TheGaggle
Politics • Culture • News
Our community is made up of those who value the freedom of speech, the right to debate and the promise of open, honest conversations.

We don't agree on everything but we never silence our followers and value every opinion on our channel.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
The Gaggle Book Club: "Soviet Judgment at Nuremberg" By Francine Hirsch

Each week, the Gaggle Book Club recommends a book for Gagglers to read and—most important—uploads a pdf version of it.

Our practice is that we do not vouch for the reliability or accuracy of any book we recommend. Still less, do we necessarily agree with a recommended book's central arguments. However, any book we recommend will be of undoubted interest and intellectual importance.

Today's book club selection is "Soviet Judgment at Nuremberg: A New History of the International Military Tribunal after World War II" by Francine Hirsch. A groundbreaking, deeply researched reassessment of the Soviet Union’s role in the International Military Tribunal (IMT), Hirsch's book fills a void in the standard Nuremberg narratives, according to which the Anglo-Americans ran the show from start to finish, with the Soviets only showing up occasionally to quibble about such embarrassing issues as the Katyn massacre.

Hirsch, to the contrary, argues that Soviet jurists were indispensable to establishing the IMT. The Soviet Union pushed for a legal reckoning for the Nazis via a formal international court. Among Allied leaders, some, such as Churchill, preferred to dispense with the possibly embarrassing process of holding trials, opting instead for summary executions for Nazi leaders.

The Soviet Union, by contrast, from early on urged the establishment of a formal legal process. Soviet legal legal thinkers such as Aron Trainin had developed the concept “crimes against peace” in the 1930s. While the Western powers contributed concepts such as "crimes against humanity," it was the Soviets who were instrumental in elevating "aggression" to a crime, which formed Count 1 of the indictment at Nuremberg.

According to Hirsch, Soviet prosecutors brought to Nuremberg a very different legal culture, shaped by, first, civil law traditions, and, second, Soviet Marxist-Leninist ideology. From the start, Soviet prosecutors sought to prove that the Nazi regime had been a criminal conspiracy from the start, that the Soviet Union had been the main victim of Nazi aggression, and that the war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated on Soviet soil were uniquely horrific.

None of the Allied Powers believed that the IMT was administering impartial justice. The war crimes trials were seen as an extension of the war itself, a mechanism to adjudicate the vanquished as uniquely evil, and the victors as uniquely virtuous. The Soviet prosecutors were a little less hypocritical than their Western counterparts in that they made no pretense of believing that the trials would be solely concerned with determining individual responsibility for crimes. The Soviet prosecutors at the outset sought to put the Nazi regime as a whole on trial. Curiously enough, decades later, the Western public still believes that at Nuremberg defendants were tried as individuals, and not as representatives of a reviled regime. This soothing notion exists even though the IMT declared the following organizations “criminal”: the Nazi Party leadership corps, the SS, the SD (Sicherheitsdienst) and the Gestapo.

Of course, mention of any of the war crimes perpetrated by any of the Allied powers was strictly prohibited. No Katyn, no carpet bombing of cities, no Hiroshima, no fire-bombing of Tokyo, no executions of POWs (at least by the Allied powers).

Francine Hirsch's "Soviet Judgment at Nuremberg" provides a useful corrective to the stories presented by Telford Taylor and John Tusa that presented the Western powers all moral and high-minded, and the Soviets as curmudgeonly bit-players.

Francine_Hirsch_-_Soviet_Judgment_at_Nuremberg__A_New_History_of_the_International_Military_Tribunal_after_World_War_II_(2020,_Oxford_University_Press)_-_libgen.lc.pdf
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
TG 1912: NATO Summit Passes Under The Radar

George Szamuely and Peter Lavelle discuss NATO's one-day summit, its terse declaration, its commitment to raise military expenditures and its insincere sycophancy toward U.S. President Trump.

00:29:49
TG 1911: Trump's 12-Day War: Winners & Losers

George Szamuely and Peter Lavelle discuss the 12-day war between Israel, Iran and the United States and wonder who won and who lost.

00:57:32
TG 1910: Laying The Groundwork For The Next Iran Attack

George Szamuely discusses the latest intelligence assessment that suggests that Iran's nuclear program was barely dented, and wonders whether it's the first step of a campaign to lay the groundwork for the next U.S.com/Israel attack on Iran.

00:42:15

Is America headed for Civil War? Can National Divorce stop the violence before it gets out of hand? Is there any way to restore federalism to the American system without resorting to these two options? How different might America look in Ten Years? All this and much more were discussed in-depth with a leading political figure from the Great Plains area of the United States.

placeholder

Tensions are skyrocketing in the Pacific Northwestern state of Washington in the USA. So much so that local leaders are throwing out proposals many would have thought far-fetched some time ago in a desperate bid to find some kind of off-ramp before things get out of control. How long before Washington state's days as a united political entity come to an end?

placeholder
June 27, 2025
January 21, 2023
More Leftie Than Thou
"Jacobin" Magazine Celebrates A Strike Against Ol' Blue Eyes

Here at "The Gaggle" we have very little time for the "more Leftie than thou" school of thought--that's the approach to life according to which the only thing that matters is whether you take the right position on every issue under the sun from Abortion to Zelensky. No one in the world meets the exacting standards of this school of thought; any Leftie leader anywhere is always selling out to the bankers and the capitalists. The perfect exemplar of this is the unreadable Jacobin magazine. 

The other day I came across this article from 2021. It's a celebration of trade union power. And not simply trade union power, but the use of trade union power to secure political goals. Of course (and this is always the case with the "more Leftie than thou" crowd), this glorious, never-to-be-forgotten moment on the history of organized labor took place many years ago--in the summer of 1974 to be exact. Yes, almost half a century has gone by since that thrilling moment when the working-class movement of Australia mobilized and prepared to seize the means of production, distribution and exchange. 

Well, not quite. Organized labor went into action against...Ol' Blue Eyes, the Chairman of the Board, the Voice; yes, Frank Sinatra. Why? What had Sinatra done? Sinatra was certainly very rich, and he owned a variety of properties and businesses. But if the Australian trade union movement were, understandably, searching for the bright, incandescent spark that would finally awaken the working class from its slumber there were surely richer, greedier, more dishonest, more decadent, above all more Australian individuals it could have discovered. Australia was never short of them. Rupert Murdoch immediately springs to mind. Why Sinatra?

 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals