Germany did invade.
I thought it was a bit strange that the russians in this movie already disliked/hated the german nazi-party many years before they even came to power (1933)
They hated it because communists oppose fascism and fascists oppose communism because of their contradicting class interests. Socialism is a revolutionary system that seeks the overthrow of capitalism and private property and its replacement with working class rule. Fascism is a reactionary system that seeks to defend the bourgeoisie and save capitalism from revolution and violently crush anyone who threatens the interests of the capitalist class. The two forces are diametrical opposites and have opposed each other from day 1. Continuing to do so today in Ukraine where neo-Nazis have taken power in Kiev and communists are playing leading roles in the anti-fascist resistance in the eastern part of the country.

"The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor."
- Voltaire

reply