[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new on Mondays : /meta/
New /roulette/ topic: /AK-47/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war. - New board: /draw/


File: 1637820524530.jpg (166.1 KB, 1448x814, 20211125_010824.jpg)

 No.616357[Last 50 Posts]

Anyone who attacks:
>China
>North Korea
>Syria
>Iran
>Belarus
>Vietnam
>Cuba
>Venezuela
>Bolivia
>Nicaragua
Or any other American enemy is a glowie unless proven otherwise.

Claiming to "side with the people against their government" isn't good enough. That was the favorite catchphrase of the fucking Bush administration. What kind of leftist are you if you're on the same page as fucking W? These people can start by explaining which group *specifically* we should be supporting and demonstrate that they're not connected to or allied with US-NATO. Even that's not foolproof, Solidarnosc in Poland was being secretly funded by the CIA and the Vatican, though the fact that Reagan was publicly creaming himself over what was supposed to be an "independent" labor union should have been a massive tell.

 No.616361

File: 1637820889675.jpg (1.91 MB, 3276x2443, israelifirends.jpg)

and if the libs ever say they are on the side of human rights, just remember how many dictatorships have been supported by the liberal""""""democracies"""""""""

 No.616392

lmao I will ruthlessly critique every single one of those nations and there's not a thing you can do, I don't care if you feel gang stalked by government agents because your tribal and aesthetic approach to politics makes you feel you are attacked

 No.616396

fuck belarus and fuck iran.

Everything else is based

 No.616398

File: 1637822797159.jpg (194.32 KB, 1600x1370, 1634092687164.jpg)

>>616357
>If you criticise corruption, revisionism, reactionary social policies, or the fact that these places still have capitalist MOPs then ur a glowie.

Way to fedjacket OP.

 No.616405

>>616398
It's important we defend all of these countries against liberal and fascist smears. In the company of other communists there is room for critique.

 No.616409

>>616407
You have a very un-nuanced take. Belarus flooding the EU with migrants for example weakens the EU and is useful for destabilizing the EU core countries.

 No.616411

Hyperonline, hyperpartisan autism speaks

 No.616414

>>616409
1) Belarus does not
2) It would not weaken the EU
3) It would not destabilize core EU countries
4) Even if all were true it would not help the socialist cause in any way.

 No.616416

>>616414
Social chaos would absolutely help socialism.

 No.616422

>>616416
Ah yes how dumb I am let's go and support fascist movements, terrorist bombings, mass shootings, hell American imperialism and nuclear war. Make us closer to socialism.

 No.616425

>>616422
>nuclear war
Posadism

 No.616426

It's considered very cool and subversive to criticize the same countries liberals do but for leftist reasons, but those criticisms apply to many other countries that are obviously shit and therefore score 0 cool points to criticize. It's also cool to pretend that your 'support' actually matters which means that you must support either the multipolar anti-Western liberal countries or the Truly 100% Communist countries of which there are 0.
>>616418
>Dissent
>>616422
nta but imho no social chaos in today's world means the maximum amount of consolidated anticommunist hegemony, so no openings for new socialism

 No.616427

>>616426
>nta but imho no social chaos in today's world means the maximum amount of consolidated anticommunist hegemony, so no openings for new socialism
Explain.

 No.616430

>>616427
well it seems to me that if all the reactionary forces and highest number of resources are consolidated in one entity that can act unilaterally, it is less likely that anything can oppose it, like a budding socialist movement; but if these forces and resources are split and fighting with each other, it seems more likely for a new socialist movement to find a space where resources aren't worth spending to fight it, because the US needs to spend it fighting China, or whatever.

 No.616433

>>616430
Makes sense, you raise some good points.

 No.616526

File: 1637836150588.jpg (79.66 KB, 800x478, ironcurtain.jpg)

>>616357
That picture: Soviet boomer moment

>>616409
>Belarus flooding the EU with migrants for example

Soviet union builds the Iron Curtain
<NOOOO you must let people cross borders

Belarus lets people cross borders
<NOOOO you must bring back the Iron Curtain

The migrants just pass through Belarus, they don't come from there. The Migrant "flood" is being generated by Imperial foreign policy fallout. You'd be less wrong if you said Washington is flooding the EU with migrants.

