Anarcho-Bolshevik

In my experience, anticommunists tend to be pretty terrible at managing time. There were many German anticommunists in the 1940s who thought that the G.P.U. still existed.

As long as none of the civilians is a white cishet capitalist man, who cares?

invading poland side by side with the nazis

This would actually be a more accurate description of the Slovak Republic’s contribution to the Fascist invasion of Poland, though it is very rare to see anticommunists mention that even in passing. I wonder why. (Presumably they’d say that it is unimportant or uninteresting, of which—as I showed in my thread—it is neither.)

Yes, but I stopped updating the megathread because of the character limit. Seriously, I added so much content to the thread that our software couldn’t take it anymore. I’ve been thinking about using Github as an alternative, though I am inexperienced with that platform and I am unsure if others would want me to continue my compilation there.

Something tells me that if I invited anticommunists to check out a source with the self‐heroizing title of ‘RFvsMisinfo’, featuring a blood‐splattered photograph from the Munich conference and various sentences presupposing that any counterevidence is ‘Western propaganda’, they would feel more than a wee discouraged, too… just saying.

Sloppy propaganda aside, it is genuinely interesting to compare and contrast the Fascists’ dealings with other dictatorships of the bourgeoisie to their dealings with the people’s republics. It isn’t useful just for dunking on anticommies. For example:

the [Fascists] knew from experience that Soviet demands were “much harder to meet than Finnish demands.”

And since somebody mentioned deportations of Jews:

between 1941 and 1944 the Finnish military [deported] at least 2,829 POWs to [the Third Reich] on 49 occasions; among the military [deportations] were over 500 individuals who were defined as “Jewish” or “political” (Communist), or both.

Admittedly, I feel like a sicko for saying that these subjects ‘interest’ me… but hey, somebody has to get their hands dirty when studying these tragedies. It’s only fitting that the one doing the job most often would also be the one who can tolerate it the best.

An organization that bombastically calls itself ‘EUvsDisinfo’, splatters a diplomatic photograph with fake blood, and preemptively dismisses counterevidence as ‘pro‐Kremlin disinformation’ does not sound like something that has an interest in exploring this matter in good faith, but I can play along (for now). Simply put, your source leaves too much counterevidence unaddressed. This, for example:

The discussion in London took place on 24 April. Halifax also backed unilateral declarations. ‘A tri-partite pact on the lines proposed, would make war inevitable. On the other hand, he thought that it was only fair to assume that if we rejected Russia’s proposals, Russia would sulk.’ And then Halifax made this comment, almost as an afterthought: ‘There was… always the bare possibility that a refusal of Russia’s offer might even throw her into Germany’s arms.’⁸⁰ Was anyone listening? If you asked the British and French everyman’s opinion, war was already inevitable.

[…]

The failures of the previous five years to obtain agreements on collective security led Molotov to want to pin the French and British to the wall to make sure they would not leave the Soviet Union in the lurch against the Wehrmacht. This was not Soviet paranoia, it was Soviet experience. Would not any prudent diplomat in the same position, after years of being spurned, mistrust interlocutors like Chamberlain and Bonnet? Maiskii’s reports appear to have encouraged the Soviet government to invest in continued negotiations. The obduracy in Moscow derived from doubts about British and French intentions which Maiskii and Surits could not overcome, and that for good reason.

(Source and more here.)

I know that I did not address everything in your link, but frankly I really doubt that you have the time, patience, or interest in reading a thoroughly sourced and exhaustive commentary on it. For simplicity’s sake I chose to focus on the denial that the liberal capitalists wanted a reinvasion of Soviet Eurasia.

Agreed. I know that the original poster isn’t siding with the Herzlians, but this is still in questionable taste.

Oh man, it’s been so long and I tried so many that I can’t possibly offer a certain answer… but a good candidate is JumpStart Preschool, which I (barely) remember playing on a Windows computer. Otherwise, it could have been The Busy World of Richard Scarry Busytown, Richard Scarry’s How Things Work in Busytown, Gus Goes to Cyberopolis, Fisher-Price Ready for School: Kindergarten, Fisher-Price Learning in Toyland, Fisher Price Great Adventures: Pirate Ship, or Nick Jr Play Math!

There are many more that I could name, like Oddballz, Pajama Sam in No Need to Hide When it’s Dark Outside, Ozzie’s World, Sesame Street: Numbers, Mr. Potato Head Activity Pack, Play-Doh Creations, and Candy Land Adventure, but I am less sure of those. Finally, there are those titles that I simply can’t find again. There was a point‐and‐click program that mainly took place in a spaceship, and another one where a character said ‘I brush my teeth before I go to bed every night!’, but I’ll be damned if I can find videos of those.

I’m surprised that they made handhelds! I was always under the impression that Soviet video games were more like experimental curiosities than a visible industry. The situation was similar in the Anglosphere back in the 1950s and ’60s: there was not much of a market for them, so they were hard to find (unless you were a computer scientist).

I really doubt that Moscow deported women and children out of either collective punishment or misidentification. It’s more reasonable that it was simply Soviet policy to keep families together as much as possible.

Of course, if Moscow did separate the relatives, then antisocialists would go from griping about ‘collective punishment’ to griping about ‘separating loved ones’ instead. In any case, antisocialists rarely attempt to understand their opponents’ motives, especially in detail. All that you need to know is that the Soviets committed atrocities against innocents and that’s it. They did it just ’cause.

