417
A new country in the world!
(feddit.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
417 points (100.0% liked)
Memes
45660 readers
1153 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
True, if thia were WW2 they would be non ironically saying for the allies to surrender to the Nazi, Soviets and fascists, to "prevent deaths"
The soviets were part of the allies, and killed 8/10 Nazis. Seeing your historical illiteracy explains your lack of understanding on current geopolitical events
of course after nzia invaded them, but before that they had agreements to share Europe with the Nazis, who don't know history is you, not me
Literally everyone made agreements like that. The Soviets were the last to do it after spending years trying to form an anti-fascist pact with the liberal powers.
You didn't know the soviets were part of the allies, so it's futile to go in any discussion with you. Your repeating fascist propaganda and insinuating that Stalin and Hitler were allies. You can't even contextualize the Munich agreement. Just stfu and lurk more
of course i know that in the end they fought the nazis, this don't exclude the fact they had an pact with the nazis to partition europe, also why would be a fascist propaganda if they were the ones making agreements with the fascists?
maybe yes, maybe not, the love for genocide was mutual tho
Because fascists like yourself like to share this without the proper context to paint the Soviets in a bad light, when in fact it was them almost alone stoping the Holocaust.
I like how the article you shared says
That's...wow 💀
You're right, the Soviet Union joined the allies against the Nazis because they were explicitly not revolutionary defeatists, which cannot be said of a large number of modern day tankies.
"Tankie" functions for libs the same way, as "woke" does for chuds. It's a meaningless term
And libs often seems to function for tankies in exactly the same way. I'm an anarchist but when I argue with tankies I get called a lib even as I call for the overthrow of capitalism. Funny how that works, almost as if the problem is dogmatism.
Unlike "Tankie" and "woke", "lib" does in deed have a definition.
So does "tankie" and "woke." I used mine correctly, you are indeed a tankie. When a chud calls a left-wing political activist woke, at least they're using it correctly, even if they don't necessarily know that they are.
You called me a liberal for - let me check - opposing imperialism regardless of who's doing it. Interesting, do you think that fits the definition?
Could you kindly defone that for me?
Where? Lol funny how you get that feeling I talked about you