 No.616529

>>616526
Lukashenko is one of the few people showing some decency to those folks by airlifting them out and providing them passage into europe. The Polish government could literally just say “these people ain’t my problem” and let them fuck off to Berlin, but somehow their hateboner for refugees is greater than their hateboner for Germany

 No.616531

>Resist the glowies!
>Anyone who attacks:
>>China
Very funny that OP has contrived this whole thread out of butthurt over Dengists getting bullied over the last couple of days for saying allying with the CIA is good when you're Chinese, actually.

 No.616533

>>616529
You are completely missing the point, one has to look where migrants and refugees come from and fix the root cause of the problem, like for example rebuilding Syria, so these people don't have to flee in the first place.

 No.616534

>>616531
It's very annoying though when glowies are trying to build an anti china echo chamber.

 No.616536

Context matters:
>In Public
We should defend any and all countries targeted by imperialism aggression regardless of ideology.
<Among Communists
Reckless criticism of all that exists is still the way to go.

I'd say /leftypol/ userbase belongs more to the latter category than to the former.

 No.616537

>>616409
These refugees come from the middle east, for which the West is absolutely responsible with its destructive policies in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, etc. - Belarus is one of the only countries they can fly to, or walk through. Should a country that is currently under sanctions designed to ruin its economy shoulder a burden not even the EU wants to shoulder?

 No.616539

>>616531
>China supporting maoists in Afghanistan == allying to USA and supplying mujahideen

Fucking funny how the cable, which was used by anti-china-ists to prove that China supported mujahideen, didn't turn out to be saying that at all, and yet they still go with their initial narrative anyway, their own lack of arguments be damned.

 No.616540

>>616392
Ruthlessly criticize the West 9 out of 10 times first.

 No.616542

>>616426
Liberals criricize those countries for leftist reasons. They always pretend to be ultra-left when it comes to other countries but oppose the same measures at home. Liberals have always criticized that socialist states do not have independent labor unions, for example, while having no problem with union busting capitalists at home.

If you are a Westerner, you have to expect that none of those countries OP mentioned, with the exception of maybe China which has acquired a bit of soft power recently (but still very little), have the leverage to make their authentic voices heard in the West, whereas every single voice, no matter with right-wing or even radically left that calls for the overthrow of their government is amplified. Imperialism does not care for a right/left division. Every single voice you hear in the West that criticizes those governments is bad, because it's guaranteed not an authentic expression of what the average Nicaraguan/Cuban/Syrian etc. thinks.

It's pretty dishearting to see people still cling to so-called "nuanced takes" after the "Syrian gas attack" debacle, the "Xinjiang genocide" debacle, etc. - I guess some never learn.

 No.616543

>>616540
Well I do that's why I hang out on this website

 No.616545

>gets btfo in the China thread
>comes to make this

So hold up up you’re telling me I can’t critique China but also have to defend Nicaragua from glowies… but son… China glowed Nicaragua sending weapons to the CIA contras

Your position does not make sense.

Also love how this includes Syria and Iran but not Palestine.

You’re a crackhead that’s for sure.

 No.616546

>>616540
Preaching to the choir

 No.616548

>>616539
Hahaha don’t make me post the cable, and the huge amount of other evidence, proving you’re full of shit

Just because you cherry pick one tiny part of the full thing excluding the full source does not make it say what you want it to say

 No.616549

Ignoring them is the better policy (in the case of time-wasting internet arguments with retards)

 No.616550

>>616536
>I'd say /leftypol/ userbase belongs more to the latter category than to the former.
It doesn't.

 No.616551

>>616545
Wait for them to find out Nicaragua's position on the Prc lol.

 No.616554

>>616542
>Every single voice you hear in the West that criticizes those governments is bad, because it's guaranteed not an authentic expression of what the average Nicaraguan/Cuban/Syrian etc. thinks.
I could easily turn this around and say every single voice who shouts support for these countries is bad because inauthentic as well. But you know what I have an Iranian friend in exile in my country because he's on death row over there for having been too much to the left so I know better than drawing lines in the sand, saying one side is good and the other bad because of feelings toward the US and denying people have legitimate critics and analyses to give.

