What’s Wrong With Asking What’s Up With Russia?

Ilana Mercer

Franklin Delano Roosevelt is not the man to quote in support of the market economy. He was, after all, the president who gave America the assault on free-market capitalism known as the New Deal. He also capitulated to communism at Yalta, 70 years ago. There, in February of 1945, he and Winston Churchill met with Joseph Stalin, a genocidal butcher who dwarfed Adolf Hitler, to divvy up the world.

By the time the “Big Three” convened in the Crimean city, the region had long been subdued and decimated by the Bolsheviks. In November and December of 1920 alone, Crimea had been the site of a massacre of 50,000 souls. Kulaks, Cossacks, Ukrainians; priests, White Guards, socialists, nobles, Mensheviks and bourgeoisie: Entire groups had been branded as counterrevolutionaries-by-class, designated as sub-humans worthy of extermination. That is if the Reds’ revolutionary utopia was to come into being, which it did.

For simply being who they were or if caught talking out of turn, anyone in communist Russia could be made “a head shorter,” in Trotsky’s “delightful” turn-of-phrase.

Why, Roosevelt and Churchill had just missed the deportation, in 1944, of the Crimean Tartars. According to “The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression”—that “800-page compendium of the crimes of communist regimes worldwide”— “of the 228,392 people deported from the Crimea, 44,887 had died after four years.” Still, the Anglo-American leaders saw fit to sit down with Stalin to “map out the postwar world,” ceding Eastern Europe to “Uncle Joe,” FDR’s affectionate moniker for the communist mass murderer.

In fairness, Churchill does not deserve to be lumped with FDR as an appeaser and enabler of ultimate evil. Churchill was avowedly anti-communist. He detested Stalin. For this very reason, FDR considered Churchill a “reactionary … an old incorrigible imperialist, incapable of understanding [Stalin’s] ideological idealism.” Against the wishes of Winston Churchill did Roosevelt agree to “give Stalin what was not his to give,” noted historian Paul Johnson, in his “History of The American People.” Churchill went along with FDR because he was desperate for American financial support.

Like many pseudo-intellectuals of his time, explained Johnson, Franklin Roosevelt was “grotesquely Stalinist.” Against all evidence to the contrary, he regarded the Soviet Union as a “peace loving democracy, with an earnest desire to better the conditions of the working peoples of the world.” As to FDR’s advisers in Moscow: They considered Stalin a benevolent, genial democrat. Indeed, “this monster, who was responsible for the death of 30 million of his own people,” was regarded by the American administration as “exceedingly wise and gentle.”

One can well understand why the medieval blood ties that tethered some Ukrainians to the Russians would have been severed by the criminal communist regime, which targeted the Ukrainian breadbasket with a vengeance. The communists robbed the Ukrainian peasants of their fertile farms, forced them into slave labor by corralling them into state-owned, collective farms, and systematically starved them by requisitioning most of their grain. The peasants had been left with a fraction of the amount of grain required to sustain life.

Yet these heroic, individualistic farmers rose up against the Reds.

The slogans of the Ukrainian peasantry, in 1919, were “Ukraine for the Ukrainians, down with the Bolsheviks and the Jews (whom they associated with the Bolsheviks), free enterprise, free trade.” Besides the standard mass executions, in order to wipe out this class of people, Stalin devised a diabolical man-made famine which killed up to 10 million.

Fast forward to Kiev, circa 2013, where Ukrainians tore down the statue of the founding father of Bolshevism and a mass murderer in his own right. But that man, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, still reposes in a mausoleum in Moscow’s Red Square.

Why, pray tell?

President Roosevelt had his lucid moments. Or moment, rather.

According to Jonson, “When asked what single book he would put into the hands of a Russian communist, Roosevelt replied: ‘The Sears, Roebuck catalog.’” Sears, Roebuck was one of the great American companies which, through mass production and mass marketing, made available to America’s own Kulaks the luxuries that were previously enjoyed only by her rich.

Today, libertarians will often favor Russia in its dispute with Ukraine and the West. So where are those telltale signs of liberty we libertarians look for, when we voice support for this or the other side? And where, pray tell, are those “made in Russia” labels? Other than crude and commodities; Kalashnikovs (AK-47s) and Vodka —what does post-communist Russia peddle?


ILANA Mercer is a paleolibertarian writer, based in the United States. She pens WND’s longest-standing, exclusive paleolibertarian column, “Return to Reason.” She is a contributor to the preeminent libertarian site Economic Policy Journal and to Junge Freiheit, a German weekly of excellence. Ilana is a fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies, an award-winning, independent, non-profit, free-market economic policy think tank. Ilana’s latest book is “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons For America From Post-Apartheid South Africa.” Her website is www.IlanaMercer.com. She blogs at www.barelyablog.com.


  1. I would not say that Franklin Roosevelt was a “Stalinist” – he was too ignorant of classical Marxism to formally be a Stalinist. However, Franklin Roosevelt was certainly pro Stalin – and, generally, statist in his politics and dishonourable as a man. His effort to impose Fascism on the United States via the “National Industrial Recovery Act” (General Johnson’s jackbooted “Blue Eagle” thugs – of the National Recovery Agency) was struck down (9 to nil) by the Supreme Court in 1935 – Mr Roosevelt accepted the judgement (so he was NOT formally a Fascist dictator), but with exceptionally bad grace – it was a “horse and buggy” view of the Constitution to hold that government officials could not just make up regulations (on prices and what sort of goods and services should be sold) with the force of law.

    Mr Roosevelt also rejected Winston Churchill’s request that the Nazi extermination camps and death railways be bombed – as Paul Johnson (“A History of the Jews”) points out, Franklin Roosevelt even repeated the absurd National Socialist propaganda against the Jews (that they had controlled the professions and so on in 1933) as if it was true. To Jews he wanted to use (or get votes or other support from) Mr Roosevelt was lovely – but as soon their backs were turned…… He was a vile man – two faced.

    The fact that this vile person is treated as some sort of hero shows the deep corruption of the education system (and not just in the United States) and the media.

    • Teaching British “GCSE” history to British pupils, one learns fast that
      (1) FDR is “to be praised for ending he war”,
      (2) The British Empire is broken and Fnctuionally-lost,
      Haig confirms that he (is, from now on) fielding Britain’s Last Army”.

      Only (1) is accepted as an even brpoer Brake/hp, hp of a 1-ton vehivle acceleratign to
      1,000 m s~2-

Leave a Reply