DEATH TO ZIONAZIS
Those debates also seems to end up with libs becoming nazis, since there’s growing number of them.
Removed by mod
Lend-Lease helped, but the reason the communists beat the Nazis and saved the world was already because they had turned the tide of the war before the arms arrived. Contrary to pop-culture depictions of World War II, the soviets did not use “human wave” style attacks, and the communists were in fact greeted as the liberators they were. The Nazis brought genocide wherever they went, while the communists saved the world.
Nobody here is forgetting history, you’re inventing history.
The USSR had steady and consistent economic growth, and provided free, high quality education and healthcare, full employment, cheap or free housing, and fantastic infrastructure and city planning that still lasts to this day despite capitalism neglecting it. This rapid development resulted in dramatic democratization of society, reduced disparity, doubling of life expectancy, tripling of functional literacy rates to 99.9%, and much more. Living in the 1930s famine would not have been good, but it was the last major famine outside of wartime because the soviets ended famine in their countries.
Literacy rates, societal guarantees in the 1936 constitution, reports on the healthcare system over time, and more are good sources for these claims.
The USSR brought dramatic democratization to society. First-hand accounts from Statesian journalist Anna Louise Strong in her book This Soviet World describe soviet elections and factory councils in action. Statesian Pat Sloan even wrote Soviet Democracy to describe in detail the system the soviets had built for curious Statesians to read about, and today we have Professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance to reference.
When it comes to social progressivism, the soviet union was among the best out of their peers, so instead we must look at who was actually repressed outside of the norm. In the USSR, it was the capitalist class, the kulaks, the fascists who were repressed. This is out of necessity for any socialist state. When it comes to working class freedoms, however, the soviet union represented a dramatic expansion. Soviet progressivism was documented quite well in Albert Syzmanski’s Human Rights in the Soviet Union.
The truth, when judged based on historical evidence and contextualization, is that socialism was the best thing to happen to Russia in the last few centuries, and its absence has been devastating.
Death rates spiked:
And wealth disparity skyrocketed alongside the newly impoverished majority:
Capitalism brought with it skyrocketing poverty rates, drug abuse, prostitution, homelessness, crime rates, and lowered life expectancy. An estimated 7 million people died due to the dissolution of socialism and reintroduction of capitalism, and this is why the large majority of post-soviet citizens regret its fall. A return to socialism is the only path forward for the post-soviet countries.
When you look at the US Empire and western Europe as having higher quality of life than the USSR, you are looking at the benefits of imperialism, colonialism, and neocolonialism and wishing the USSR also practiced this, instead of helping liberate colonies and the global south. Russia in particular was a semi-feudal backwater in 1917, and made it to space 5 decades later. The USSR was not the picture of wealth, but was for its time the picture of development and rapid progress.
Communism works in theory and in practice.
are you fucking implying that the Soviets were worse than the Nazis??
What about countries who didn’t succumb to fascism? That time period was rife with fascists.
Spain, England, random mini countries in Europe, America. All had fascist parties that lost their spunk in that time because they defeated them in the polls/fought them.
Nazis weren’t the only fascist group at the time. Very silly post. Lack of history understanding
The British empire committed far more atrocities than Nazi Germany could ever aspire to, and they did it all using a far more stable form for colonialism than fascism: parliamentary / bourgeios democracy.
The US genocided an entire continent under this model, something the nazis explicitly tried and failed to accomplish in eastern europe.
The only reason nazi germany is demonized while the british and US empires are not is because: nazi germany also attacked western europe (a big no-no), and that they lost (thanks to the USSR btw). So really all you can say about the fascists vs the other countries you mentioned is that fascism is a far less historically stable and successful model of government for colonialism, than parliamentary bourgeios democracy.
Y’all are pulling anything out.
I just said you’re acting like nobody else defeated fascists any other way. Which isn’t true. Lol
countries who didn’t succumb to fascism
Spain
Uh… I don’t know how to tell ya…
Ignorant.
How did they remove the fascist? It wasn’t with fighting.
For the record, the end of franquism was a combination of factors, an active insurgency managing to kill his heir was a big part
Franco literally died of old age
And the country moved forward without that continuing.
I genuinely don’t understand what you guys don’t understand.
Good thing Franco didn’t have a successor lined up. I wonder why that was…
And the country moved forward without that continuing
Yeah, if by “moved forward” you mean “had a non-combative transition in which all the fascists in the state apparatus and positions of economic power remained”
Lack of history understanding
Does not seem to realize that Spain was taken over by fascists
???