 No.616557

>>616536
This is correct. You all have no idea how full my dms are from me defending China to friends and family. It’s only with other communists I have the nuanced Maoist anti CIA take cos for most people if you tell them “uh actually China has allied with glowies” they are like “um.. anon… what’s a glowie?? Kampuchea? What’s that? Are you okay anon? You think the United States flood the streets of America with crack cocaine? Have you been taking drugs anon?”

 No.616561

>>616557
It's because people here don't go too much outside anon, and it shows.
They think leftypol is besieged by liberalism.
Lol.

 No.616578

>>616554
Okay, so?

It would be good for there to be an actual DotP in Iran, but where’s that gonna come from? Who has the power to make it happen? Especially when you have a fuckload of imperial powers looking to at best regime change Iran and at worst wipe it off the map.

 No.616580

>>616561
Sage and flag-fags are libs who retranslate every anticommunist myth they can get away with while claiming to be communists/leftists.

>>616557
>China is not the monster you claim it is!
<but also they have totally allied with glowies to murder communists, they are social-imperialist capitalists with better economy and society than in the West, they imprison uyghurs (but only a little, and because it's based, akshually), and also are a threat to a liberal world order, which has a better chance to spawn world revolution than if China imposes it's authoritarian order onto everyone!

 No.616581

File: 1637841290479.png (295.48 KB, 1960x1492, glow to glow.png)

>>616554
>I have a friend in Iran who's going to be personally executed by the Ayatollah on live television trust me bro
FUCK OFF
>WEEGUR GENOCIDE
you couldn't be any more obvious if you tried, what's the matter, your previous partner didn't inform you that not even socialists on Reddit buy into the uyghur shit anymore?

 No.616583

>>616581
quote from >>616580 got deleted but ya there is no """uyghur oppressions :(" you complete dumbfuck

 No.616595

>>616581
Didn't say any of this shit retard go outside

 No.616597

File: 1637842186892.png (100.26 KB, 834x447, ClipboardImage.png)

MEDS

 No.616601

>>616554
What's mostly conceived of "support" to governments is often nothing more than debunking propaganda. You don't believe China genocides Uyghurs? You are a Dengist. You believe the Syrian gas attacks were staged? You are an Assadist. I refuse to accept this dishonest framing that debunking imperialist conspiracies is "support" to a specific government. How could you even "support" it? Do you send money? 99% of all this shit is cooked up in the State Department and falling into the trap of "nuance" you are just aiding American imperialist interests.

 No.616602

>>616597
>>616595
Nice inspect element adjustment faggots you got anything more interesting than what even a /pol/tard can do in his sleep?

>>616554
<But you know what I have an Iranian friend in exile in my country because he's on death row over there for having been too much to the left
>>616580
<they imprison uyghurs (but only a little, and because it's based, akshually)

Cool fake stories and talking points! Now go back to your day jobs working at CNN where retards will actually buy into your shit.

 No.616608

>>616580
> <but also they have totally allied with glowies to murder communists

This is objectively true

>economy is better than the west

Objectively true

> they imprison uyghurs (but only a little, and because it's based, akshually)


Never said anything remotely like this but go off

> and also are a threat to a liberal world order, which has a better chance to spawn world revolution than if China imposes it's authoritarian order onto everyone!


Absolutely never said anything like this but again, go off.


Dengoid making up fan fic again, it’s cool to have fans tho

 No.616626

File: 1637845283408.png (595.9 KB, 994x989, glowjak.png)

>>616392
>I will glow brighter than the sun and there's nothing you can do to stop me!
Oh, I already know that.

 No.616630

>>616601
I would say YOU are just aiding American imperialist interest by being a brainless defender of their targets, on their level of discourse from their angle of attack. A simple and straight forward inversion of the ruling class narrative is the best way to keep the masses ignorant and estranged from what you want to defend while staying on in your nice niche of simple anti American discourse. I know it will hurt for you to recognize this but there's a reason Grayzone isn't allowed as a source on wikipedia beyond the fact that they criticize imperialism, it's because like you, they aren't serious and cheat their way to paint the cool narrative they want.
Methodical examination and presentation of the facts isn't a "trap", it's the only way the socialists have to be an actually functional movement because they don't possess the luxury of cultural hegemony.

 No.616631

File: 1637845938541.jpg (27.51 KB, 783x499, 1636960656921.jpg)


 No.616632

File: 1637845942544.jpg (102.15 KB, 1200x800, blackest reaction.jpg)

>>616398
>The Soviet Union is a corrupt bureaucratic dictatorship!
>The Soviet Union is revisionist!
>The Soviet Union is reactionary!
>The Soviet Union is akchually capitalist now ever since Khrushchev!
>If anything, we need the Soviet Union to go down for REAL socialism to rise!
And look at where that got us, anon.

You behave like a glow, you get treated like a glow.

 No.616634

>>616632
This is the exact mentality that lead China to invade Afghanistan

 No.616635

"glowie" going back full circle to being uttered by paranoid schizophrenics I see

 No.616636

>>616634
China invaded Afghanistan?

 No.616637

File: 1637846364153.jpg (124.64 KB, 1200x1165, glowing intesifies.jpg)


 No.616639

>>616357
>muh "imperalism" maymay
Ok, bommer!

 No.616643

File: 1637846939484.png (283.22 KB, 1960x1492, glow2glow.png)

>calls the DPR Korea "North Korea"
>gowie
Whap up Agent Sánchez

 No.616647

>>616602
>Nice inspect element
><they imprison uyghurs (but only a little, and because it's based, akshually)
This is literally the only other mention of Uyghurs and it's a strawman written by you you mentally ill freak, you posted three times in as many minutes shitting your pants over the Uyghurs which nobody else had mentioned. The reason it didn't show in the CTRL+F is because for whatever reason you used a Cyrillic U.

 No.616650

>>616636
I dunno what else you call training and arming militant islamists then sending them over the border.

I was being facetious on purpose tho

 No.616654

File: 1637847577734.jpg (42.64 KB, 466x458, how the glow is made.jpg)

>>616630
> there's a reason Grayzone isn't allowed as a source on wikipedia
yes Wikipedia is extremely biased when it comes to political topics
but nice try attempting an appeal to authority fallacy.

 No.616660

>>616357
China, Iran, Cuba, Vietnam, Venezuela are completely owned by the global bourgeoisie. They are enemies of us. Ofc especially China.
The others are trying to survive.

 No.616664

File: 1637848689184.jpg (39.68 KB, 800x450, brainlettttt.jpg)

>>616643
>are you calling the Democratic Republic of Vietnam "North Vietnam"? Wow! Are you calling the German Democratic Republic "East Germany"? What the fuck? Only a glow would recognize the division of a country!
What a shit attempt to turn tables around.

 No.616665

>>616632
Based and cornpilled.

 No.616666


 No.616668

>>616580
<Endless rant full with strawman on Uyghurs and other glowie shit

Dude I'm gonna tell you a secret since you seem to me extremely socially maladjusted and need to read the room: 90% of people criticizing current PRC politics criticize their having MARKETS AND WAGE LABOUR and COULDN'T CARE LESS about all the glowie shit being spread around here, because they take it AS A GIVEN that they are false.

That said, that China has shit foreign politics which are in way shape or form comparable to the USSR is not an anticommunist criticism, how the fuck could it be? People here are literally lamenting that China DOES NOT HELP COMMUNISTS worlwide UNLIKE THE USSR.

 No.616671

>>616668
+in no way shape or form

 No.616673

>>616630
>there’s a reason the greyzone isn’t allowed as source on Wikipedia
Yes because Wikipedia was founded by a right lib glowbot now shhh liberal you are not helping the situation

 No.616676

>>616630
This isn't it dude.
Conceding on glowie points is not a substitute for nuance.

 No.616702

File: 1637851400504.png (13.92 KB, 644x800, (you).png)

>>616664
>>are you calling the Democratic Republic of Vietnam "North Vietnam"? Wow! Are you calling the German Democratic Republic "East Germany"? What the fuck? Only a glow would recognize the division of a country!
>What a shit attempt to turn tables around.

 No.616703

>>616357
>You need to supports anti American bourgeois, THAT is the real leftist position
you're not even trying at this point are you?

 No.616705

>>616703
The cold war and its consequences

 No.616710

File: 1637851905909.png (239.83 KB, 600x395, lenin.png)

>Imperialism is as much our “mortal” enemy as is capitalism. That is so. No Marxist will forget, however, that capitalism is progressive compared with feudalism, and that imperialism is progressive compared with pre-monopoly capitalism. Hence, it is not every struggle against imperialism that we should support. We will not support a struggle of the reactionary classes against imperialism; we will not support an uprising of the reactionary classes against imperialism and capitalism.
https://marxists.architexturez.net/archive/lenin/works/1916/carimarx/5.htm
LENIN GLOWIE CONFIRMED

 No.616714

>>616703
>>616705
>Implying there’s no critical, principled support that understands that these “anti-american regimes” are the way they are BECAUSE of American interference
The reason we don’t have a red Iran is because of the USA, you knob end.

 No.616716

>>616554
>I have an Iranian friend in exile in my country because he's on death row over there for having been too much to the left
Your friends a faggot and deserves the death penalty

 No.616719

>>616716
You’re either a larper, a falseflagger or a schizo

 No.616725

>>616714
that isn't a reason to support the bourgeois of iran

 No.616729

>>616719
>You’re either a larper, a falseflagger or a schizo
This is what the guy that wrote >>616554 looks like (attached) as his friend is a CIA agent
>>616725
>that isn't a reason to support the bourgeois of iran
Correct. We should support Iran (even as a bourgeois state) because they're doing shit like this lol
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-s-base-iraq-comes-under-attack-missiles-iran-claims-n1112171

 No.616735

>>616729
Thats just supporting bourgeois A over bourgeois B, in the end the workers still lose. That isn't leftism that is just a third world fetish

 No.616736

>>616729
>This is what the guy that wrote >>616554 looks like (attached) as his friend is a CIA agent
le meds has NOT arrived

 No.616737

>>616710
We are supporting national bourgeoisie of various countries against "globalist" bourgeoisie of USA and Europe and Japan. Show me where marxists are supporting feudal kings and monastic orders against capitalism, lol

 No.616738

>>616357
Only Vietnam, Iran, and Cuba are worth a shit. The rest are either cucked or willing to cuck when the opportunity arises.

 No.616740

>>616710
Pretty sure he's referring to the feudal classes resisting capitalist encroachment.

 No.616741

>>616735
>National bourgeois with limited influence and power are the same as globetrotting imperial states
Under one group the advent of a socialist revolution and worker’s state is far more of a possibility.

 No.616743

>>616735
That sounds like something a fag or trot would say
<This is the position in regard to the question of particular national movements, of the possible reactionary character of these movements-if, of course, they are appraised not from the formal point of view, not from the point of view of abstract rights, but concretely, from the point of view of the interests of the revolutionary movement.

<The same must be said of the revolutionary character of national movements in general. The unquestionably revolutionary character of the vast majority of national movements is as relative and peculiar as is the possible revolutionary character of certain particular national movements. The revolutionary character of a national movement under the conditions of imperialist oppression does not necessarily presuppose the existence of proletarian elements in the movement, the existence of a revolutionary or a republican programme of the movement, the existence of a democratic basis of the movement.


<The struggle that the Emir of Afghanistan is waging for the independence of Afghanistan is objectively a revolutionary struggle, despite the monarchist views of the Emir and his associates, for it weakens, disintegrates and undermines imperialism; whereas the struggle waged by such "desperate" democrats and "Socialists," "revolutionaries" and republicans as, for example, Kerensky and Tsereteli, Renaudel and Scheidemann, Chernov and Dan, Henderson and Clynes, during the imperialist war was a reactionary struggle, for its results was the embellishment, the strengthening, the victory, of imperialism.


<For the same reasons, the struggle that the Egyptians merchants and bourgeois intellectuals are waging for the independence of Egypt is objectively a revolutionary struggle, despite the bourgeois origin and bourgeois title of the leaders of Egyptian national movement, despite the fact that they are opposed to socialism; whereas the struggle that the British "Labour" Government is waging to preserve Egypt's dependent position is for the same reason a reactionary struggle, despite the proletarian origin and the proletarian title of the members of the government, despite the fact that they are "for" socialism. There is no need to mention the national movement in other, larger, colonial and dependent countries, such as India and China, every step of which along the road to liberation, even if it runs counter to the demands of formal democracy, is a steam-hammer blow at imperialism, i.e., is undoubtedly a revolutionary step.

Foundations of Leninism, https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1924/foundations-leninism/ch06.htm

 No.616745

>>616743
Ironically enough even Trotsky himself held the position that national bourgeoisie should be supported against imperialism. See his comments on if Britain were to go to war with Brazil.

