Have political purges ever succeeded for a society?

[Whack-a-Mole]

To start, I am NOT advocating for purges of any sort.

I was wondering if a political purge has ever achieved the goals they set out to do? Certainly, they are often a means to keep power for those few at the top. But, usually, they are advertised as a means to a “better” society. Clear out the malcontents and riff-raff and there will be a golden age.

But, I cannot think of any that have come anywhere close. They are nothing but horror shows. Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, the French Revolution (not sure who to pin that on), Juan Perón, Augusto Pinochet and so on (not meant to be a complete list…just examples).

Were any meant to have high ideals and went wrong or is it all men getting power mad and running amok?

[Si_Amigo]

Well Castro did get organized crime and American corporate oligarchs out of Cuba, but at a very high price in other areas by becoming a puttet for the Soviet Union. Still, this was seen as a positive thing by Castro and his revolutionaries.

[PatrickLondon]

If you were Stalin, or any of those, eliminating any possible rivals and troublemakers was a better society and a golden age - and all available media were used to persuade the surviving populace it was so as well.

[Babale]

Sulla?

At least, unlike most dictatorial purgers, he stepped down on his own.

He didn’t succeed ultimately, though; his purges didn’t eliminate threats to the Republic, they showed ambitious men exactly how to subdue the Republic.

[Northern_Piper]

I believe that at the time, American Revolutionaries thought it was a good thing to purge the Loyalists and kick them out of the new country.

Maybe that did help solidify the revolution’s ideology, by purging anti-revolutionary ideologues.

[Babale]

@Northern_Piper

I believe that at the time, American Revolutionaries thought it was a good thing to purge the Loyalists and kick them out of the new country.

From the Wiki page:

Expulsion of the Loyalists

the war concluded with Great Britain defeated by the Americans and the French, the most active Loyalists were no longer welcome in the United States, and sought to move elsewhere in the British Empire. The large majority (about 80%–90%) of the Loyalists remained in the United States, however, and enjoyed full citizenship there.

That… doesn’t seem like much of a “purge” to me.

[Northern_Piper]

Tell that to the ones who had their property confiscated, some tarred and feathered, and felt they had to leave for Canada, Britain and the Caribbean, for their personal safety or to be able to express their political views freely.

From the Wikipedia article, the number expelled was about 88,000.

The number killed in the French Terror was about 45,000.

France had a larger population than the 13 colonies: 28 million in 1789, compared to 2,400,000 for the colonies in 1775.

Which was the larger purge?

[Babale]

I feel much worse for their slaves than for the people who weren’t allowed to grovel at King George’s feet in public.

From the Wiki page, again:

The departing Loyalists were offered free land in British North America. Many were prominent colonists whose ancestors had originally settled in the early 17th century, while a portion were recent settlers in the Thirteen Colonies with few economic or social ties

@Northern_Piper

Tell that to the ones who had their property confiscated, some tarred and feathered,

None of those are good things to do to someone; but what I said was,

@Babale

That… doesn’t seem like much of a “purge” to me.

And it really, really doesn’t.

I’d much rather be tarred and feathered than wake up to find myself on Sulla’s list.

@Northern_Piper

From the Wikipedia article, the number expelled was about 88,000.

So you’re counting the slaves they took to the new free land that Daddy George gave them, too?

[Northern_Piper]

So as is common, define the terms so that the United States doesn’t look bad.

Essentially, you don’t have any sympathy for the Loyalists and their political views, so you don’t think it counts as a purge.

[Northern_Piper]

Ontario and New Brunswick were founded by political refugees from the American revolution.

[Babale]

@Northern_Piper

So as is common, define the terms so that the United States doesn’t look bad.

Sure, invent my position, why don’t you.

The US doesn’t need any help looking bad in its early history; it does that all on its own, through its treatment of Black slaves, its dealings with the Native Americans, and the wars with Mexico.

And making life miserable for monarchists, enough so that 10%-20% of them got fed up, took their slaves, and took free land from Daddy George - that was not a nice thing for the US to do either (although it pales in comparison to keeping hundreds of thousands of slaves, which the revolutionaries also did). But it isn’t a purge.

