Changes

Nellie Ohr was Professor of Russian Studies at Vasser College during 90’s. [[Edward Baumgartner]] (hired by Fusion to work w/Veselnitskaya & Christopher Steele) studied at Vasser (Russian Studies) this time. Nellie Ohr was a conduit between Steele/Fusion and Bruce Ohr/DOJ. Nellir Ohr sent emails regarding [[Natalia Veselnitskaya]] to Robert Otto – State Department – Bureau of Intelligence and Research specializing in Russia.<ref>https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1026658792623230976.html</ref>

Nellie Ohr was Professor of Russian Studies at Vasser College during 90’s. [[Edward Baumgartner]] (hired by Fusion to work w/Veselnitskaya & Christopher Steele) studied at Vasser (Russian Studies) this time. Nellie Ohr was a conduit between Steele/Fusion and Bruce Ohr/DOJ. Nellir Ohr sent emails regarding [[Natalia Veselnitskaya]] to Robert Otto – State Department – Bureau of Intelligence and Research specializing in Russia.<ref>https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1026658792623230976.html</ref>

Nellie Ohr’s Ph.D. thesis is titled ':“Collective farms and Russian peasant society, 1933-1937: the stabilization of the kolkhoz order”''.

Nellie Ohr’s Ph.D. thesis is titled ''“Collective farms and Russian peasant society, 1933-1937: the stabilization of the kolkhoz order”''.

According the ''The American Spectator'': {{quotebox|“Kolkhoz” order means “collective farm” order, so Ohr’s subtitle refers to the “stabilization” of the collective farm order. The phrasing alone is suggestive of some silverish lining after the [[holodomor|six million or more people were killed]] by [[Stalin]]’s state-created famine, mass deportations, and general war of “de-kulakization.”<br>In the introduction to her 418-page paper, Ohr sets forth her main arguments, citing many of “revisionism’s” leading figures — J. Arch Getty, Roberta Manning, Gabor Rittersporn, Sheila Fitzpatrick.<br>Speaking “revisionist” lingo, Nellie Ohr turns the millions killed by Stalin into “excesses,” which, in Ohr’s words, “sometimes represented desperate measures taken by a government that had little real control over the country.” (Poor Stalin.) She depicts purges as representing “to some degree a center-periphery conflict in which the ‘state-building’ central government tried to bring headstrong local satraps under control.”<br>Here, in full context, are the “revisionist” trends she says her thesis will “corroborate”:<br>''Recently, Western historians [i.e., "revisionists”] have been using materials from the Smolensk archive to back up their arguments that power flowed not only from the top down but also from the bottom up to some degree; that excesses sometimes represented desperate measures taken by a government that had little real control over the country; that policies such as dekulakization and the purges of the later 1930s had some social constituency among aggrieved groups of poorer peasants; and that the purges represented to some degree a center-periphery conflict in which the ‘state-building’ central government tried to bring headstrong local satraps under control.''<ref>https://spectator.org/nellie-ohr-woman-in-the-middle/</ref>}}

According the ''The American Spectator'': {{quotebox|“Kolkhoz” order means “collective farm” order, so Ohr’s subtitle refers to the “stabilization” of the collective farm order. The phrasing alone is suggestive of some silverish lining after the [[holodomor|six million or more people were killed]] by [[Stalin]]’s state-created famine, mass deportations, and general war of “de-kulakization.”<br>In the introduction to her 418-page paper, Ohr sets forth her main arguments, citing many of “revisionism’s” leading figures — J. Arch Getty, Roberta Manning, Gabor Rittersporn, Sheila Fitzpatrick.<br>Speaking “revisionist” lingo, Nellie Ohr turns the millions killed by Stalin into “excesses,” which, in Ohr’s words, “sometimes represented desperate measures taken by a government that had little real control over the country.” (Poor Stalin.) She depicts purges as representing “to some degree a center-periphery conflict in which the ‘state-building’ central government tried to bring headstrong local satraps under control.”<br>Here, in full context, are the “revisionist” trends she says her thesis will “corroborate”:<br>''Recently, Western historians [i.e., "revisionists”] have been using materials from the Smolensk archive to back up their arguments that power flowed not only from the top down but also from the bottom up to some degree; that excesses sometimes represented desperate measures taken by a government that had little real control over the country; that policies such as dekulakization and the purges of the later 1930s had some social constituency among aggrieved groups of poorer peasants; and that the purges represented to some degree a center-periphery conflict in which the ‘state-building’ central government tried to bring headstrong local satraps under control.''<ref>https://spectator.org/nellie-ohr-woman-in-the-middle/</ref>}}