Seems like a bad call to me too, PTB. I'll reverse the ban.
post
Sorry but this is PTB. Criticizing Stalin and the USSR doesn't make one a liberal. Wtf.
Calling this one a PTB, it's not a shitlib thing to not ask the USSR to have not temporarily partnered with Nazi Germany.
I love how all tankie defense boils down to "dO yOuR OwN ReSeArCh"
They are too exhausted by all their research to form proper arguments. 🙂↕️
Where "your own research" means "Cowbee's research."
What is cowbee? Google isn't helping
A blatherer whose every response seems to involve trying to get someone to read a book that i'm starting to suspect they wrote, or are actually a fourteen year old who read their first thing that Spoke to them.
I did my own research and it disagrees with tankies' conclusions. Now what?
Then you've been brainwashed with western propaganda is they're their usual go to
And also they're Russophobic, Sinophobic, a total shitlib, and most of all, banned for Rule 1 and 2 (having a dissenting opinion)
I was raised and educated by people who grew up in USSR. If it was a paradise like tankies claim, those people would know.
They're too used to banning dissent from their online spaces that they don't have a clue how to actually make an argument that holds any water or without resorting to bad faith tactics. Their arguments never hold up to scrutiny.
Damn that sounds a lot like MAGA
Just remember, whenever you read, "social democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism," you are reading part of the justification for why the USSR should sign a treaty with Nazi Germany. The actual justifications for this are complicated, I think it is actually not completely straightforward such as "Nazis bad, treaty with Nazis make USSR fascist." However that is exactly the sort of campist and obscurative reasoning that Stalin tries to make. The argument was not "the USSR is still critically underdeveloped next to the most industrially advanced country in Europe, and we need some time to industrialize before we can oppose European fascism." It was, "The social democrats in Europe are worse than Nazis, so the Nazis need time to crush their moderate wing."
You can kind of understand the Real Politic of Stalin. It's the same justification for the endless purges of his political enemies. I think that the historical basis for authoritarianism extends beyond the "great man." But the guy was probably the greatest historical revisionist of the last 150 years. Both his enemy Leon Trotsky and Trotsky's one-time secretary Reya Dunayevskaya meticulously documented how Stalin had history literally rewritten to make him seem like a more revolutionary figure than he was.
I recognize that Trotsky doesn't have a good rapport with anarchists, nor should he, after 1921. But If any leftist tradition "weighs like a nightmare on the minds of the living," it is the legacy Stalinism.
PTB, Defending stalin for siding with nazis is crazy
Defending Stalin, period. Is crazy. He arguably killed more people than Hitler...
PTB and on the basis of blatant misinfo as well. Disappointing
what does ptb mean?
Power tripping bastard — check sidebar
The sidebar lists the most common acronyms of this community.
I'm banned from there for publicly calling out one of the mods for covertly supporting the American right-wing. I deserve the ban, let's be clear, I intentionally went out of my way to spam warnings across the community. That said, the moderation of that comm seems to be getting worse since I was last there.
PTB.
Edit: To be clear, this was the same moderator, who seems to be the head moderator, and in light of this, it now seems clear that they weren't just supporting the American right-wing, but moreso supporting any and all totalitarianism.
Ah ha, but you forget that Stalin was busy murdering the last of the military officers that won the Revolution.
What's wrong about having a wartime ally and then declaring war on them?
I do that all the time in Total War. It's not a big problem if you have the armies to back up your chaotic strategies and if they complain, just wipe them out.
Linking to anything Cowbee said as "fact" is insane.
Haha that name rang a bell that was one of the first people I ever blocked on Lemmy :)
Before 1941 everyone collaborated, appeased, or worked with the Nazis in some form. And then 1941 happened and the Holocaust.
Rather than this being a lesson for future generations of why Nazis cannot be collaborated, appeased, or worked with: it seems as though this is some ace up the sleeve for catching modern debatelords for apparently being inconsistent.
Generally I think if you're using terms like 'shitlib' you're losing ground, and of there's someone saying 'tankie' there is unlikely any common ground to be found. Accurate or no, the first one to use either term is usually in the wrong, imo.
Before 1941? I assume you mean before 1939?
I don't think there's any equivalence in saying "if you invade Poland we are going to declare war on you" and then doing so (as France and Britain did) and literally teaming up with Hitler to invade Poland (as the Soviet Union did).
Appeasement was a weak strategy but the idea was less that war needed to be avoided at all costs and more that war with Hitler was inevitable but western Europe needed to buy a few months to try to catch up in rearmament. They were just a few months away from fighting the battle of Britain with biplanes.
1941 was when Germany invaded the USSR (and Japan attacked the USA), which I was marking as the last point in which any major/global power remained diplomatic, even neutral, with the Nazis.


top 58 comments