And how did they transition back into democracy?
Not by fighting. Which is what I was talking about. 🙄
Y’all kinda boneheads
Uh, they didn’t? Spain remains a dictatorship of capital to this day? Dickhead?
Okay so.
Stalin tried to ally with the west (who were fascists and still are)
Stalin the tried to ally with Nazi Germany(fascist)
And Spain has always and will always be fascist.
Stalin is the only non-fascist.
Is that what you’re basically saying
There’s lots of non-fascist countries outside europe. How do they not count when almost all of the world’s population lives outside europe?
its only fascism if the victims are white
Removed by mod
You’re the one claiming that the uSSa during the jim crow era, britain during the bengal famine and francoist spain weren’t fascist lmfao like skim some wikipedia articles or something wth
Well the USA and Britain weren’t fascist though they were bourgeoise liberal democracies like Dessalines said. Francoist Spain was fascist, but with a more Catholic bent as opposed to Nazism which wanted to create a weird neo occult religion.
Nazism which wanted to create a weird neo occult religion.
USA literally.
Like I said as long as the victims aren’t white you wouldn’t consider it fascism. Like is the fact that the white population got to vote on how to oppress supposed to make it less fascist for the oppressed?
Fascism isn’t just a term for people doing bad things though I hate to be that guy, but it was a distinct movement that started in the 20th century. Doesn’t excuse any of the atrocities committed but colonialism was initially carried out by European monarchs most white people didn’t get to vote for that. White people were constantly reconstituting their philosophical systems to explain why they actually had the right to enslave and exploit people. Shit goes back to the ancient Greeks.
No, fascism is the marriage of corporations and the government, which allows them to legalise forced labor and genocide in order to drive down labor costs, monopolize whole industries by force and thereby maximizing profit. Fascism got adopted as the moniker for these types of governments because Mussolini made it very explicit with his “All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.”, but that doesnt mean that the idea started in Italy. Was Nazi Germany not fascist? It’s a movement distinct from the italian blackshirts after all…
Lemmy socs have the same issues everywhere. Anything that isn’t exactly them is fascist. No difference between Fascist and fascist either. They don’t understand
No I’m claiming that during that same time period Stalin was fighting Nazis. Other fascist groups existed and were ended through other means.
Ok so you concede that Churchill was a fascist, but it’s fine because he got voted out? And how exactly was Jim Crow and segregation ended though? Just peaceful voting? Black people successfully campaigned within the democrat framework, got on the ballot, were voted in, the racist policies were changed and everyone agreed to go by them? After the death of Stalin Franco famously saw the error of his ways and abdicated to make way for a democracy of the people?? Please make a more elaborate claim I don’t get what you’re alluding to with “other means”.
You talked about countries that didn’t “succumb to fascism” seems like Amerikkka started out fascist so you’re technically correct I guess in that it didn’t “succumb”, spain famously had an anarchist revolution that got brutally put down and a fascist monarchy got erected that lasted into the 1970s and Britain was famous for looting and genociding all over the globe so again, less succumbing and more just being the standard mode of operation.
Stalin was probably the worst communist leader when he was alive. Not a good example.
How so? Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Khrushchev were all worse. Stalin solidified socialism in the first federation of socialist states, during their most tumultuous period. Most of the gains of socialism in the USSR were built under the Stalin-Era.
Stalin massacred at least 50 million White cishet capitalist men… and even that estimate is probably too low.
It’s actually 60 million, they went back in time and added more /s
⇧ literal Holodomor denial. Denying that Stalin exterminated 70 million White capitalist men is the same thing as Holocaust denial (except it’s actually way worse; the Holocaust wasn’t THAT bad)
You evil redfash tankie subhuman how can you downplay the 10 million billion innocents Stalin personally crushed to death with his big spoon after all the grain in Ukraine was scooped away. You Chinese Russian Ai Bot.
Stalin made a spoon so large not even he could eat all the grain with it. #inconvenienttruths #tankiespwnage.
I was at the “Victims of Communism” museum and personally saw the spoon, or well only half of it as it was so big it would have taken me hours to walk around it.
Actually, this is turbo-Holodomor denial, 80 million white capitalist men were turbo-killed.
In fact, at least 90 million kulaks were stomped into the ground by Red Army soldiers dancing cossack dance on them
And now 100 million, just to sound scary. Robert Conquest just entered the room.
Funny how you post this and they can’t face it. Just giggle and awkwardly tap dance around it.
