this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2023
892 points (99.9% liked)
196
16591 readers
2018 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Both. Fascist apologist like to cherry pick palatable characteristics of figures like Stalin, or Hitler, or Andrew Jackson in order to destigmatize thier idolatry of these figures. These "certain aspects" are the tip of the wedge they use to destroy rationality and peace.
A reasonable person who would like to discuss the benefits of communism would point to the value of labor, advantages of unions, and the dignity of the worker, not the evil, paranoid, and violent person of Stalin.
Always, the stink of fascism follows the idolization of so called "great men." Excuses after excuses.
I appreciate you arguing even though it's with a brick wall.
Lol. To the contrary! I think communist lady has proven to be in interesting person to argue with. 😅😅😅😅
You're the brick wall, so yeah. Read the meme lady. Easy block.
The Holocaust most definitely happened and was perpetuated by the Nazis. Please don't accuse me of denial.
Communism, or to be most specific, Marxism, was most definitely aligned against Hitler.
Stalin, was not. He would have watched Hitler kill all of Europe had the Nazis not attacked Russia. Same as the united states if Japan had not attacked them.
I'm not obsessed with Stalin. I'm also not a Holocaust denier. You really seem keen on saying inflammatory things about me without any preceding context.
I will observe that I think Stalin was an awful person who tarnished the reputation of socialism for a century. I don't have anything against socialist, being one myself.
I have a beef with apologist for failed communist states like the soviet onion. I feel they deeply misrepresent socialism.
It's a semantic argument, then. To me a fascist is a Donald Trump. To me, Facisim is a broad set of characteristics which can be attributed to people outside of the context of Nazi Germany. For example, I might call an ancient emperor a fascist.
Facisim to you is a political movement linked only to the Nazis and thier allies.
That's not unfair. It's a different definition of the word.
Either you have a misunderstanding of what a tankie is in common vernacular, or I do.
My definition of a tankie is as follows: A "tankie" is a term that originated in British politics, referring to individuals who unconditionally supported actions of the Soviet Union, including the use of military force to suppress dissent. Today, it's often used more broadly to describe those who uncritically support or defend perceived socialist or communist authoritarian regimes, sometimes even in the face of human rights abuses. The term is typically used pejoratively within leftist circles.
I don't believe a communist is necessarily a tankie, but a tankie would call themselves a communist.
Personally, as an American, I would never fly an American flag. To me, it represents the violence of the state, the genocide of the indigenous people, and capitalism.
I believe that the Soviet union, as well as some modern communist states, have largely failed to represent the Marxist vision, and I am extremely critical of people who are embrace the theater of certain communist states.
Interesting. I don't want to put a burden on you, but you might want to consider that Western people who use the pejorative "tankie" might not be ideologically opposed to you in any particular way, and if you were to instead reply first with what you did just now they might even agree with you.
I got really triggered when you said I was a Holocaust denier. Maybe you felt the same way with me comparing Stalin with hitler and Andrew Jackson.
I'm sorry if I made you feel attacked or uncomfortable as a Trans individual. While I personally don't identify as a communist, I have a strong empathy for Marxist. I can only imagine the fear and anxiety you must feel at home, and I hope that you and your allies succeed in building a better world for yourselves.
Likewise, I don't speak to many people outside of the US.
I think you'll find that westerners tend to be more loose with thier definitions. We adopt analogies and political shorthands very quickly.
Additionally, many "progressive" Americans like me are extremely critical of nationalism. Capitalist and conversation Christian propaganda is everywhere here, and it cultivates a short of hyper sensitively to certain subjects. I'm very critical of states, especially socially conservative or militaristic ones.
In your situation, supporting a communist party might be your best choice, just like mine is voting for capitalist Democrats (over Republicans).
I hope you make more Western friends. You'll surely teach them new things and vice versa.
I like you and I respect you. I need to go to sleep (it's 1:15am here). Take care!
To blame "anti-communist revolution" for the decline of LGBT-rights in hungary when much of the anti-LGBT legislation came about near 20-years after Hungary became a democracy and during when the Hungarian Socialist Party, the successor of the Communist Party, was still the largest force in Hungarian politics is disingenuous.
...it's nice that you're honest about being anti-democratic and that you have no qualms about calling yourself tankie in that context. Are you a "little green man" as well?
Your historical notes are technically correct, and Stalin did even attempt to reach a pact with France to limit the potential expansion of Nazi Germany. However, once those initiatives failed, Stalin had no issue about pacting with Hitler instead to invade third countries together, which highlights how Stalin's first priority was improving his geopolitical position, rather than an ideological opposition to nazism.
Do you deny the Molotov–Ribbentrop pact and the illegal attack on Poland by the Soviet union under its leader Josef Stalin?
No why should I ? A non aggression pact is not the same than occupying another country. The Jews which were deported to other parts of the Union were in deed saved from the Nazis.
I am of the strong opinion that fascism doesn't care if you call yourself a communist, a capitalist, or a Democrat. If someone promotes a state which strips the power of local and individual labor for it's own use; cultivates violence as a means of domestic control; supports expansionism; and finally the consolidation of power under a personality; I oppose it, and call it what it is.
My comments are split now, so I'll let you read my other one. I would just like to emphasize that I consider myself a socialist, and that it's not really that vague of a criteria for the purposes of an Internet argument. It's just broad. I believe all current world superpowers current share elements of fascism which I despise and oppose.
You're a spineless coward, just admit you're fine with genocide and totalitarianism so long as they have a red flag.
And then they killed millions of people to enforce Stalin's autocracy. How, exactly, is that better than Hitler?
Because they were attacked. Otherwise they would have happily sat out of ww2.