O que é este blog?

Este blog trata basicamente de ideias, se possível inteligentes, para pessoas inteligentes. Ele também se ocupa de ideias aplicadas à política, em especial à política econômica. Ele constitui uma tentativa de manter um pensamento crítico e independente sobre livros, sobre questões culturais em geral, focando numa discussão bem informada sobre temas de relações internacionais e de política externa do Brasil. Para meus livros e ensaios ver o website: www.pralmeida.org. Para a maior parte de meus textos, ver minha página na plataforma Academia.edu, link: https://itamaraty.academia.edu/PauloRobertodeAlmeida.

Mostrando postagens com marcador Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko. Mostrar todas as postagens

terça-feira, 16 de julho de 2013

A frase da semana: gangsterismo no poder - Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko

"O stalinismo foi o gangsterismo no poder."

Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko (1981)


Pois é, mas não só ele, nem tampouco só com essa denominação, nem apenas naqueles tempos sombrios. O gangsterismo político tem muitas outras formas, vem representado por vários outros personagens, em muito mais lugares do que supõe a nossa vã historiografia. Aposto como cada um de nós pode citar pelo menos um gangster político, até insuspeito de sê-lo.
Aliás, a frase não é só da semana, nem do mês, muito menos se limita ao ano...
Questão de letras, e de tempo verbal...

domingo, 14 de julho de 2013

Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko: obituario por Anne Applebaum (WP)

Recomendo a leitura do livro desta historiadora sobre o Gulag, já traduzido e publicado no Brasil, para os que ainda se pretendem simpáticos ao socialismo soviético.
Segundo esse extraordinário autor, o stalinismo foi "gangsterism enthroned." Nada mais correto.
Conhecemos um pouco do gangasterismo no poder, também por aqui...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko, historian and survivor of Stalin’s gulag, dies at 93