No? Click the link, we both got quoted for doing this same bit making fun of Robert Conquest and his made up “victims of communism” numbers before, and the fascists at MWOG tried to spin it as “Holodomor denial” when the 1930s famine was never brought up. Modern historians agree that a famine happened in the 1930s, with 3-4 million potentially dead, the problem with the Holodomor narrative is that it assumes this was on purpose when all evidence points to the opposite, as a combination of weather disaster and bourgeois farmers called “kulaks” resisting collectivization of agriculture by burning their crops and livestock.
You realize they’re kidding
No that’s not what is happening. Yes they are kidding but they’re rejecting a truth they tried to originally argue against. That’s not kidding, that’s called willing ignorance.
It’s not kidding lol. It’s mockery of reality to continue to preserve a bubble of bullshit
To be clear, you’re talking about this period here, when the USSR defeated fascism and the average life expectancy rose from 35 to 60?
Chilling.
Ah yes, the part where the USSR defeated fascism [right fucking after it allied with and was subsequently betrayed by fascism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov–Ribbentrop_Pact].
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain 🙄
The communists were never allies with the Nazis. A non-aggression pact is not an alliance. The communists spent the decade prior trying to form an anti-Nazi coalition force, such as the Anglo-French-Soviet Alliance which was pitched by the communists and rejected by the British and French. The communists hated the Nazis from the beginning, as the Nazi party rose to prominence by killing communists and labor organizers, cemented bourgeois rule, and was violently racist and imperialist, while the communists opposed all of that.
When the many talks of alliances with the west all fell short, the Soviets reluctantly agreed to sign a non-agression pact, in order to delay the coming war that everyone knew was happening soon. Throughout the last decade, Britain, France, and other western countries had formed pacts with Nazi Germany, such as the Four-Power Pact, the German-French-Non-Agression Pact, and more. Molotov-Ribbentrop was unique among the non-agression pacts with Nazi Germany in that it was right on the eve of war, and was the first between the USSR and Nazi Germany. It was a last resort, when the west was content from the beginning with working alongside Hitler.
Harry Truman, in 1941 in front of the Senate, stated:
If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don’t want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances.
Not only that, but it was the Soviet Union that was responsible for 4/5ths of total Nazi deaths, and winning the war against the Nazis. The Soviet Union did not agree to invade Poland with the Nazis, it was about spheres of influence and red lines the Nazis should not cross in Poland. When the USSR went into Poland, it stayed mostly to areas Poland had invaded and annexed a few decades prior. Should the Soviets have let Poland get entirely taken over by the Nazis, standing idle? The West made it clear that they were never going to help anyone against the Nazis until it was their turn to be targeted.
Churchill did not take the Nazis as a serious threat, and was horrified when FDR and Stalin made a joke about executing Nazis. Churchill starved millions to death in India in preventable ways, and had this to say about it:
I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits.
Meanwhile, the soviet famine in the 1930s was the last major famine outside of wartime in the USSR, because collectivized farming achieved food security in a region where famine was common. As a consequence, life expectancy doubled:
The Nazis and soviets were never allies. A non-aggression pact is not an alliance, and the non-aggression pact between the soviets and the Nazis was unique among the other non-aggression pacts in that it was on the eve of war. The soviets knew war was coming, and so bought more time to prepare.
tl;dr
Communists hate Nazis. Nazis hate communists
Why did they agree to split Poland then?
Sounds like an alliance to me.
They didn’t, they agreed to “spheres of influence” that the other group was to not enter in case of outbreak of war. The soviets did not “split Poland” with the Nazis, the soviets only went in weeks after the Nazis did. Most of the area the Soviets took are areas in modern Lithuania and Ukraine that the Soviets were re-taking. Poland had annexed them in the Polish-Soviet War and the Polish-Lithuanian War earlier.
This did not happen outside of your fevered Mcarthyist dreams
They had an agreement on a mutual benefit or common goal, that’s an ally. Not a friend, but an ally.
Vegeta hates the z-fighters but he hated freiza more. Batman and the Joker against the Joker Who Laughs.
That’s an ally, even if it is temporary or hate each other they’re still allies.
Russia even released documents themselves showing such things.
You guys are seriously severely sensitive to anything you can’t even speak truth.
