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.
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.
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.
This is myopic. Stalin invaded Poland because it refused to cooperate with the Soviet Union against Nazi Germany. The Nazis and USSR weren’t just raiding North Africa cooperatively, it was a geographical necessity to the Soviets attacking Nazi Germany that they be able to have their military on Germany’s border!
How the hell are the Soviets supposed to attack Nazi Germany if Poland says the Soviets aren’t welcome on its land?
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.
Omg please read a book, I beg you😭🙏. The USSR was basically the only country taking an active stance against fascists. Who supported the anti-fascist side in the Spanish civil war? That’s right the USSR, who allowed the fascists free reign in Europe? Right, the UK and France. The UK and France were happily appeasing the fascists as long as they weren’t threatened themselves.
Did you finish your book halfway through? Hitler and Stalin formed an alliance shortly after the Spanish civil war. Even though Hitler referred to Slavic people as untermench Stalin still signed treaties because they were at the end of the day both Fascist Authoritarian dictators and dont give a single fuck about committing crimes against humanity.
What do you do when a rabid fascist neighbor is on the rise and the capitalist countries of Europe are not willing to enter a defense alliance? Poland was not friendly towards the USSR, so in the case that the USSR did not divide Poland, Poland would have been completely invaded by Nazi Germany which puts the fascists right at the doorstep of the USSR, which clearly is not an optimal situation.
And you are really lacking any historical knowledge if you call Stalin fascist. The USSR under Stalin did the bulk of the work against fascism in Europe and it is a gross misappropriation to call Stalin or the USSR fascist.
This is so stupid and you provide part of your own refutation. Molotov-Ribbentrop was not an “alliance”, it was a non-aggression pact and an agreement limiting the amount of Poland that the Nazis could invade. Where the Nazis invaded Poland, they committed genocide. Where the Soviets invaded (since Poland refused their earlier offers to ally against Germany), they evacuated the Jewish population from the front lines of the inevitable invasion.
Nazism as an ideology set out to eradicate those seen as impure, and two of the most prominent of those targeted groups were communists and Slavic people. Hitler literally wanted to kill everyone who identified as a socialist. To think that the USSR was unaware or tolerant of this fact is a truly awful take.
Wow a commie who doesnt know history, not surprising. Firstly I never said USSR didnt know what Germany was doing, I said they didnt care. This is backed up by history. Yes Hitler hated the soviets and they probably disliked him to but they tolerated him and his crimes against humanity enough to form an alliance and work together. A little timeline of events to refresh your memory: 1939 USSR signs a non aggression pact with Germany. This pact includes plans to divide eastern europe between USSR and Germany, a clause that prevents the USSR from allying or aiding enemies of Germany. Shortly after Germany and the USSR double team Poland and split it up between them. After Stalin used the attack to capture a few eastern european countries he asked to join the Axis powers treaty. Stalin was warned multiple times that Germany was preparing to backstab him but rejected the warnings as he thought they were so allies. After it was confirm that Hitler had betrayed him he spent several days sulking in his holiday house refusing to communicate with his generals.
There is no way you can reasonably say that USSR disapproved of Hitlers action and Ideology. The only thing he would have had an issue with is that Hitler hated slavic people. He was even willing to put that aside because they both had authoritarianism in common.
Stalin was warned multiple times that Germany was preparing to backstab him but rejected the warnings as he thought they were so allies
He underestimated how quickly Germany would attack and that was a massive fuck-up that resulted in a huge amount of death from the ensuing genocide by the Nazis, but that’s not because he thought Germany and the Soviet Union were “allies”.
He was even willing to put that aside because they both had authoritarianism in common.
This is such an insipid statement. “Authoritarianism” isn’t an ideology, it is a methodology. What, are you saying that they had common cause against the wholesome democratic west that rejected Stalin’s requests to form an anti-fascist alliance and crush Nazi Germany?
Reading through this thread, a lot of the Beehaw users are crass anticommunists who hardly even tolerate anarchists. Considering the understanding you came to with CommunistLady about the equivocation you make here being kind of gross, I’d like to gently submit the suggestion that you check out Hexbear.net, since it’s a communist site that puts heavy emphasis on trans-inclusivity and has an anarchist comm (and rules for the MLs about treating the anarchists with respect).
Certain aspects of Stalin? Or in general?
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.
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
You did not addressed a single point lol you’re a broken disc, say the same thing all the time
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.
deleted by creator
BASED
This is myopic. Stalin invaded Poland because it refused to cooperate with the Soviet Union against Nazi Germany. The Nazis and USSR weren’t just raiding North Africa cooperatively, it was a geographical necessity to the Soviets attacking Nazi Germany that they be able to have their military on Germany’s border!