By 

The Washington Post, July 13, 2013

Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko, a Soviet historian and dissident who survived the gulag under Stalin and in later decades brought new attention to the scope of the regime’s barbarism, died July 9 in Moscow. He was 93.
The cause was a stroke, said Russian scholar Stephen F. Cohen, who played a crucial role in the English-language publication in 1981 of Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko’s best-known work, “The Time of Stalin: Portrait of a Tyranny.”
“Anton was one of a handful of Soviets who were able and brave enough and resourceful enough to break the silence about the real history of the Soviet Union, which was completely falsified under Stalin,” said Cohen, a professor emeritus at New York University and Princeton University. “He told the truth as he knew it, the uncensored truth of the Stalin era.”
Anton Vladimirovich Antonov-Ovseyenko led a life that might be said to mirror the fate of his country.
He was born in Moscow on Feb. 23, 1920, just after the Russian revolution, into a prominent Bolshevik family. His father, Vladimir Antonov-Ovseyenko, was a military commander who in 1917 led the revolutionary assault on the Winter Palace in St. Petersburg and, together with Leon Trotsky, helped create the Red Army.
A founding member of the Soviet state, Vladimir Antonov-Ovseyenko later served as adviser and arms supplier to the anti-fascists during the Spanish Civil War.
In the 1930s, the Antonov-Ovseyenko family fell victim to Stalin’s purge of the Soviet Communist Party and in particular to his persecution of “Old Bolsheviks” — who might challenge his claim to power — and their relatives.
Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko was 16 when his mother committed suicide in prison and 18 when his father was executed.
In 1940, when he was 20 years old, Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko was himself arrested after he refused to denounce his father as an “enemy of the people.” He spent most of the subsequent 13 years imprisoned in Soviet jails and concentration camps, including Butyrka, one of the most notorious Moscow prisons, and Vorkuta, a mining camp above the Arctic Circle, where he suffered from illnesses caused by malnutrition.
In a 2011 interview with the Public Radio International program “The World,” Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko said criminal gangs were common in the gulag, but they treated him better than other prisoners because of his ability to recite stories and poems.
“And I was expected to do this after a while,” he said. “So I always enjoyed this special status. But of course thieves are thieves. They can still steal from you even if they like your stories.”
After Stalin’s death in 1953, Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko was released. He sought obscurity and settled in what was then the Soviet republic of Georgia. But despite poor vision — his eyes were ruined in the labor camps, and he needed special assistance to read and write — he began to chronicle the fate of his father’s generation, and of his own.
Thanks to family and friends who had old Communist Party connections, he eventually gained access to documents and records that were not at that time available to historians, let alone to the general public.
His father’s status as an “Old Bolshevik” gave him access to people and witnesses who would not have trusted others. Among other things, he had access to material produced by Stalin’s successor, Nikita Khrushchev, who conducted a secret inquiry into Stalin’s life and reign in 1954.
Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko’s first book, published under a pseudonym during the short-lived political “thaw” after Stalin’s death, was a sympathetic biography of his father. But his best-remembered work, “The Time of Stalin,” written in the 1960s and ’70s, was never officially published in the Soviet Union.
Instead, it was smuggled out of Moscow by Cohen, whose biography of Nikolai Bukharin, a founding father of the Soviet state, won him trust among an inner circle of anti-Stalin, post-gulag intellectuals that included Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko.
In an interview, Cohen recalled first meeting him: “He was like something out of Dostoyevsky — half-blind, wiry, lean and embattled. He challenged me to chin-ups equal to my age. I did 1, and he did 82.”
Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko’s book about Stalin first appeared in Russian in 1980 and then in English. Writing in the New York Times, journalist Harrison E. Salisbury called it “an extraordinary endeavor” and “a milestone toward the understanding of three-quarters of a century of Russian trauma.”
“The Time of Stalin” is best described as a biography of Stalin combined with an extended polemic against Stalinism, a political system Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko defined as “an entire historical epoch during which the vilest and bloodiest kind of evildoing flourished upon this earth. It was gangsterism enthroned.”
The book was one of the first to number the victims of Stalin in the millions, rather than the hundreds or thousands, and it contained many insiders’ stories of life inside Stalin’s Kremlin.
Not every detail of the book has held up to archival research, and the book is very much a product of its era. It shies away from criticizing Vladimir Lenin, for example, who launched the first reign of terror in the Soviet Union.
The book was remarkable — and remarkably brave — for its time, because the author criticized not only Stalin, who was dead, but also his “apologists,” who were very much alive. “I have striven for truthfulness,” he wrote, “there are no fabrications in this book. What would be the need? The truth is horrendous enough.”
The book made Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko into a political dissident. Upon hearing of its publication, Soviet authorities ordered a day-long search of his Moscow apartment, and he was kept well away from mainstream historians. Russian versions of the book were subsequently smuggled back into the Soviet Union, where they found an avid clandestine readership.
Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko’s bravery and dedication to truth-telling made him a singular figure during the Soviet era. In his later years, his obstinacy shaded into fanaticism. He quarreled with other historians and fell out with other groups of survivors and activists who also were trying to chronicle the history of Stalinism. Foreign royalties from sales of his book abroad made him relatively well-off, however, which enabled him to function independently.
Survivors include his wife, Yelena Solovarova, and a son, Anton.
In 2001, he founded, almost entirely on his own, the State Museum of the History of the Gulag in Moscow. The project, which opened in 2004, once featured a replica of a barrack from the gulag, kept purposefully chilly, and near it was an interrogators’ room.
The museum received mixed reviews from other survivors and scholars in the former Soviet Union. The museum is poorly funded, not least because Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko did not cooperate with others in its construction.
Mr. Antonov-Ovseyenko remained committed to the remembrance of Stalin’s crimes until the end of his life. At the age of 87, he attended a ceremony at Bukovo, a vast killing field outside Moscow where his father was murdered along with more than 20,000 other people. In 2010 he told a Radio Liberty interviewer that Russia should have removed the Lenin mausoleum as well as Stalin’s tomb from Red Square long ago.
These were “monuments to a great betrayal,” he said, and should be destroyed.

Applebaum is a columnist and historian whose 2003 book, “Gulag: A History,” won the Pulitzer Prize for nonfiction.

Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko (1920-2013): o homem que falou a verdade sobre Stalin

Russia Mourns Stalin Scholar, Gulag Museum Founder

Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko

MOSCOW, July 11 (RIA Novosti) – His father was executed on Josef Stalin’s orders, his mother committed suicide in jail, and he survived 13 years in the Gulag – to become one of the most outspoken critics of Stalinism.
Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko wrote several seminal books denouncing the Soviet tyrant, his henchmen and the political system that devastated Russia and doomed millions to exile, disgrace, prison or death. Even blindness, exacerbated by merciless prison conditions, did not stop him from writing and running the Moscow branch of the Union of Victims of Political Purges.
Yet Antonov-Ovseyenko was best known as the founder and president of the Gulag History Museum in Moscow, where a modest memorial service was due to be held Thursday, two days after his death.
He died Tuesday at the age of 93 – having outlived the Communist system his father helped create and witnessed the sweeping and chaotic changes in post-Soviet Russia. But his twilight years coincided with attempts to whitewash Stalin's legacy and political system that Antonov-Ovseyenko described and denounced in his books.
“The sad thing is that now there is a new wave of reviving the cult of Stalin, of worshipping him,” he told Radio Liberty in 2005. “There is a new Stalinization.”
In February, almost half of all Russians said that Stalin played a “very positive” or “quite positive” role in the nation’s history, according to a poll by the independent Levada Center. Scholars, politicians and bloggers have debated recent history textbooks and Stalin biographies that either denounce his atrocities or praise him as an “effective manager” who helped crush the Nazis and turned Soviet Russia into an industrial superpower with a nuclear arsenal.
In 2008, Stalin was ranked third in an online vote organized by a Russian television channel for a show on the greatest Russians in history – and a poetic line from the 1940s Soviet anthem mentioning Stalin was recently restored to a metro station in central Moscow.
Antonov-Ovseyenko described Stalin as a common criminal – a claim he said his own experiences as a Gulag prisoner, historian and son of a Communist leader meant he was entirely qualified to make.
He was born in 1920, the son of Vladimir Antonov-Ovseyenko, a revolutionary who organized some of the key events of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. The Red Army commander fiercely objected to the rise of Stalin within the Communist Party ranks and sided with Stalin’s archenemy, Leon Trotsky.
When Anton was nine years old, his mother was arrested and sentenced to jail. The year was 1929 – the year of Trotsky’s deportation from the Soviet Union. She committed suicide seven years later. Her husband publicly rejected his Trotskyist affiliations and served as a justice minister and a consul to Spain.
However, he was executed in 1938, after being arrested at the peak of the Great Purge of 1936-1939 that decimated the Communist ranks, resulting in at least 700,000 death sentences – about 1,000 executions a day – according to declassified KGB archives. Millions more were exiled and jailed.
Antonov-Ovseyenko, who studied history and began working at art museums, was branded the son of an “enemy of the people” and was arrested and sentenced to imprisonment three times. He spent 13 years in five Gulag camps, and was eventually released in 1953, shortly after Stalin’s death.
While working unremarkable day jobs, Antonov-Ovseyenko gradually collected data and interviews with purged Communists in order to write “The Time of Stalin: Portrait of Tyranny,” a book that was published in the West in 1981 and nearly got him jailed again back home. In 1984, he came under pressure yet again for “anti-Soviet propaganda.”
Despite almost completely having lost his eyesight, Antonov-Ovseyenko penned several more books that cemented his reputation as a leading expert on Stalinism.
In 2001, Antonov-Ovseyenko founded the Gulag History Museum in central Moscow, which features models of prison cells and a watchtower, as well as a gallery of art depicting prison life and personal items of former convicts. It also holds exhibitions, seminars and theater performances on topics ranging from mass deportations of entire ethnic groups to the persecution of the Russian Orthodox clergy under Communists.
In one of his last interviews, he deplored the decades of Stalinist “degeneracy” that will hinder Russia’s development for years to come.

