The notion that Stalin caused the death of millions of people

I have no problem with the definition or the claim that Stalin attempted to nationalise the farming sector of the economy, so I will be skipping to when source 3 by my opponent is used. The problems with contenders third source First, I'd like to point out that the history place, the source that my opponent uses to cite for the number of kulaks who were deported to Siberia, doesn't cite any primary source for this information. It's literally all assumed to be true because history place is claiming all of these ideas. I think, since history place cites no primary source(that I can see) we cannot accept this as evidence of anything. Secondary sources such as history place have a job to cite the primary sources they get the information from, but they failed to do so. So, due to that history place is a secondary source, this already makes it suspect since everyone should know secondary sources are not ever as reliable as primary sources, for they might, even if accidentally, report on something incorrectly. The fact that they didn't cite any primary sources is even more suspect. So, this source can't be accepted since it provides no evidence of its claims. Addressing Contender's fourth source Now, this source is better because it actually cites a source written by Stalin himself, which would essentially be a primary source. The quote my opponent offers by Stalin is sound, as you can see it on page 412 of this primary source written by Stalin[1]. However, simply because Stalin admits to expropriating the Kulaks, doesn’t prove that millions starved. You would need to establish a link between the expropriation and millions dying, which it doesn’t seem you have sufficiently done so. In conclusion, this quote is rather irrelevant to determining if Stalin is responsible, or that he had malicious intent to kill off millions of people. Problems with contender’s fifth source Now, this secondary source cites other secondary sources for its information. These secondary sources do not cite their primary sources. For example, the information my opponent is claiming about the mass deportation that supposedly took place of kulaks, this source cites History Place as its source for that information(just follow the 5th link down at the bottom, which is cited above where this source talks about the deportations) So in other words, my opponent indirectly cited the same source as before with their third source, and I’ve already explained problems with this source as it doesn’t cite any primary sources or offer any evidence of its claims. Thus, the claim that Stalin deported millions of Kulaks is still unsubstantiated. This is the problem I’ve found personally with looking up information about the Holodomor: nearly every source about it is a secondary source that doesn’t cite any primary sources and offer no evidence. Claims like these should not just be accepted without evidence, for I assert the widely-held belief in innocence until proven guilty. So far, my opponent has not proven that Stalin was guilty of ordering Kulaks to be mass deported, or that this resulted in millions of deaths. Problems with the survivors my opponent quotes: My opponent quoted several survivors recalling their times with the holodomor. They cite their source 6 for these quotes. The problem with this source, is that the video they claim to have of these survivors recalling the “horrors” of the holodomor, is that the link to the video doesn’t even seem to work. How convenient. Simply go to near the bottom of their source[2] and click on “play”, you’ll see an error that says “page doesn’t exist”. Additionally, when looking up the names of these people through a google search, for two of them, nothing of relevance comes up. Look up Olena Mikiak and Mykhaylo Naumenko in google, and you’ll see nothing comes up in pertaining to someone who is old enough to have survived through the Holodomor. Now, looking up Fedir Burtianski comes up with claims that someone named this made comments about their experience in the Holodomor, but there is still not any other information about this person. If these people actually exist, you’d think there would be more information about them. It seems there isn’t any other information about these people. For all we know, this could have all been fabricated, and since there is no other information regarding these people, and the video about this apparently doesn’t work, it’s a pretty good possibility. The notion the NKVD was responsible Next, my opponent claimed that the NKVD were responsible for shootings, deportations, and stealing of food from Ukraine. This is asserted without evidence as well, and even if it was true, to establish Stalin as the guilty one, there would surely be orders to the NKVD from Stalin himself to do these things. For all we know, the NKVD may have been acting on their own discretion, maybe even against the orders of Stalin. Without any sort of orders by Stalin provided by my opponent, there’s no way to know whether Stalin was responsible, and I would like to remind voters of the idea of innocent until proven guilty. Moving onto my arguments... My opponent has taken the more realistic number of between 7-10 million people dying as a result of the holodomor. However, I will point out through logic why this might not have been the case, and I will dispute that the Soviet government was the one behind this. There is evidence that the Kulaks were possibly the ones responsible for the famine, and not the Soviet government. According to this[3], there is record of Kulaks who destroyed much of the machinery, livestock, and other means through which farming took place, in an attempt to prevent the Soviet government from seizing the means of farming production, and giving it to their workers. One only needs to think about the results of what would happen due to much of the machinery, livestock, etc being destroyed. 11% of the population owned nearly all of the farming land in the Ukraine[3], and they were the kulaks. If it’s true that the soviet government deported the kulaks, it was likely due to them finding out that the kulaks actually destroyed all of the machinery in an attempt to prevent the Soviet Union from being able to produce the grain and food necessary for the rest of Ukraine. Thus, you could say if the deporting happened, it was a form of punishment for what the Kulaks did that resulted in the deaths of millions. If the soviet government, specifically Stalin, had the intent to starve millions of Ukrainians, why did the import of agricultural products rise substantially during the years of the famine? In 1931, before the famine, the Soviet Union exported 5,182,835 tonnes of grain, but in the following year once the famine began, they decreased their exports to 1,819,114 tonnes and began importing 750,000 tonnes during the first half of 1932. The amount exported decreased further the next year, and imports increased another 157,000 tonnes.[4][5] If they really wanted to kill off millions of people, it seems they were making an attempt to fix the problem of wheat shortage caused by the famine. If they really wanted to kill off all Ukrainians, they wouldn't’ have increased their imports of grain to those areas. Often the number 7-10 million people dying as a result of the famine comes from comparing the USSR's population from 1932 to what it was in 1934, and looking at how much the population didn't increase as it was expected to do so. Generally, most historians conclude that the population was supposed to increase anywhere between 7-10 million more than it did. There are two things wrong with this calculation: first, if Stalin wanted to kill off Ukrainians, why were other areas affected by the famine besides Ukraine? It's a fact other parts of the USSR were in famine too, not just Ukraine[6]. To conclude 7-10 million Ukrainians died is faulty since more areas than just Ukraine were affected. Secondly, the 7-10 million number assumes these were all deaths, but it is logical to conclude that in a time of famine, the birth rate would have decreased. Why would people have as many children as they previously had when there is not food for them? So, the fact the population growth was off by 7-10 million could be a result of both a birth rate decline and a death rate increase. Therefore, the extent to which the "holodomor" caused casualties for Ukraine is not nearly as bad as most people make it out to be. You really can't know how many people died during this, but it likely wasn't 7-10 million. Sources: [1] http://ciml.250x.com... [2] https://www.rferl.org... [3] http://www.archives.gov.ua... [4] The Years of Hunger. Soviet Agriculture 1931-1933, Davies and Wheatcroft, p.471 [5] i7;i7;i7;i6; k4; m4;l0;m2;l8;k2;m3; j2;i9;i3;j1;i9; h3;l6;l9;l7;l3;k2;l5;k2; i7;i7;i7;i6;. i2;l6;l9;l2;k4;k2; 1935, page 574, 575[6] https://en.wikipedia.org...