Perspectives on the Great Purge

In the West there has always been a great association between the Soviet Union, particularly during Stalin's lifetime, and the use of state organs to perpetuate terror and violence escalating in the Great Purges of the 1930's. While much scholarly research has been invested into this complex time in history, there is also much confusion, exaggeration, and obfuscation of not only facts, but principle details which help explain the situation, or at least place it in its proper context.

Some of the most renowned works (in the West) regarding the purges of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union during the 1930's come from British Historian (and Fellow at the Hoover Institute at Stanford University) and former MI5 agent, Robert Conquest. Conquest's work has earned him fame as a Russian/Soviet historian and one of the leading authorities on Soviet 'crimes.' Though his work incorporates the use of many details and historical facts, there is definitely some obvious bias apparent in his writings that reflect his conservative stance (it should be noted here that the Hoover Institute is a conservative/libertarian think-tank). Likewise, other more objective accounts have been made by such historians like Montefiere. Montefiere's works, unlike Conquests, focus less on trying to portray Stalin as a devious tyrant and spends more time than any other author on examining the historical contexts in which the events took place, as well as on those closest to him (see Stalin: Court of the Red Tsar). Another historian who has written on the subject and gone into great details regarding those closest to Stalin is Donald Rayfield, whose book Stalin and His Hangmen discusses the relationship between Stalin and many of his closest associates and the Soviet secret police organs.

These works, as objective or subjective as they may be, fail to provide the essence of an internal perspective that only socialists can provide when examining and reviewing the events of the 1930's purges of the Soviet Union. This examination attempts less at achieving an abstract or objective account of what happened, and focuses more on attempting to find context within contemporary theory in Marxism-Leninism to account for the repression, imprisonment, and executions. Many Marxist-Leninists who support Josef Stalin have published works contesting the number of individuals who perished during this time, or to justify why they happened. Ludo Martens, noted historian and Chairman of the Workers Party of Belgium has authored several books and articles on the subject, including an all-out attempt to rehabilitate Stalin's name and legacy against the allegations of cruelty, repression, and totalitarianism. I highly recommend his works to anybody who is interested in gaining a Marxist-Leninist historical perspective on both the Soviet Union and Stalin.

As for the general population who lack the detailed analysis that most historians attempt to apply, many mistakes and mischaracterizations are made when trying to understand the Purges themselves, or there role in contemporary Soviet political culture. Some of the biggest mistakes include neglecting the importance of class-struggle as a fundamental element of socialism. Also, more practical differences that emerge due to differences in legal systems as well as tradition can account for a great many misunderstandings.

That class-struggle continues even under socialism is an understatement. In fact, the antagonisms of class-struggle are greatly intensified under socialism, as observed by Stalin well before Mao (who would later develop this theory even further including an internal "bourgeoisie" within the communist party itself). For more on this, please refer to my article regarding the "Aggravation of Class-Struggle Under Socialism," in which I provide a more in depth description of this theoretical principle.

Class struggle can manifest itself in many different forms. When the proletariat raises itself to assume political power, it develops the capacity to use the organs of the state to perpetuate class-warfare against its designated enemies (the bourgeoisie, political reactionaries, and those forces hostile to the revolution). In the Soviet Union, this developed into a vast series of organizations that developed into what would later on become the NKVD (later, after Stalin it became the infamous KGB). The sole purpose of the NKVD was defined in its predecessor organization, the Cheka, as the "sword and shield of the revolution." Within communist theory, the state is seen as a tool for class oppression. In socialism, where the state remains intact though transformed for the purposes of achieving the objectives of the proletariat, organs of state repression are necessary in ensuring the preservation of the new order and preventing or disabling anything that could pose a threat to the achievement of socialist objectives. The fundamental necessity to prevent the most damage incurred to society must turn itself onto the Party, where the potential for counter-revolution may be deeply seeded in hostile actors. This concludes with necessary purges of personnel within the state and party apparatus in the name of state security. This is not dissimilar to the purges that took place during the McCarthy era in the United States with the aim of removing communists or communist sympathizers from government, bureaucratic, or influential positions.

Another factor that's important in developing a perspective on the Great Purges is the distinctions that should be noted between traditional concepts of Soviet law versus contemporary Western traditions. Failure to make these distinctions often times reflect a vastly over-simplified generalization of not only the actual events and facts, but also an inappropriate comparison between two severely distinct systems.

There is no denying that many people were convicted and purged on circumstantial evidence or mere suspicion. However, all legal systems have their faults, including the Soviets. To best understand the Great Purge and the Trials, you have to know some history regarding Russian legal theory and application, as well as a thorough understanding of the Soviet legal system. The greatest influence on the Trials and Purges was not Stalin at all, but many other individuals who played a very significant role in the execution of the events. The legality behind the Purges and the Trials were not without their precedents, and the distinctions that many Western critics point out are often times resolved through a detailed understanding of Soviet/Russian legal studies.

The differences were not arbitrary, though many critics often claim so. That's why many legal scholars were able to assess and analyze the Soviet trials objectively because they had a sound understanding of legal technique and understood the disparities between European Civil Law, Soviet Civil Law (which had always confessed to using criminal law as a means of class-struggle), and British/American common law traditions. Some differences are of little or immaterial consequence, but others (if you don't take them into consideration) seem greatly odd if you are comparing Soviet legality simply to American common law.

Internal investigations into the Purges and the trials themselves from the perspective of Soviet legal theory implies that the whole thing was done according to the standardized procedures dictated by Soviet legal traditions, theory, and constitutional limitations.

Now, were the trials and purges necessary? Yes, I do believe so and even though there probably were some innocent people who lost everything (or their lives), during tumultuous times such as those in which the Soviets were facing, require extreme measures. Also, there has been evidence suggesting that there were plans of conspiracy between elements of the NKVD and the Red Army to overthrow Stalin, including the use of alleged charges that Stalin had been an informant for the Okhranka prior to the October Revolution. Though, this source comes from an ex-NKVD officer who defected to the US (Alexander Orlov). According to Orlov, Tukhachevsky had planned on using the information achieved from the Tsarist archives to attempt an overthrow of Stalin. Though I'm not sure how accurate this information is, considering Orlov was a traitor.

In conclusion there was an ideological and political necessity for the purges. Also, blaming them on Stalin is beyond simplifying a complex issue and is absolutely worthless.