Facists [sic] like to kill people that’s kind of their whole ideology.

That… wasn’t the point of Fascism. Frankly, I’d be surprised if you could name the countries or regions where the Italian Fascists committed their massacres.

The point of Fascism was to forcibly save capitalism from the concessions that the lower classes won. I recommend listening to this: https://lemmy.today/post/315713

And the other paraphrase sounds like a reply to Planck:

Planck began his intercession on behalf of Haber, even going so far as to say that without the latter’s chemical process for obtaining ammonia from the nitrogen of the air “the previous war would have been lost from the beginning.” To this remark Hitler retorted: “I have nothing at all against the Jews themselves. But the Jews are all Communists, and these are my enemies — it is against these that I am fighting.”

???

Jews have been likening Zionism’s neocolony to the Third Reich as early as 1948. I collected quotes from Orthodox Jews, Shoah survivors, and even a few ‘moderate’ Zionists making their own comparisons after my Sephardic friend encouraged me to write an article formally comparing the two entities.

A case in point is Golda Meir (Meyerson), who was in fact one of the more hawkish leaders of the Yishuv. On May 6, 1948, following a visit to Arab Haifa only a few days after its conquest and the flight and expulsion of the city’s Arab population, Meir reported to the Jewish Agency Executive that “there were houses where the coffee and pita bread were left on the table, and I could not avoid [thinking] that this, indeed, had been the picture in many Jewish towns [i.e., in Europe during World War II].”⁴²

Within Mapam—a left‐[leaning] Zionist party that was part of the state’s first government headed by David Ben Gurion—the expulsion of Palestinians was the subject of intense debate. For example, Eliezer Pra’i (later Peri), editor of the Mapam daily al‐Hamishmar, wrote: “Among the best of our comrades the thought has crept in that perhaps it is possible politically to achieve our ingathering in the Land of Israel by Hitlerite‐Nazi means.”⁴³

Following the atrocities committed during Operation Hiram by the [neocolonial] army (IDF) who conquered the central‐upper Galilee pocket, the [neocolonial régime] established a three‐person investigation committee. At a cabinet meeting on November 17, 1948, convinced that the army and defense establishment were being evasive, Mapam representative Aharon Cisling stated: “I couldn’t sleep all night. […] This is something that determines the character of the nation. […] Jews too have committed Nazi acts.”⁴⁴

(Emphasis added.)

That is only small sample of the comparisons that I collected—not a single one of which came from a gentile.

Of course, there are limits to the analogy, and one could argue that such analogies are never necessary, but whatever the case I find it troubling to dismiss them as ‘antisemitic’ seeing as how many well adjusted, well educated Jewish adults have made and continue to make their own comparisons between the Reich and the Zionist occupation (which most certainly isn’t a ‘democracy’).

Fifty‐five downvotes over this comment? Judas Priest, this community needs to chill out.

But I am chuckling at the joker who said ‘nobody gives a shit, though’. Trust me, I know from experience what apathy looks like. This definitely isn’t an example.

There is no fediverse instance more queer-friendly and than Hexbear; what are you even talking about?

I am guessing that the reasoning is as follows:

1. The short twentieth century’s people’s republics were frequently heterosexist in some way
2. Many on Hexbear defend the people’s republics (within reason)
3. Ergo, Hexbear is heterosexist

This reasoning does not apply when defending dictatorships of the bourgeoisie such as Imperial America and the British Empire, because

Social democracy?

No socialist State has ever been won at the ballot box

https://archive.org/stream/ClassStruggleInSocialistPoland/page/n48/mode/1up

https://archive.org/stream/ClassStruggleInSocialistPoland/page/n51/mode/1up

‘The “Cold War” is a Marxist lie.’

Well, I can thank you for sharing this unique perspective on the matter with me, even though I do find some of its conclusions either unconvincing or bizarre (‘Franchi (whose real name was Edgardo Sogno) was a monarchist, so strongly anti-Communist that after the war he joined very right-wing groups, and was charged with collaborating in a project for a reactionary coup d’état. Who cares? Sogno still remains the dream hero of my childhood.’ Seriously‽), but that still doesn’t justify hostility to a conclusion that’s very easy to reach. The statement ‘Fascism was a form of colonialism’ may be somewhat of an oversimplification, but I gave you some very good reasons why there was nothing ‘utterly ridiculous’ about it.

You didn’t answer my second question whether you know of Fascist Italy’s colonial history or not. So, you already knew of the ‘reconquest’ of Libya, the massacre at Addis Ababa, the forced marriages in Somalia, the concubinages in Eritrea, Benito Mussolini referring to Emperor Haile Selassie as a ‘Bolshevik pig’ in front of a crowd of thousands, and even the unofficial annexation of Tavolara in 1934?

On a side note, respectable scholars such as Robert Paxton would consider Iberia’s 20th century anticommunist régimes to have been at best parafascist, in part because they weren’t adventurer‐conquerors, but also for more complex reasons. For example:

After 1945 the Falange became a colorless civic solidarity association, normally referred to simply as the Movimiento. In 1970 its very name was abolished. By then Franquist Spain had long become an authoritarian régime dominated by the army, state officials, businessmen, landowners, and the Church, with almost no visible fascist coloration.⁸

(Source.)