|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on December 20, 2005, December 20, 2006, December 20, 2007, December 20, 2008, December 20, 2009, and December 20, 2010.|
- 1 liquidated
- 2 Atrocities
- 3 The Royal Imperial Family
- 4 Criticism of the Cheka?
- 5 how do you create a redirect?
- 6 date of 1922 redesignation/merge
- 7 Name
- 8 YouTube clip from the Russian film "Chekist"
- 9 New article for "Cheka" abbreviation ("may mean any one of these")?
- 10 Commie Atrocities
- 11 10 % of Jews
- 12 Needs complete rewrite.
- 13 "Atrocities" section
- 14 Sources
- 15 Cheka leather fashion influence?
- 16 Fixed
- 17 Cheka badge as it was in 1922
This may sound somewhat flagrant, but I think the euphemism of "liquidated" political opponents should just be changed to "murdered". 'Cause really, who are you trying to protect from the lies? I love liquid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 20:01, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
I cited Ernst Nolte in the atrocities section for the previously un-cited assertion about the Cheka's infamous rat-cage torture. I also included a note to the effect that the rat-cage stories are not totally reliable. The notes were taken from the page on Ernst Nolte.Potashnik (talk) 01:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The Royal Imperial Family
Should more, perhaps, be made of the Cheka's involvement with the death of the Tsar and his family be made on this page. Or is it something too trivial for want of a better word to have on the page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Criticism of the Cheka?
This article reads like something out of the Soviet-era Pravda. How about incorporating criticism and descriptions of Cheka's totalitarian tactics instead of reproducing the official party line on this instrument of repression and violence? Porfyrios 20:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
See Natasha? the Cheka were really good guys after all! Wetman 17:56, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC) (awaiting further information)
- No one likes much FBI, SIS, Siguranca, KGB, but don't forget, it is a necessary tool of the state, so better refrain from trivial good/bad black/white evaluations. No one likes hangman, and hangmen are not the prime of mankind. So if you are avaiting further information about cruelty of cheka, please pour it here only in reasonable amounts. Mikkalai 18:10, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Even so, some criticism is needed. The page is seemingly devoid of any criticism at the moment. --Flask 16:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- Interestingly, I believe it was Lenin who created the Cheka; he considered the suppression of opposition a critical step in transferring Russia through totalinarianism-socialism-communism (utopia) - this being part of the socialist element. However, he did not wish to keep the Cheka active, and would likely have dissolved them had he lived a few years longer. Failing to do so might well have been one of his reasons for stating (albeit in different words) "for god's sake don't pick Stalin" in his Testament. Rob Church 00:16, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
- Cheka purposes ware not to matain Bolshevik as party on power, or only party, nor destroy any ideological opposition. That's manipulating historical events. It was just intended to defend people from that older people classes that had lost their old privileges and seeked any chance for sabotage, attack and counter-revolution, and I mean in violent totalitarian fashions, never in intellectual or ideological peaceful criticisement of revolution. SFSR was a good thing, from the perspective it supposed liberation and democratical power of worker class and peasants in an underdevelopped wild capitalist country domained by Tsar and burgeoise oligarchy, that lead to endless wars, to lack of ideologic freedom, to exploitation of workers and peasants, to poorness or unfair minoritary distribution of richness and development, education system unaccessible for poorer or humbler people, etc.; and SFSR supposed a conquest by majoritary and popular classes through assumption of auto-gestionary power and establishment of a new institutional system from the basis, democratically lead by soviets, with freedom of militation and ideas, and different political organizations (not only Bolseviks, though it just was the majoritary one for it got the one that represented ideas of most of politized workers that freely joined) of just all opposite, development, equal distribution of richness and land for who cultivated it, an extraordinary implementation and investion on educational system and libraries, made accessible for everybody, organisms of democratical organization and power of people, that were soviets, as a way of democratically acting on power, adoption of legal measures that meant progress, advance and more freedom for human relationships among citizens, like adoption of consensuated divorce, equalitary laws for women and men, and right and access to work and politics and public life to women, abolishment of anti-semitic laws, implementation of salaries, etc. Much of all was wasted and critically ended or transformed with access of Stalin to central power, and transformation of it on a fashion of burocratical totalitarian power, and all the subsequent ideological manipulation, derivation and propaganda for turning socialist ideas, purposes and furtherly institutions into totalitarian Estate, militarist, doctrinary, sectary and repressive ideas and purposes, using the name and rethoric of first to fake and achieve purposes or implications of second; he was a disordered and manipulative, very dangerous and smart guy seeking for power, and he got it, couriously coinciding with the merging of SFSR anti-imperialist socialist republic into imperialist burocratic and totalitarian sigle-partyist USSR (that was a process, but too of a sudden, suspiciously, that deserves to be analysed). Such a process obviously and dangerously had to include Cheka. Of course, the fact many people participating in SRSF Cheka's committees and democratical leadership were unprepared people, for such responsabilities, lead to some unfairnesses, and the fact some innoccent people unfairly payed, but this is one thing, and what is said in the article is other very different, that doesn't analyses context and causes in an objective, non-biased way. I'd like to seek for a less propagandist and biased, more objective and neutral article, more just with history. I'll soon start making my propositions in order to achieve, and support them with sources. signed DeepQuasar
how do you create a redirect?
