Conversation corner
-
Neo-fascism in Europe
Date2007/03/10 20:47 by: Richard PondThe Estonian government wants to demolish anti-fascist war memorials and rebury Soviet soldiers who liberated the country. Is this acceptable? I don't think so. What is the Estonian Social Democrats' stance?
Meanwhile in Romania, where the pro-Nazi dictator Ion Antonescu was voted 6th greatest Romanian in a TV poll, the Court of Appeal in Bucharest has decided that it was "legitimate" for Antonescu to invade Pridnestrovie during the war. The Romanian regime's actions against Jews in Pridnestrovie was so barbaric that even German Nazi Party officials regarded them as cruel.
What is the EU doing, what is the PES doing, and what are the Romanian Social Democrats doing to stamp out pro-Nazi revisionist history and pro-Nazi courts in Romania? -
Re:Neo-fascism in Europe
Date2007/03/16 14:22 by: Paul MulvilleYeah, this sounds like dangerous ground to lose to fascism.
-
I approve of Estonia's anti-communism
Date2007/04/02 21:17 by: MarcelEstonia is right. Why should they honor the Soviet occupiers who deported and killed tens of thousands of their countrymen? To them the Soviet regime was just as bad as Hitler's criminal gang.
In every country it occupied (from Kazakhstan to Ukraine, from the Crimea to Estonia) the Soviet Union deliberately deported tens of thousands of people and replaced them with Russians in order to brutally stamp out nationalism and replace it with a Soviet identity (ie forced 'equality'). Millions were starved to death or worked to death in the gulags. The Soviet regime was a criminal enterprise rivalling Hitler's for cruelty.
Communism was all about forced equality, so people were not allowed to be different. Those refusing to become 'equal' were starved, shot, worked to death or simply deported.
This process later repeated itself in China. And in Cambodia. And to a lesser extent in Cuba (thousands shot, tens of thousands chased out or deported). -
Re:Neo-fascism in Europe
Date2007/04/19 13:45 by: Jörgen SiilDear Richard,
Firstly, I would like to make two corrections:
1. As also the Secretary General of Council of Europe Mr Terry Davis has already said: the Soviet Army was an occupying force in Estonia. It did not liberate Estonia in 1944. Consequently, the celebration of any kind of victory or liberation is a very controversial topic for Estonian people and the majority of Estonians regard the monument as a symbol of occupation.
Boisterous gatherings with the Soviet flags being raised are provoking counterblast, protests and can pose a public order problem.
2. There has never been talk to demolish the monument but rather to displace it to a graveyard together with the remains of the soldiers.
Estonian Social Democrats think that the situation needs a solution and that there should not be a war on monuments and overall this topic should not be considered as part neither the election campaign (which it was since we had elections on the 4th of March) nor any other campaign that promotes hostility, especially when there is a possibility of an escalation of the conflict among nations. Also we agree with the President of Estonia that we should not displace the monument but due to the fact that the monument has gained a separate meaning among Estonians and Russian rather to change the meaning of the site from the present "Soviet liberation" symbol to the symbol of the memory of the fallen and for reconciliation.
Best and hope that answers your question,
Jörgen Siil
Sec. Gen., Estonian Social Democratic Group in the EP/
International Secretary, Estonian Social Democratic Party
