You're viewing a single thread.
Communists in the USSR weren’t that good either, don’t forget that too... Oh, and weren’t they also the ones that collaborated with the nazis from 1939 to 1941?
The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was not societ "collaboration" with the Nazis. It was a self-preserving, non-aggression treaty between a rising fascist empire hell-bent on destroying workers movements like communism as all fascists are and a young workers movement that had been besieged since it's inception. It gave them the time they needed to industrialize and prepare for the inevitable war with the Germans which they sacrificed so much for. 80% of Nazis were killed by the red army and 27 million soviets died for it.
Calling that pact collaboration is incredibly direspectful to their history
Yup. I hate historical revisionism. The pact was strategic, not a tacit approval of Nazism.
Even if you view it from the German point of view, it was the same. Hitler didn't suddenly like Communism for a short while. He had to build up his forces for invasion.
Have you read the secret protocol that was attached to it? How can dividing the Eastern Europe into „spheres of interest“ and occupying the territories of foreign states (the pact was signed a month before WWII started by both nazi Germany and USSR that invaded Poland, after that the Baltic countries, Romania and maybe a country or two more that I cannot remember) a „self-preserving, non-aggression treaty between a rising fascist empire hell-bent on destroying workers movements like communism as all fascists are and a young workers movement“? Pardon me, but your statement is full of shit. Just like USSR, that’s why it was „besieged since it’s inception“.
Yeah territory definitely has no strategic value when you are preparing for war against your largest ideological enemy 💀
I never said it was great, just that you were severely misrepresenting it
I blocked mistahbenny. There's no point talking to them. They've already made up their mind on the matter.
Ah, I haven't encountered them before
Stalin promised a million soviet soldiers to france and britain to stop hitler. They both refused, as they saw the soviets as their bigger enemy, the brits having used troops to stop the russian revolution less than 2 decades before.
Dessalines stays winning
Ahistorical both sidesing garbage. Read a book some time, TV pop culture and Reddut comments aren't a substitute.
Any valid arguments besides bullshiting?
It kind of takes learning reality to understand contextual differences.
It might sound lazy when people tell you to educate yourself but that's what is required.
If you want to be spoonfed an education on history you should take a history class.
Don't be a condescending prick, comrade.
They're definitely misrepresenting the situation, like @ComradeSharkfucker explained, and I think it would be great if someone could make/share a FAQ so we wouldn't have to keep typing this by hand. But telling people to read a book some time is the arrogant crap that alienates us from the people we need on our side. More people are reading this than the person you replied to.
We do not, in fact, need nazi sympathizers on our side. People who "Soviets were just as bad, if not worse, than the nazis" are deliberately downplaying the Holocaust in an attempt to "redpill normies."
They're lucky if all they get is "go read a book" from us. We're justified in lining them against a wall and shot.
They are here in bad faith and treating them like someone here in good faith is civility fetishism. There are also already plenty of comments providing correction.
Be direct and honest with people.
This loser liberal is dming me instead of posting publicly, how courageous
They got
apparently
Same! They keep caping for Nazis.
Yeah me too, haha, way to double down
Nazi apologist scum. You are so full of shit
you know like most of western europe signed pacts with the nazis too, right?
Yes, I do. I also think that they largely contributed to the beggining of the WWII, hence it’s name that’s pretty self-explanatory. The thing is that, in academic history, any war starts with an event. That event is the invasion of Poland on the 1st of September, 1939. I hope you see where I’m going... We could trace back the causes of this war years, maybe even decades before it began, but that’s simply not correct (when talking about what pact/document led to it’s beggining).
The thing is that, in academic history, any war starts with an event. That event is the invasion of Poland on the 1st of September, 1939.
Wow and the war in ukraine started exactly in 2022 when the evil vladimir "voldemort" putin randomly decided to invade for no other reason than being evil, right?