How the hell are the Soviets supposed to attack Nazi Germany if Poland says the Soviets aren’t welcome on its land?
Do you deny the Molotov–Ribbentrop pact and the illegal attack on Poland by the Soviet union under its leader Josef Stalin?
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
And then they killed millions of people to enforce Stalin’s autocracy. How, exactly, is that better than Hitler?
Removed by mod
All tankies ever have is name-calling.
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.
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
What’s your excuse for the holodomor?
deleted by creator
You’re a spineless coward, just admit you’re fine with genocide and totalitarianism so long as they have a red flag.
Genocide is horrible. That’s why I have so much respect for the USSR for stopping the Nazi menace.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_the_Soviet_Union
So I guess it’s just not genocide when the Soviet Union does it?
The Soviets bravely fought against the Nazis and put a stop to the Holocaust. For that alone, they should have all of our respect.
deleted by creator
Because they were attacked. Otherwise they would have happily sat out of ww2.
Omg please read a book, I beg you😭🙏. The USSR was basically the only country taking an active stance against fascists. Who supported the anti-fascist side in the Spanish civil war? That’s right the USSR, who allowed the fascists free reign in Europe? Right, the UK and France. The UK and France were happily appeasing the fascists as long as they weren’t threatened themselves.
Did you finish your book halfway through? Hitler and Stalin formed an alliance shortly after the Spanish civil war. Even though Hitler referred to Slavic people as untermench Stalin still signed treaties because they were at the end of the day both Fascist Authoritarian dictators and dont give a single fuck about committing crimes against humanity.
What do you do when a rabid fascist neighbor is on the rise and the capitalist countries of Europe are not willing to enter a defense alliance? Poland was not friendly towards the USSR, so in the case that the USSR did not divide Poland, Poland would have been completely invaded by Nazi Germany which puts the fascists right at the doorstep of the USSR, which clearly is not an optimal situation.
And you are really lacking any historical knowledge if you call Stalin fascist. The USSR under Stalin did the bulk of the work against fascism in Europe and it is a gross misappropriation to call Stalin or the USSR fascist.
This is so stupid and you provide part of your own refutation. Molotov-Ribbentrop was not an “alliance”, it was a non-aggression pact and an agreement limiting the amount of Poland that the Nazis could invade. Where the Nazis invaded Poland, they committed genocide. Where the Soviets invaded (since Poland refused their earlier offers to ally against Germany), they evacuated the Jewish population from the front lines of the inevitable invasion.
Nazism as an ideology set out to eradicate those seen as impure, and two of the most prominent of those targeted groups were communists and Slavic people. Hitler literally wanted to kill everyone who identified as a socialist. To think that the USSR was unaware or tolerant of this fact is a truly awful take.
Wow a commie who doesnt know history, not surprising. Firstly I never said USSR didnt know what Germany was doing, I said they didnt care. This is backed up by history. Yes Hitler hated the soviets and they probably disliked him to but they tolerated him and his crimes against humanity enough to form an alliance and work together. A little timeline of events to refresh your memory: 1939 USSR signs a non aggression pact with Germany. This pact includes plans to divide eastern europe between USSR and Germany, a clause that prevents the USSR from allying or aiding enemies of Germany. Shortly after Germany and the USSR double team Poland and split it up between them. After Stalin used the attack to capture a few eastern european countries he asked to join the Axis powers treaty. Stalin was warned multiple times that Germany was preparing to backstab him but rejected the warnings as he thought they were so allies. After it was confirm that Hitler had betrayed him he spent several days sulking in his holiday house refusing to communicate with his generals.
There is no way you can reasonably say that USSR disapproved of Hitlers action and Ideology. The only thing he would have had an issue with is that Hitler hated slavic people. He was even willing to put that aside because they both had authoritarianism in common.
He underestimated how quickly Germany would attack and that was a massive fuck-up that resulted in a huge amount of death from the ensuing genocide by the Nazis, but that’s not because he thought Germany and the Soviet Union were “allies”.
This is such an insipid statement. “Authoritarianism” isn’t an ideology, it is a methodology. What, are you saying that they had common cause against the wholesome democratic west that rejected Stalin’s requests to form an anti-fascist alliance and crush Nazi Germany?
Reading through this thread, a lot of the Beehaw users are crass anticommunists who hardly even tolerate anarchists. Considering the understanding you came to with CommunistLady about the equivocation you make here being kind of gross, I’d like to gently submit the suggestion that you check out Hexbear.net, since it’s a communist site that puts heavy emphasis on trans-inclusivity and has an anarchist comm (and rules for the MLs about treating the anarchists with respect).