Some Thoughts on Destruction
Today, when we think of the phrase, destroying someone’s life, it is easy to equate this to the countless cases in the media of individuals being the victims of online bullying. Social media has allowed our opinions, pictures, comments and acquaintances to become topics of those that may have different opinions or look different to being the victims of nonstop abuse by an online community that may largely be unknown to them. These cases are frequently brought in the media when those receiving the bullying take the extreme measure of inflicting self-harm or committing suicide. Deplorable as this may be, there still exists an opportunity to withdraw from social media and avoid reading or seeing the messages of hate directed towards oneself. It just may be a symptom of modern life that the thought of going without a connected device is too much for some people to think about.
The terms destroy and destruction differ in that the former is a verb and describes an act that could lead to the destruction of something. However, destruction would indicate something that is beyond repair and in total ruin. To link this to the online bullying scenario above, it could be said that bullies set out to destroy a person’s reputation. It is somewhat difficult to apply destruction in this sense. But what about those that through state sanctioned behaviour have seen the destruction of individuals, friends and families? They’re many examples of this, from the Nazi’s attempt to bring about the destruction of the Jewish race in Europe, the Armenian massacres and countless other atrocities carried out against members of certain groups. It is from one such group that I want to focus on that highlights the destruction of so many in what, in hindsight, was a mass hysteria brought on by suspicion.
The Great Terror in Russia resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Soviet citizens. Husbands, wives, children over the age of 15, nannies, parents and friends were all viewed as possible counterrevolutionaries that were working to bring down the Communist rule, and in particular Stalin. The Terror was seen as a time of scapegoats where false confessions and alliances were used to assign suspicion on citizens. Through the use of troikas, the process of being found guilty and sentenced to death or jail were sped up to handle the vast quantity of those being persecuted. The Soviet Union at this time was one undergoing rapid modernization and under the communist philosophy, producing a new class of elites. This also included movies, theater, art and writing that were about praising the leaders and celebrating the struggle the people had gone through. It is too difficult to review all of those that suffered during this period, as many stories of their destruction are the same. It is the individuals that differ.
Take for example the story of Tania Miagkova. Miagkova is brought in to our consciousness through the work of Yuri Slezkine in his book, The House of Government. Through meticulous research of letters written by and to Miagkova while under arrest for being a Trotskyist, we get a sense of an undying faith in the state and the Communist Party and her husband, who was also arrested. Sent to prison when her daughter was only 8, she was released in to exile, rearrested and ultimately executed without ever seeing her daughter again. Miagkova’s are only two victims of the many thousands that suffered similar fates. Yet she still believed in the greater good of the Soviet nation. These were well read individuals that worked hard and filled their minds with the works of classic authors, both Russian and foreign. Slezkine makes a point of highlighting the bookishness of so many of the Communist Party elite. Yet their ultimate destruction occurs despite their hard work and view of the broader world. Ultimately, besides Stalin himself, it would be impossible for any individual to be viewed as the complete Stalinist. There are so many books and articles on the Great Terror and the effect it had on the Soviet citizens that it is easy to see the victims as one homogeneous group. Miagkova’s sentiments in her letters and her story may be similar or identical to others in the same situation but they are her words.
