Hey guys, I have 2 questions about 2 talking points used by liberals.
1: SOVIET COTTON INDUSTRY IN CENTRAL ASIA AND IT’S IMPACTS I’ve heard many people claim that Soviets established these cotton industries to deliberately damage Central Asian states and prevent it from developing(this comes from [Pakistani] Muslim friends[am Muslim and Pakistani myself] who also make the claim that Soviets were totally anti-Islam and oppressed Muslims of Caucasus and Central Asia). How do I counter this claim (all 3 of these claims)
2: FIDEL CASTRO URGING CUBANS TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY IN HIS FINAL DAYS I’ve heard this claim too that the economic condition of Cuba worsened so much that Castro removed his army from the borders and told people to Run to USA and many people desperately “swam” to USA How do I counter this point? (due to exams, didn’t had the time to read basically any book about Castro, hence why asking this question)
Thanks
The Fidel thing never happened. If you’re referring to the thing that happened during the special period, he said something more along the lines of “if you want to go, go”, meaning they won’t be stopped. Around 40000 people left, which is not that relevant in a country that had 10.8 million people living in it at that time. That is like 0.3%. And of course saying they “swam” makes it sound even worse, of course no one actually swam to Miami.
Thanks. And what about that USSR stuff?
Before the Soviet period Central Asia was practically completely undeveloped. The Soviets invested huge efforts and resources into developing the poorest and most peripheral Republics, and often did so at a loss.
Central Asia had very little modern agriculture before the Soviets built a massive irrigation system. It is easy to criticize in hindsight because of its environmental impacts, but development always comes with a cost. Afterward it could sustain a large scale agricultural sector which allowed it to finance other development such as infrastructure. Were they supposed to remain in permanent under-developement? What would have been the main driver of development for these regions if not agriculture?
Before the Soviet Period most of the region still lived semi-nomadically, with only a handful of historic cities (Tashkent, Bukhara, Samarkand, Khiva, Kokand) along the Silk Road, but these had seen very little development in the modern era (like most of the Asian side of the Russian empire) The Soviets introduced modern infrastructure, education, literacy, housing, healthcare, etc. Even some industry.
Decisions about the economic direction of the Republics were also not necessarily made all in Moscow. The local leadership of the Republics themselves had a lot of say. People like to forget that each Soviet Republic (except for Russia) had its own communist party.
And no, the Soviets were not at all anti-Muslim, just like China isn’t anti-Muslim. The state was simply officially atheist. It is not oppression to suppress reactionary clericalism. This channel has several videos on topics relating to Muslims and Islam in the Soviet Union:
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
I don’t know enough about it, but even a simple google search shows that the USSR rapidly industrialized the region (as expected). Still, I just don’t know enough to talk about the specifics. Regarding religion, contrary to popular belief, personal religion was not an issue in the USSR. The issue was about the religious organizations and leaders mixing with state and local politics, as they have everywhere deeply and especially in Russia. If anything, Islam was more priviliged in the USSR compared to the Orthodox church, and definitely more than anywhere else in the west at the time. I’m sure some other comrades that are more familiar with the subject can provide a much better answer than this though.
