Joseph Stalin is the most reviled opponent of the liberal bourgeoisie. No one causes more lib seethe than Stalin. The man was also firmly socially conservative and anti-cosmopolitan. And most importantly, he won the fucking war and died on old man at the height of his power, and the Soviet empire he built survived for decades afterwards.
So why is the online right still in love with a miserable loser like Hitler? Why are chinlet shooters and insecure browns still chanting "Hitler was right" instead of embracing the chad superiority of Stalin? Are they just stupid?
>>2901413Because Stalin was too pro social and the fact that his country actually survived for decades of boring peace makes it unattractive to fash who want to die gloriously. Plus the modern far right is basically just downstream of the cold war tendency to lionise Nazi Germany while decrying the USSR as simultaneously incompetent and laughable but also about to take over the world any second
>No one causes more lib seethe than Stalin
Hitler is much more reviled than Stalin.
>>2901418Kinda but Hitler is viewed as a joke figure, liberals are more scared of "trots" than they are of Nazis
>>2901413>Immediately denounced by his successor>Empire stagnates and collapses in just 40 years>Even the Chinese, who nominally broke with the USSR over their betrayal, themselves pivoted to a market economy to save party ruleSo this is the power of Stalinism…
>Karl Marx
Because chuds have a fetish for immorality. They think that stalin was some red nazi who committed genocide and war crimes.
>>2901429China did not ever denounced stalin
China did not collapsed like USSR
Explain?
>chad bullshit
Read a book instead of simping out for vibes bullshit
>>2901448They didn't have to denounce him in words when they did so in deeds.
>>2901487nafoid tier bait
>The man was also firmly socially conservative and anti-cosmopolitan.
No he wasn't. The USSR was by far the most socially progressive country in the world at the time. It was the only country in the world where racial discrimination was illegal, it operated the world's largest affirmative action program, it was the only country in the world that actively encouraged women to enter the workforce and pushed them into sciences, management, etc. Stalin rolled back *some* of the most socially progressive policies of the early Bolsheviks, but by comparison to the rest of the world the USSR was extremely socially progressive. He only seems conservative by modern standards, but this was not the case at the time.
>>2901446Maybe that's just a UK thing then, over here the establishment tries to appease/coddle the far right while ruthlessly crushing the actual socialist left
>>2901418They're usually presented as equivalents by liberals.
Anti-Stalin leftists only come in two kinds
>still libminded
>christpilled cuck that hates anyone who wins and is strong
>>2901413>Joseph Stalin is the most reviled opponent of the liberal bourgeoisie. No one causes more lib seethe than Stalin.yeah hell yeah
>The man was also firmly socially conservative and anti-cosmopolitan.uh oh it's a retard thread
uh oh anon thinks stalin's "conservatism" is what made the bourgeoisie seethe
as for "cosmopolitanism" 90% of the time people who bring this up are defending bourgeois anti-immigration and anti-minority policies in CAPITALIST countries on the ground that it's what Stalin would have wanted or some schizo shit. No Stalin would have wanted you to overthrow your bourgeoisie, not beg them to gun down migrants fleeing climate change. You silly little bastard.
>>2901413>No one causes more lib seethe than Stalin.No one today in this tiktok generation even knows who Stalin or Hitler are. You might know something about one of the two of them if you took a class on antiquities but its all ancient history.
The idiots chanting "Hitler is right" don't even know who Hitler was. They know Hitler = racism so "Hitler is right" implies "racism is right". Its not more complicated then that. These morons are not people writing detailed treatises about the historical correctness of national socialist policies.
As for why people don't praise Stalin, well he never got associated with anything. Hitler got associated with racism, but no one even knows what Stalin stood for these days. Stalin = communism doesn't work because there were so many other communist leaders. He didn't even invent communism: there many others like Lenin, Marx, etc.
You can't even strictly associate him with leftism today because as you mention bouts of social conservatism. You can only look at him as the product of his times. People that do have a nuanced positive view of Stalin as a product of his times tend to be smarter then the morons that say "Hitler was right." So basically he never got associated with anything the brainrot generation could latch on to.
>>2901673>No one today in this tiktok generation even knows who Stalin or Hitler are. You might know something about one of the two of them if you took a class on antiquities but its all ancient history.
>The idiots chanting "Hitler is right" don't even know who Hitler was. They know Hitler = racism so "Hitler is right" implies "racism is right". Its not more complicated then that. These morons are not people writing detailed treatises about the historical correctness of national socialist policies.depressing truth nuke. idiocracy always wins. most people will never learn from history. they will always repeat it
>>2901712Nothing fucking matters. We have brown white supremacists and white "heritage American" (God how much I hate that term) third worldist maoists.
>>2901413> Joseph Stalin is the most reviled opponent of the liberal bourgeoisieThen why was he allied with them in the Second World War?
