276
important rulepost
(lemmy.world)
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 13 Jun 2023
276 points (100.0% liked)
195
4182 readers
1 users here now
RULE 1: IF YOU VISIT THIS COMMUNITY, YOU MUST POST BEFORE LEAVING!!
The Lemmy equivalent of r/195 on Reddit. Not officially affiliated (yet).
Any moderators from the reddit can have mod here, just ask.
There's another 196 over on 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
Most people use the Blahaj.zone one so this place isn't very active.
ALL HAIL LORD SPRONKUS!!!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
You accuse me of defending the "genocidal" western world?
Which country started WW2 and the holocaust? I am gonna give you a hint it is 1 of the people I named in my post.
If you actually think I am defending anyone than you are not reading my post.
In which countries/campaigns most nazis died? Might shed some light over individual parties contribution to the fall of Germany in ww2.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_casualties_of_World_War_II
Doesn't change the fact the USSR allied with the Nazis and divided up Poland with them, and then came crying to the West for Lend-Lease aid when trusting Hitler backfired on them.
Engaging in historical revisionism to own the tankies.
Nothing I'm saying is untrue. Sources or GTFO.
The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was negotiated while Thalmann was rotting in a concentration camp. Stalin was actively censoring Soviet solidarity with Thalmann for a half decade because he believed the Nazis could be compromised with and didn't want to send the message that they supported a German political prisoner, even a Communist one. After years in the camp Thalmann was eventually shot in the back of the head on Hitler's personal order.
Seriously what point are you trying to make?
You are saying that Europe "rolled" over and effectively died when the Nazis were strolling in and most of the western nations were just apathically watching?
I agree with you. Good point to make. If the western nations were to make a stand earlier in Hitlers crusade than alot of hurt could be spared.
Even in my country there used to be enough people who were collaborating with the Nazis. We actually had a party who were actively promoting it.
My country also had the most jewish victims that were murdered by the Nazis. Three quarters of the total that lived in my country were brutally slaughtered.
It is the highest of all western nations.
I have read the literature and seen the documentaries.
So again what is the point that you are trying to make that I don't know about?
My point is that, by the single metric of crushing nazis, no warring nation topped the soviets.
Can't deny that the strongest opposition to nazis, by count of absolute death of nazis, was the socialists, not the democrats.
You agree western nations were lenient in the beginning, just like the soviets did what was diplomatically available to delay being attacked, until some industrial setup was available.
But by the end of ww2, counting the bodies, soviets get less credit than they deserve by western historiography.
Source: Wikipedia.
"But by the end of ww2, counting the bodies, soviets get less credit than they deserve by western historiography."
Sounds more like a thing that you should pick up with your history teacher then.
WW2 in my country is a part of history that get's the most attention during history classes. Never has it underestimated the role of the Soviets in the WW2 in defeat of the Nazi's.
That doesn't mean that it validates the regime that it had during those years. Don't you have the ability to see the incidents in isolation or is your whole reasoning about this fact that because they killed the most Nazi's that the regime and whatever they did in Eastern Europe and their own borders are OK?
It is the same reasoning people make that Hitler is also quite a good guy because he designed the Autobahn (which is Nazi propaganda) that "improved" the lives of the people of Germany.
Just because a governing body of a country did good things for their country or had tendencies to make a right choice doesn't change the fact that they are and still can be pieces of shit.
I'm originally from a colonised country. I have reasons to be skeptical of dominant western speech and historiography.
I'm not validating every action of socialists, the same way I have to suppose you don't validate every action of the western nations. All governments are probably doing stupid shit, I support none.
I'm impressed by your statement that a governing body that had tendencies to make the right choice is/was a piece of shit, in contrast of generally defending governing bodies that apparently doesn't have tendencies of making the right choices in the economy realm, for most people. Evident by recent banks bailouts.
Adding to my point, we only know about stuff that happens outside western countries through the lenses of western media. Which is generally alright, where there's no state interest in the topics. And this specific topic, of socialism, alternative means of organising production and making politics is very sensitive to western countries, so they have to filter news, just like you'd expect China to do.
Also, thank you for a generally civilised conversation in a very heated sublemmit, I appreciate it. :)
Doesn’t change the fact the USSR allied with the Nazis and divided up Poland with them, and then came crying to the West for Lend-Lease aid when trusting Hitler backfired on them.
Fixed that for you. That's what happens when you cozy up with Hitler trying to be his ally like a moron before realizing you fucked up. A long and proud history of shit decision making and then whining about it after.
Your useage of 'buts' is awfully similar.
I can't help that I like big butts and I cannot lie.