The kulaks killed themselves?
You're confusing Soviet history with American history.
In american history, "Only a good Indian is a dead Indian," in soviet history, not racial, but class struggle one, a millionaire, a former tsarist general or minister, a kulak, anyone could become an ordinary citizen by simply ceasing to be a kulak or an exploiter.
You see, you can't stop being an indian or, for example, in nazi Germany a jew. For an american WASP or a german nazi you will still be an enemy to be destroyed. In the case of the german nazis, we have, of course, an extreme situation. Although the Anglo-Saxons also made a good mark in the field of genocide, for example, completely exterminating the population of the island of Tasmania. It was done exactly by exterminating them, killing them, during the organized round-up of the native inhabitants of the island.
In general, in the USSR it was possible to stop being an exploiter, but in the USA, indians preferred to be only dead.
The whole fault of Hitler in the eyes of respectable europeans is not that he staged a genocide.
For europeans this is a normal, ordinary thing. But Hitler staged a genocide of whites, which is a bit extremist for the 20th century in the eyes of good old colonialists. If he had killed indians or negroes, he would not have had any problems from the civilized european or american community.