Wow you're a fucking moron. Wars don't start with "events," WWI wasn't started because some serb killed the Archduke, wars start because of historical and material trends provoking conflict over resources and territory. God you're fucking stupid
What the fuck are you talking about. In academic history, it's widely understood things don't just appear out of thin air and the defining event of when nearly any conflict 'starts' is a very ideologically motivated choice. It's exactly what you're doing now and what Zionists do with the current genocide in Palestine
Return to the posting trenches coward
Hmmm I wonder if Britain was doing anything questionable to India or France to Algeria during this timeframe
Oh wait, I forgot,
Ah yes, the spontaneous invasion of Poland that happened randomly and had no buildup, the "Big Bang" of WWII, if you will. All event are random, static, and devoid of context and preceding history.
WW2 started in 1931 when Imperial Japan attacked China, liberal
This is correct and anything else is eurocentric nonsense. The Allies were more than France, Britain, the USSR, and United States.
Out of all the possible chosen start dates for World War 2, you go with the one that can be used to paint the Soviets in the worst possible light. Just a coincidence, though, I'm sure.
Yes, I do.
Oh, then you admit to just being an anti communist shitliberal
The thing is that, in academic history, any war starts with an event.
Only in shitty popsci history books do wars start with “an event,” because even bourgeois historians know to distinguish between proximate and ultimate causation.
woof
The USSR signed a non-aggression pact after trying to get the Western Powers to help protect Czechoslovakia. The Western Powers of course denied this, as they wanted the Nazis to kill the Soviets. The Soviets ended up killing 80% of the Nazis that died in WWII, the scale of the Eastern Front was many times larger than the Western. Moreover, Americans and other western powers were ordered to not attack western business assets in Nazi Germany. This is because the West had ties to the Nazis, while the Communists and Nazis hated each others guts.
The Red Army saved the world from fascism, and paid the price with tens of millions of lives. They are heroes.
did the ussr applied fordism to wholesale killing of human beings? no. next question.
Oh look it's an ignorant liberal, tell me more about how fucking ignorant you are
Stalin tried to build a coalition against Germany first and was roundly rejected by every other power because wow, i'm so shocked, but capitalist govts actually liked the fascists more, who would have thought
Ew a liberal
Stating historical facts means being a liberal to you? Damn.
Care to explain why the west refused to crush the Nazis with Stalin before the molotov ribbentrop pact, why you're ignoring the fact the Soviets are the only reason Nazism was defeated when it was due to their immense sacrifices on the eastern front, or why you don't bring up the blatant apologia for Nazis in the West (operation paperclip or Canada calling Nazis "victims of communism")
Oh, it's because you're a liberal
Playing devil's advocate for Nazis and whataboutisms aren't a good look.
Please frame your whataboutism properly with a "what about the" prefix.
This is what I hate about people who are vehemently anti-communist. They can look at a picture displaying the atrocities of fascism and then, instead of demonizing the horrific acts of fascism, decide to change the subject to talk about how evil communism is.
Anti-communist looking at picture of the Holocaust: "Man, I sure do hate communism."
The hypocrisy of this post or the rude replies that I’ve got from your „comrades“ is what must bother you really, not the way I reacted to this pic. I am not an anti-communist, it’s just that I don’t like when people of one ideology make a refference to the bad things that another ideology did, while their own people did things that were just as bad. The soviets are exactly the same to me as the nazis. And if some of those people replying would be smart enough to do so adequately, they would later find out that I have always lived in a post-soviet country, and I know pretty well the whole story behind the way it got into USSR, and how it got there, and what the communists did, for example, with more than 40000 people in one night from 6th of July to 7th of July 1949, in Bessarabia.
Normilizing fascism through comparison instead of rejecting fascism is literally how the Nazis came to power
Good job parroting the propaganda like a good nazi dog
One day you might self reflect long enough to know how fucking dumb you sound defending literal Nazis
You can't tell the truth here.
Sorry not sorry but this shit-hole community is just pig fuckers all the way down to the smelly core.