>>2901721Because Hitler was too retarded to realize that he would've had Western backing if he had attacked the USSR before attacking Britain and France.
>>2901721Because the Nazis declared war on the USSR, and the only other people fighting them at the time were liberals.
>Joseph Stalin is the most reviled opponent of the liberal bourgeoisie.
Ironically he was himself an embodyment of liberalism precisely because of his social conservatism. The idea that one can choose be socially regressive without also being economically regressive, as though society and economy are two seperate perameters, is peak liberal brainworms.
>>2901738>collage includes tweet with a quote from a partially obscured linkTotal twitter user rape
>>2901748
>if the english didn't like the soviets then why did hitler take this completely unforced action first
This ain't the argument you think it is, champ
>>2901673>No one today in this tiktok generation even knows who Stalin or Hitler are. You might know something about one of the two of them if you took a class on antiquities but its all ancient history. >The idiots chanting "Hitler is right" don't even know who Hitler was. They know Hitler = racism so "Hitler is right" implies "racism is right". Its not more complicated then that. These morons are not people writing detailed treatises about the historical correctness of national socialist policiesDo you think boomers,Gen X and Millennials know more about Hitler other than how you described him? Literally Hitler's entire personification is charismatic racist demagogue who killed millions of minorities in a systemic way. Everyone knows who Adolf Hitler is each generation. Joseph Stalin on the other hand is more less known by the younger generation because the USSR fell and was "defeated" so there is less of a boogeyman than Hitler. That is why to this day being called Hitler is the worst thing for a politician to be called.
>>2901723>Because Hitler was too retarded to realize that he would've had Western backing if he had attacked the USSR before attacking Britain and FranceThe thing is that the French did not want Germany to gain the spoils and resources to become master of the European continent and Britain always had the dogma that there cannot be a dominant power in Europe. It was a giant great powers chess board where their fear of German dominance coming true even matched their hatred of the USSR
>>2901983
nazifags fuck off
>>2901502>ziggerrent free living in nafoids brain
>>2901419i love how quickly his point gets proven
>>2901742you didnt even make an argument
>>2901723how was he gonna attack the ussr without going through poland first lol?
>>2902009Politely and respectfully, what are thoughts on NATO
>>2901738I would fetch you the link but Artyom Lukin is suspended from twitter. I used to have this link bookmarked. It is very basic and straightforward history from the US government's history website which enumerates the non-aggression pacts made with the nazi regime by countries other than the USSR throughout the 1930s, in the buildup to the molotov-ribbentrop non aggression pact. Again, Stalin's rationale is confirmed; he tried tor each out to Western Europe for a United Front, was ignored or rejected, and then as soon as the soviets signed their own non aggression pact to buy time and move factories east, and set up a front line in Poland, for the impending operation barbarossa, all the liberal regimes of europe cried "stalin and hitler are making a pact to rape poland together" this was an opportunistic narrative to be expected of the liberal regimes, since they had a strong incentive even at that early stage to depict communism and fascism as "the same" and "authoritarian."
But what we observe in reality is 19 years of buildup where the NSDAP openly announced their intentions to annex eastern europe and slaughter "judeobolsheviks." Did Stalin really see these reactionary monsters as his friends? No. He did not see the liberal regimes as his friend either. He was simply buying time using the only method he had. Naturally, it did not work, but it was the only option left. This is what I wish people would understand.
>>2901742I found the link
https://archive.ph/AX8DFhttps://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/ussrsee the very bottom section about molotv ribbentrop:
<In the hope of improving relations, President Roosevelt dispatched businessman Joseph E. Davies to Moscow as Bullitt’s replacement in 1936. While Davies managed to reestablish amicable relations with the Soviet leadership, his dismissive attitude concerning the purges alienated other American diplomats. Moreover, Davies faced unprecedented new challenges as a result of the worsening political situation in Europe. U.S.-Soviet relations reached their nadir in August 1939, when the Soviets signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact with Nazi Germany after the British and French rejected Soviet offers to establish a military alliance against Germany. Not until the German invasion of Soviet Union began in June 1941 would the United States and the Soviet Union once again find a way to make common cause on any meaningful issue. >>2902232this post was intended to reply to
>>2901742, but it doesn't matter; see
>>2902235 >>2902238yeah he helped the liberal bourgeoisie save evropa, point being he was not their "most reviled opponent" as OP said but a collaborator
Natives are the most reviled opponents, followed by environmental and journalists who get got by mercs from logging and mining companies. Even most of the left hates them for being reactionary nature lovers and not using the land productively enough.
>>2901739>choose be socially regressive without also being economicallyever heard of something called base and superstructure?
>>2902009where is your argument?
