<<Was this what give Stalin the lisense to kill them off?>>
Well, Stalin had his reasons, and I'm sure they were good ones, but he never saw fit to confide them to me. So I am only gonna speculate here.
Probably Stalin foresaw what later actually happened in other countries of occupied Europe - - the upper bourgeoisie and the landed aristocracy tended for the most part to side with the German occupiers and collaborate with them, when the issue was presented to them as one of forming a common front against "Bolshevization," which translated readily into "Communist expropriation of private property." In Poland, the all-pervasive anti-Semitism, which permeated every level of Polish society, made collaboration and anti-Soviet activities even more likely, and so Stalin probably figured it was better to nip the problem in
the bud.
As it happened, due to their racial beliefs, which relegated Slavs, Poles included, to the role of "untermenschen" or sub-humans, the Nazis undertook occupation policies of such brutality and contempt that they effectively galvanized the Poles, who are generally very proud people, against them. However, the main Polish underground fighting organizations such as the Home Army, while not actually collaborating with the Germans, maintained very strong anti-Soviet and anti-Russian positions and were jockeying for a post-war, anti-Communist Poland to emerge.
So, on balance, I think Stalin probably made the right move.
<<When the Poles fought for themselves they fought the Natzis or they fought the Soviets ,over time they had to do both.>>
Well, "the Poles" is kind of an overbroad classification. The "Lublin Poles," (the Communists) fought the Nazis and the Home Army only, never the Soviets. The Jewish partisans, communist and non-communist, also had to fight both the Nazis and the Home Army, never the Soviets.
<<Doing without them did not benifit the Polish people in any way at all, in general what happened in every country that got rid of landlords was houseing shortage. Exceptions ?>>
Well, first of all, a huge bloc of anti-Soviet, anti-socialist potential saboteurs was eliminated in one stroke, which would have enormous but unseen benefits in that the beneficial reforms of the new Communist state in education, housing and health-care could proceed unimpeded. It's by what DIDN'T happen that one measures the benefit of this particular action. It didn't all happen in one swift stroke. For example, the last recorded massacre of Jews in Europe happened in Kielce, Poland, in 1946 when over 40 Jews were massacred by an anti-Semitic Polish mob and the local police forces, as usual, failed to intervene and in fact may have facilitated the massacre. Obviously, the failure to eliminate anti-social elements such as the mob ringleaders was a major factor leading to the massacre. I don't fault the Communists, because at that point in time they had not yet acquired absolute power in Poland. And in the aftermath, they did manage to hang all the ringleaders, albeit belatedly. But I often wonder, how many MORE such massacres would have occurred had Stalin not had the foresight to eliminate many of the instigators of racial, religious and class hatred
<<What replaces the elete when you kill them all? A less educated elete , a less motivated management?>>
No, the abolition of an elite class, followed by worker education and worker management. BETTER motivated because they are now working in their own plant for their own benefit, rather than in the Boss's plant for the Boss's benefit.
<<Stalin beleived in smashing the culture to facilitate change >>
I don't think that's true at all, I think that under Stalin, culture was preserved rather than smashed. Even more so than under capitalism. The only negative effect of Stalinism on culture that I can see was the iron-fisted control over content, which strangled the growth of new art and new art forms and killed spontaneity and cultural innovation. The West also imposed a heavy hand on new artists and new art forms, as anyone familiar with the Lenny Bruce saga, the Hollywood Blacklist saga or the publication travails of Lady Chatterley's Lover can attest.
<< the Katin forest grave was the product of Stalins attempt to decapitate the Polish culture.>>
The Katyn Forest victms were Polish Army officers, who would have had a minimal influence on Polish culture and posed a maximal threat to the Soviet State.. These were some of the most reactionary, ultra-conservative and politically unreliable elements in all of Poland. These were desperate times. The U.S.S.R. was facing the greatest threat in its history from the most barbaric of all enemies (I hope you read Molotov's report on German atrocities in occupied Russia, which I linked to for you in another post.) Against an adversary like that, with the clock ticking relentlessly, some harsh and extreme defensive measures had to be taken. (Of course, if Stalin had merely sent them to re-education camps instead, you would have bitched about that too. Whaddayagonnado?)