@Northern_Piper

Essentially, you don’t have any sympathy for the Loyalists and their political views,

No, I don’t have sympathy for the political position “I really really really want to simp for King George”. However…

@Northern_Piper

so you don’t think it counts as a purge.

Do you think I have sympathy for the political position “I want to be a bigshot in Rome”, that Sulla purged?

Whether I agree with the position being purged has very little to do with whether I identify the purge as a purge. It’s really, really simple: if you go in and kill a bunch of people for their political position, that’s a purge. If you don’t, that’s not.

And by the way:

@Northern_Piper

From the Wikipedia article, the number expelled was about 88,000.

The number killed in the French Terror was about 45,000.

France had a larger population than the 13 colonies: 28 million in 1789, compared to 2,400,000 for the colonies in 1775.

Which was the larger purge?

Why are you comparing deaths to refugees? 100-150k people fled the French Revolution, so [habdful dead +88k left] < [thousands dead +150k left] so I’d say the French Revolution was the bigger purge.

And by the way, I say that despite my sympathy for French revolutionary positions, and my lack of sympathy for the political position of “I really really really want to simp for King Louis”, so you can see that my personal preferences don’t have shit to do with whether I identify something as a “purge”.

@Northern_Piper

Ontario and New Brunswick were founded by political refugees from the American revolution.

Daddy George rewards His faithful!

[Northern_Piper]

If you define purge to mean only by means of executions, so be it. But that means the Cuban opponents to the revolution weren’t purged, either. They were political refugees, exiled, but not purged.

But that’s a pretty narrow definition, based on what the OP appears to be asking. A political purge is normally thought of as getting rid of political opponents. Exiling large numbers of ideological opponents of the regime seems to me to be a purge, because it may solidify political support for the regime, which is what OP is asking about.

[Northern_Piper]

@Babale

Daddy George rewards His faithful!

As I said, your approach is to ridicule the political opponents of the Revolution, so it’s all good.

[Babale]

@Northern_Piper

But that means the Cuban opponents to the revolution weren’t purged, either. They were political refugees, exiled, but not purged.

Weren’t a bunch of Castro’s political opponents (like, numbering in the thousands) put on show trial and executed?

[Babale]

@Northern_Piper

As I said, your approach is to ridicule the political opponents of the Revolution, so it’s all good.

Would it make you feel better if I made fun of the other Daddy George too? The one who owned a shitload of human beings and used their teeth to make his dentures?

[Chad_Sudan]

Would de-Nazification in Allied-occupied West Germany after 1945, and comparable processes in Japan around the same time, count as a purge?

[Whack-a-Mole]

@Chad_Sudan

Would de-Nazification in Allied-occupied West Germany after 1945…

Was there a purge? Or did everyone flip to, “Who, me? I had not part!” Plus, I thought the Allies pardoned basically everyone but a few for the Nuremberg trials. So, not really a purge.

ETA: I think the Allies were similarly easy on Japan. Wasn’t that the point of the Marshall Plan? To not purge?

[susan]

@Babale

I’d much rather be tarred and feathered than wake up to find myself on Sulla’s list.

Maybe.

Though the attacks were rarely fatal, victims of tarring and feathering were humiliated by being held down, shaved, stripped naked and covered in a boiled sticky substance and feathers. Their skin often became burned and blistered or peeled off when solvents were used to remove the remnants. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/in-1919-a-mob-in-maine-tarred-and-feathered-two-black-college-students-180979492/#:~:text=Though%20the%20attacks%20were%20rarely,used%20to%20remove%20the%20remnants.

Note rarely fatal. I was threatened with this as a queer teen in the South-ish US.

[MrDibble]

@Whack-a-Mole

the French Revolution

Is France a monarchy? No? Then the purge worked. Oh, there were some little hiccups on the way from there to now, but the Revolution met its goals and the French are better for having gone through it.

[Chad_Sudan]

From the Wikipedia article on Allied denazification in West Germany:

One of the punishments for Nazi involvement was to be barred from public office and/or restricted to manual labor or “simple work”. At the end of 1945, 3.5 million former Nazis awaited classification, many of them barred from work in the meantime. By the end of the winter of 1945–1946, 42% of public officials had been dismissed.