if the name is supposed to be "vechecka" how do i make the link from "vechecka" to "checka"? shb5ut sluod folkintould it just be a piped link? the content of vechecka should be:
- #redirect [[Cheka]]
date of 1922 redesignation/merge
I modified the date or renaming to GPU from Feb 8 to Feb 6 1922, which corresponds with articles GPU and chronology), and verifies against the MVD's official website: http://www.mvdinform.ru/index.php?docid=367 (in Russian) --Martyr 21:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Personally (I am a native russian speaker) I beleive the translation of the name is way too literal, to the point that it is even comic I think a much better sounding translation would be "The Special National comitee against counter-revolutionaries and saboutage", but of course a literal translation may be of more use to people 184.108.40.206 22:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
YouTube clip from the Russian film "Chekist"
I was going to add the link to the article, but thought I better post it here and see if it is appropriate. It contains nudity and brutal depictions of mass executions:
--C.J. Griffin 19:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
New article for "Cheka" abbreviation ("may mean any one of these")?
As some of you may be aware, there were several other "extraordinary commissions" in existence during the Bolshevik era (notably Krupskaya's Extraordinary Commission for the Abolition of Illiteracy). Should a "Trivia" section be added to the main article to reflect this? Darth Sidious 01:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- See WP:Trivia. Trivia sections are discouraged. Maybe we could add this information directly into the text. S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s (Merry Christmas!) 01:59, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
This section reads like the typical "Communists fry babies in oil and send them in cans to the USSR" story.
The other sourced are at least scholarly - though partly biased - but the citation of Denikin is just ridiculous and should be deleted in my opinion. He was a rabid anti-Semite whose armies carried out massive pogroms in the Ukraine and buried revolutionary workers and peasants in mass graves. What's next, citing Nazi "investigations" of "Bolshevist atrocities"? Have mercy on our poor readers, who can find this tabloid crap elsewhere on the internet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 04:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
10 % of Jews
I know this is controversial, but in the article Jewish Bolshevism, it says that were perhaps a total of 5 000 Jews in the Cheka out of 50 000 revolutionary agents. This could perhaps be mentioned in the article, since there have been numerous authors who have made allegations that the persecutions against the Christian clergy and the Christian bourgeoisie were actually motivated by religious or ethnic hatred on the part of members of the Cheka. ADM (talk) 23:55, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
- What "numerous authors"? What "allegations"? And what's up with the 10% as some kind of magic threshold? If it had been 2500, would a "5% of Jews" (sic - "of Cheka") make it different? And even, where does this 5,000 supposedly come from?radek (talk) 00:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Needs complete rewrite.
The article is incredibly biased and the sources are completely unreputable. This needs a complete rewrite; it's unsalvageable at this point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 17:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Melgunov's work is a primary source written by a participant in Russian politics in 1917-21. It does not meet the criteria of a scholarly, specialized work. Prof A. Litvin writes in his book The Red and White Terror in Russia that Melgunov was biased in his writings and by his personal experiences, while the historian P. Golub showed that Melgunov made no mention of Kolchak's crimes: "He knew of course, but persistently told the big lie about the White regimes not practicing systematic terror." None of the sources cited in this article purporting to show "Cheka atrocities" actually state that they happened, but only cite the allegations of Denikin's agitprop organs. Historians do not uncritically accept the lurid claims made by OSVAG and the like, but find them "questionable...can not qualify as a scientific publication." Based on this, the "atrocities" section will be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 23:12, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Those authors who have not done specific, scientific research on the Russian Revolution in general and the activities of the Cheka in particular do not have a place in the relevant sections of this article. Professor Ratkovsky of Leningrad/Petersburg University supersedes all of the other sources cited in this article, as he has done original research on the Cheka and violence during the Civil War, with publications such as "Individual Terrror in Russia during the Civil War", "The First Year of the Petrograd Cheka", "Red Terror and the Activities of the Cheka in 1918". Nothing in the English language is comparable to this scholar's work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 23:48, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Cheka leather fashion influence?
The cited source for "Western communists" copying the all-black leather look of the Cheka says nothing about this. In fact, it doesn't say the Cheka "dressed in leather from head to toe", only that Dzerzhinsky diverted the shipment of coats so that his men would be less likely to contract typhus. I have tagged it as failing verification. Daniel Case (talk) 04:12, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- You are correct. I have deleted the "head to toe". The leather coat, is of course, famous. George Orwell, Victor Serge, Ayn Rand, Trotsky all mentioned it in their writings.Capitalismojo (talk) 03:20, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Cheka badge as it was in 1922
The photo in the cheka article 'Cheka badge as it was in 1922 WHAT DOES IT MEAN? Because that is not a Cheka badge, It is honorary badge of the 5th anniversary of the Cheka-GPU and the establishment of GPU NKVD RSFSR — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hermanbruner (talk • contribs) 18:42, 12 October 2013 (UTC)