Everytime - feddit.org
feddit.org

I’m awfully curious as to how the author would explain away state socialists regularly reporting on the oppression of Palestinians.

  • Mindfury [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    58·
    23 days ago

    “hehe look they noticed me”

    yeah no shit, that was the point wasn’t it? god these people are dumb
    west germany remains one of humanity’s greatest mistakes

    • GalaxyBrain [they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
      35·
      23 days ago

      Anti communist ‘leftists’ will often attack so called tankies for not learning from the past. This post is a perfect example.

      Of why they’re wrong! The lesson to take from the collapse of the Soviet Union is thst Stalin didnt Stalin enough. He was quoted to be a teddy bear compared to Lennin and I wish the Man of Steel had been made of a bit harder stuff, the mistakes of our ideology in the past was that they compromised or were compromised. We have a global extinction event in mid progress, there is no compromise left for them to offer and we wont get fooled again

      • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
        16·
        23 days ago

        It can be true simultaneously that there are many people who should have been purged but weren’t and that many shouldn’t have been purged but were (or could have been dealt with in a manner other than execution).

              • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
                10·
                22 days ago

                So you would say that he should have invaded Europe, and fought with several European powers along with the US on top of Japan after suffering the catastrophic caused by the Nazis? The first nuclear bombs would have been dropped on the USSR, and honestly I think the US would have been willing to ally with Japan for the sake of fighting the Communist Menace in that circumstance considering historical stances people like Truman took regarding potentially supporting Germany against the USSR to start with.

                • Diva (she/her)@lemmy.mlM
                  18·
                  22 days ago

                  i wouldn’t be as flippant as that, a continuation of the war would have been its own sort of horror.

                  however, the yalta/potsdam settlement was a negotiated surrender of communists movements globally in exchange for a soviet sphere in eastern europe. greek communists were explicitly told to stand down, communist movements in france/italy were pressured to disarm and pursue parliamentary path.

                  there were revolutionary opportunities that were squandered, but it was a no-win scenario. the allies made it clear that turning eastern europe into a radioactive crater would be their defense plan, and the timing of that contributed to the decision that was made

                  • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
                    7·
                    22 days ago

                    there were revolutionary opportunities that were squandered, but it was a no-win scenario. the allies made it clear that turning eastern europe into a radioactive crater would be their defense plan, and the timing of that contributed to the decision that was made

                    The Chinese Civil War also didn’t have a clear winner yet. It made little sense for the Soviet Union to send aid to Greek communists against Greek nationalists only for Chinese communists to lose against Chinese nationalists. The second phase of the Chinese Civil War was the first modern proxy war with the US backing the KMT and the Soviet Union backing the CPC.

                • GalaxyBrain [they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
                  5·
                  22 days ago

                  Solid points. I was being hyperbolic in the first place and just having fun. But yeah, getting nuked would have been bad. Getting nukes earlier wasnt really an option either…

      • Anarcho-Bolshevik@lemmygrad.mlOPEnglish
        13·
        22 days ago

        Environmentalism survived—and even thrived—in Stalin’s Soviet Union, establishing levels of protection unparalleled anywhere in the world, although for only one component of the Soviet environment: the immense forests of the Russian heartland.¹

        Throughout the early Soviet period, the agencies in charge of timber extraction repeatedly pressed for greater latitude, advancing visions of highly engineered, regularized woodlands while employing aggressive, revolutionary rhetoric. Yet with one quickly reversed exception, the Politburo consistently rejected the drive toward hyperindustrialism in the forest.

        After briefly capitulating to the industrialists’ unrelenting attacks on conservationism in 1929, Stalin’s government reversed course, and in the 1930s and 1940s set aside ever larger tracts of Russia’s most valuable forests as preserves, off-limits to industrial exploitation. Forest protection ultimately rose to such prominence during the last six years of Stalin’s rule that the Politburo took control of the Soviet forest away from the Ministry of Heavy Industry, and elevated the nation’s forest conservation bureau to the dominant position in implementing policy.

        The results of this struggle for supremacy in the forest, which pitted the party leadership against those very bureaucratic interests assigned to carry out the party’s industrial ambitions, show that environmental protection could find a place in a rapidly industrializing [government] as aggressive as Stalin’s—provided that the reasons given for protection were sufficiently pragmatic, and the supporting faction sufficiently powerful.

        (Source.)