>>2902358The left wants indigenous people to be ethnically cleansed so mining and logging companies can exploit their land. The companies hire mercenaries to kill natives, environmentalists, and journalists.
>>2902394>The left wants indigenous people to be ethnically cleanseddo they tho
>>2902232>Naturally, it did not work, but it was the only option left. This is what I wish people would understand.They tried talking to France and Britain to defend Czechoslovakia and were refused. Poland also didn't want to deal with them. It was just realpolitik but it placed communist parties in other countries in a highly awkward position because the tendency was to repeat the Soviet line verbatim. You get weird stuff like the British communists for example veering towards a defeatist line during the Battle of Britain and then flipping after Germany attacked the USSR because Soviet tactics became the general line that everyone followed. That probably hurt them politically.
>>2901504>Posting an outdated quote that was almost immediately walked back a few years later Never ask an Italian fascist their opinion on Ethiopians.
>>2902359You're making his point.
>>2902359they mutually shape and maintain eachother, which is exactly why trying to be conservative in one but not the other is retarded.
>>2901739How would Stalin being socially progressive (whatever that means) prevent the Soviet economy from stagnating?
>>2902525By not retardedly wasting resources and morale on socially conservative nonsense.
>>2902529How was Stalin even a social conservative? What was he conserving other than the development of the socialist state. People are acting like he is a Vlasovite with the depiction of his so called "conservatism"
>>2901418the weapons supplied to Ukraine says otherwise
>>2902468How does that contradict his quote?
>>2902618the state of anarcho-NATOism everyone
>>2902262>helpedthe soviets were hitler's actual target in the war?
>>2901545No, they're not lmfao
I get that Hitlerism and National Socialism in general is a reactionary ideology, but Hitler to liberals is the personification of "pure evil," whereas Stalin is "evil" in the sense of socialism's ostensible shortcomings.
>>2902235>the Soviets signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact with Nazi GermanyNo such pact existed. Soviets signed NON-AGGRESSION TREATY with Germany, pact and it's contents are pure speculation based on paranoid pre-war British propaganda that still tried to start a war with USSR even after Britain was at war with Germany. What kind of a secret pact would see it's contents leaked to the British half a year before getting signed, lmao?
>>2902434> You get weird stuff like the British communists for example veering towards a defeatist line during the Battle of Britain and then flipping after Germany attacked the USSR because Soviet tactics became the general line that everyone followed. That probably hurt them politically.I hate Orwell for being a snitch and stuff but looking at the behavior around that time you really see the inspiration for doublethink in 1984.
>>2902584>please think of the Shah who is sympathetic to Nazi GermanyThere was literally a famine in Iran during the allied occupation, retard.
I wouldn't be surprised if the average Mohammad and Leila preferred the pro-nazi Shah to that
>>2902618Zelenskkky is a friend of pissrael and muskkk
>>2902584its still capitalist imperialism even if you think the volk getting affected in a negative manner by it is le bad
>>2902228no answer from the nato left-baboon, as expected
>>2902486China is culturally more advanced than most of the West though, liberalism especially is outdated, so you are proving my point
>>2905214hey jarvis, what are Zelenskkkys thoughts on Israel
>>2905210>nato left-baboonthere is nothing more nato-left-coded than helping create israel like stalin did, he makes ziohran look like a hamas member lmao
>>2901673>No one today in this tiktok generation even knows who Stalin or Hitler are.go the fuck outside
>>2902232The Polacks didn't have the balls to engage in any diplomatic relationship with the USSR, but to be fair, the USSR bracketed them as a target for hostilities a while ago. They decimated and dissolved the KPP much more effectively than the Sanationist regime ever could for example.
>you VVILL seize the means of production but in just ONE country otherwise my best friend Churchill will get very mad at me and you VVILL get surplus-value extracted from you to help develop Israel, if you disagree you are hecking counter-revolutionary and I will give your kids to Beria!
now that the dust has finally settled, what did he mean by this?
>>2905214I lost all respect for cucktin after that pinochet quote. It's criminal to go against porky but wholesome chungus to defend porky against rightful anger. Unless he was baiting hard, given his actions overall, I think he truly belives that.
>>2909891>I lost all respect for cucktin after that pinochet quote.Why? You said in the Iran thread that all third world communists should be killed so you have the same politics as Pinochet
>>2901413> The man was also firmly socially conservative and-I here i stopped reading, why do you, presumebly a westerner in your twentys to thirties so keen on having the politics of sum russian boomer bruh, fuck off
>>2909898>all third world communists should be killedWhy are most of these "third world communists" fighting against countries who are in conflict with the west?
Why are "third world communists" not fighting the west?
<that post in case anyone is curious >>2909931>I have presumed something I understand to be contradictory and I'm mad about itdiaper behavior
Stalin literally save liberal democracy in Europe
Unique IPs: 59