Stalin, o maior criminoso da historia - Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko

Resenhas, no site da Amazon, sobre o livro mais importante desse escritor-historiador, ele mesmo, e seus pais, entre as incontáveis vítimas do mais nefando sistema de escravidão criminosa jamais existente na história da humanidade. Possivelmente, Hitler foi um assassino ainda mais abjeto, mas ele teve pouco tempo para eliminar suas vítimas, não desprezando o inacreditável crime de tentar eliminar todo um povo apenas em função de seu odioso racismo antisemita. Finalmente, quem matou mais gente, foi Mao Tsé-tung, mas seu inspirador era justamente Stalin, que fez primeiro, e de forma mais ampla.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida


The Time of Stalin: Portrait of a Tyranny 

Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko 
  • Hardcover: 374 pages
  • Publisher: Harper & Row; 1st edition (1981)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0060101482
  • ISBN-13: 978-0060101480

This book was written by a man who suffered unspeakable crimes under Stalin's reign of Communist terror. His insights and often ironic humor are insightful and very interesting. A must-read for those interested in Russian history and the history of Communism and how it affected (and still affects) those in its grip.
--------
Incredibly passionate and insightful from a man who was personally touched by the action of Stalin. Oftentimes, almost sarcastic, the stories are very disturbing and told as if Antonov-Ovseyenko was a fly on the wall. A very different perspective from other Stalin texts.
-----------
"Who is Rehabilitated?" April 28, 2011
Format:Hardcover

To a person who is, like myself, young enough to have forgotten the Soviet Union, `Stalin' is too often a mere curse word, some bad but otherwise shapeless thing used mostly for ominous-sounding references. But to such a person, what could be the value of understanding the reality of the Stalinshchina?

For Anton Antonov-Ovseyenko, the need is clear. The epilogue, which is in my opinion the most valuable part of the book, pulses with disgust at the treatment of Stalin's victims, officially `rehabilitated' or otherwise, and the continued grip of Stalinism on the Soviet government. Antonov-Ovseyenko writes for the Union that still existed at the time of publication, the need for full acknowledgment of what happened under Stalin. But even after the collapse of the Soviet Union, this need is still relevant. The massacre at Katyn is a canonical example: though the Russian government recently admitted Soviet responsibility, there is still a significant Stalinist contingent in political and popular Russia - one which continues to claim that the Germans did it. To many, despite the crushing reality of mishandling and sabotage of the war effort, Stalin remains the Great Hero of the Great Patriotic War. To many, even now, Stalin can do no wrong.

But to Antonov-Ovseyenko, the Gensek - this and `Politburo' are perfect examples of pre-Orwellian Newspeak - did everything wrong. In a recent speech on the Axis of Evil, Christopher Hitchens claimed that Saddam added the element of the crime boss and mafioso to the totalitarianisms of Stalin and Hitler. But actually the element of thug and criminal is almost the definition of Stalinism. From his earliest revolutionary activity, the Gensek reeked of the underworld, e.g. the illegal `expropriations', and might well have been an agent provocateur serving the Tsarist Okhrana, though this latter suspicion is still contentious. The remaining contentions, the personal orchestrations of the purges of the Old Bolsheviks, the forced famine in the Ukraine, the various deportations, ethnic cleansings, the creation of a Gulag-based economy, and the countless betrayals, are not.

The references to Antonov-Ovseyenko's time in the Gulag are limited; the account focuses overwhelmingly on Stalin's misdeeds and accomplices, and how those accomplices and misdeeds are relevant to the time of writing. The account also contains some novel revelations. As Professor Stephen F. Cohen notes in his introduction, Antonov-Ovseyenko's status as the son of an old Bolshevik - his father is Vladimir Antonov-Ovseyenko, leader of the Bolshevik charge on the Winter Palace in 1917 - gained him access to sources unavailable to other dissident writers, such as Solzhenitsyn. And like Solzhenitsyn, Antonov-Ovseyenko does not write a dispassionate, detached account. He is a bitter survivor, angry with the continued defamation of his father and other victims. And though the book consequently drips with sarcasm at times, it never devolves into ranting. It chronicles hundreds of tragedies, some famous like the assassination of Kirov, others not.

But was Stalin just excessively zealous in his dedication? One of Stalin's many titles, the "Great Master of Daring Revolutionary Decisions and Abrupt Turns", was well-earned. The Russo-German Pact and the subsequent destruction of anti-facists movements is a perfect example. No, he was not ruthlessly dedicated to principles: he discarded them as needed. Rather, he was wholly unprincipled. Such `abrupt turns' would lead Orwell to comment on the instability required of Stalinist mind.


The Time of Stalin is an excellent read for those who really want to understand what Stalin and his subordinates actually did. It is for those who are concerned with understanding totalitarianism.