“iTs bEcAuSe ThE wESt dInDt aLly wITh tHeM”
Okay that’s fine, they still were an ally to Germany. Part of the pact agreement was to not help enemies of the other. If two characters in Survivor or Squid Game said that, you’d call them allies lol
Part of the pact agreement was to not help enemies of the other
That’s because it was a non-aggression pact. Other such pact have it too, the Soviet–French Non–Aggression Pact or the Anglo-Thai Non-Aggression Pact, or the Portuguese–Spanish Treaty of Friendship and Non-Aggression all seem to have had it. These do not make them allies.
Stalin offered a united front to fight the Nazis, they only accepted a non aggression pact when they knew they were on their own, so they needed to industrialize and prepare, and they did, and they defeated the nazis at a massive cost of life. Literally all of this could have been prevented if the French and the British just agreed to join the USSR, but those two had been genociding the globe for centuries at that point so of course they didn’t give a shit if all Slavs were exterminated as long as communism died with them.
They had an agreement on a mutual benefit or common goal, that’s an ally. Not a friend, but an ally.
This might be the most obviously stupid thing I ever read
Non aggression pacts are not the same as allying with the Nazis. It also wasn’t a betrayal when the Nazis invaded. Destruction of the slavs and Lebensraum in eastern Europe was Hitler’s inevitable goal he ranted about it in meinkamf for fuck sake everyone knew it was happening eventually. The non aggression pact was necessary to delay the inevitable long enough to industrialise and build up a force to fight the Nazis largely alone as the western powers had continuously refused to form an anti nazi pact since 1933. The soviets were also the last major power to sign a non aggression pact with the Nazis. The USSR broke the nazi beast took the majority of the casualties and killed the most Nazis.
everyone knew it was happening eventually
Well, depending on what year we are talking, those that had “read and re-read Mein Kampf until he almost memorized it” like Litvinov in 1928 probably would have, but “[a]s late as 1936 […] Benes, Herriot, Daladier, Eden and others had not read it.” Not to mention “In October 1938—after Munich—Neville Chamberlain instructed the Foreign Office to translate some excerpts for him” (Pope, Maxim Litvinov, pp. 317–18. Quoted in Fleming, The Cold War and Its Origins, chapter 4, note 14)
i did not know about your website, it’s awesome!!! i’ve been looking for these epubs for a long time.
Thanks. Besides Blackshirts and Reds and Elementary Principles of Philosophy, I made them myself.
I haven’t uploaded any of them to libgen yet (and so you wouldn’t find any of them if you looked) cuz I was never sure they were good enough, hopefully now that I have adopted the the standard ebooks manual I can be happy with them and upload them.
It’s always a massive flex to be able to link epubs you’ve created, haha. Great work!
Oh my god look at all the allies hitler had. /s Even the US wanted to help them out with operation paperclip. Maybe the fact that the Soviets killed 75% of Nazis was just a bit of nazi infighting in your eyes.
[edit] lol whoops by the time I found the image and posted, cowbee had already made a much better comment with the same image
a long life is not necessarily a good one and some contributions and trade ie Medicinals, Antibiotics, etc were not caused by Stalin
Correlation not Causation
a long life is not necessarily a good one
If you want to see a liberal turn on a dime to become pro-death, simply be a communist and extend people’s lives
Ah yes because Stalin invented penicillin too and quite literally hospital sterilization too and health standards too
A health invention in a vacuum is useless.
If you have health inventions but then withhold them from poor people, average livespan will increase very little.
If you have health inventions and then make a system that supplies those to everyone, average lifespan will increase very much.
in 1945, penicillin became widely available, we have no proof that stalin caused it
God ordained “there shall be abundant penicillin” in 1945 and there was penicillin.
The fact the majority of the global south didn’t see comparable life expectancy spikes of the same degree as socialist countries and the fact life expectancy plunged post socialism in eastern Europe really points to the system having a great effect on life expectancy.
His point isn’t that stupid though, would you rather be 70 and have grown up in Gaza or be 70 in a none apartheid state. Obviously everybody wants to live as long as possible. Either way I kinda don’t care about the 1940s and why people are so obsessed with arguing about them is beyond me especially since I’m not an academic. We have our very own unique set of political problems we have to deal with now.
It was also the fact that healthcare was made universal, housing drastically improved, and famine was ended.
also that we started to educate people on how wounds can get infected, how deadly diseases are if not prevented and treated and we adopted hygiene and sterility precautions in hospitals
Sure, but the fact remains that the establishment of socialism under Lenin and solidified under Stalin had a dramatic impact on how these advances were distributed to the people, enabling a far greater access to medical care and necessities than before.