 No.616747

Kek

 No.616804

reposting my simple argument for socialism via multipolarity: >>616430
the argument for capitalist multipolarity is much more certain

 No.616811

>>616745
A lot of people here are closeted trotskyists

 No.616817

File: 1637859111545.jpg (164.73 KB, 1080x1080, lenin imperialism.jpg)


 No.616828

>>616817
>Down with the capitalist regime of the Islamic Republic
The communist party of Iran. Lenin says we listen to them.

 No.616843

>>616828
Yes, for Iranians. Perhaps we in the West should listen to the Tudehs, or a better party. But the only impact a Westerner can have by crusading against the ayatollahs is not going to help those socialist movements out, in fact it is more likely to contribute to bloodshed between them and the West, and maybe even the installation of a comprador regime.

 No.616875

>>616828
Which communist party are you talking about? Besides the fact that they are not based in Iran, they have a far more nuanced view of the opposition and protest movements there and often see it as an imperialist plot.

They aren't cucks like the Communist Party of Iraq.

 No.616902

>>616875
The CPI who apparently has an actual presence in Iran, the MLM party and the Tudeh think the same for that matter. There's a reason a lot of comrades are in exile, I'm the anon who has a friend linked to this shit and who's condemned to death here btw, but apparently some here think I must be a CIA agent and that he deserves death for being a leftist.

 No.616905

>>616357
im sorry, but criticizing a government or regime isnt ATTACKING anything, even if it hurts your feelings OP

 No.616908

File: 1637862885814.png (755.33 KB, 1161x594, luka sigmagrind.png)

>>616905
>helping imperialists to manufacture consent to prepare a war is about feelings

 No.616924

>>616902
Imo, your friend has their own struggle, and Westerners have theirs. Any Western-backed regime change will only go in one direction. Westerners should defer to Iranian communist parties, but only explicitly. If I talk in my daily life about the terrible Iranian theocracy without talking about communism, it only means that I hate muslims. If I contribute to an anti-Iranian culture on an English speaking site like this one, I think a similar thing happens. It invites /pol/ retards and coup-suporting liberals

 No.616930

>>616908
look anon, shitposting on obscure internet boards does literally nothing to 'manufacfture cunsent'. stop taking leftypol so seriously.
critique is important, there was a time when marxism was the ruthless critique of everything in existence, but apparently that time is over and modern internet marxists are hyper spooked cucks that identify with politicals actors like neckbeards do with consoles. if you like that shit, fine, I will still shit on china for allowing the existence of billionaires.

 No.616946

>>616673
And because they are Putin bots

 No.616947

>>616930
The neoliberals have been trying to overthrow what is at least a social democracy type economy for a few years now. If you want to make criticisms, you have to include this as relevant context and frame your criticism in such a way that it doesn't play into the hands of people that want to do regime change.

 No.616971

>>616811
If they were Trotskyists then they would support Belarus, Iran, etc.

 No.616977

>>616947
I would never support regime change in vuvuzela and think the government should be more hardline socialist, that doesnt mean I dont have any criticism of them otherwise (that fucking crypto currency for example)
this is why what OP wrote doesnt work. the world isnt as simple as "you critique something means you are against it". I critique China, or the DPRK or Venezuela BECAUSE I wanna see them do better.

>If you want to make criticisms, you have to include this as relevant context and frame your criticism in such a way that it doesn't play into the hands of people that want to do regime change.

I dont. In fact, there is no reason to aside from not offending faggots like you which I dont give a fuck about.

 No.616978

>>616977
This. Word by word.

 No.616980

>>616930
Here's my 'ruthless critique of all that exists:' every single existing state today is liberal, and therefore not worth talking about, espcially because our support or opposition means nothing. Libs: owned

 No.616988

Ok calm down Caleb

I know you love to shill for muh anti imperialism but youre no different from a less retarded jason unruhe this way.
Just because iran is not the usa doesnt mean i have to like their reactionary theocratic anti communist politics.

 No.616989

>>616977
>there is no reason to
Yes you have to make it clear that you are not part of the regime change chorus, if you criticize a country that is currently being targeted for regime change, or else your criticism will be dismissed as if it was part of regime change propaganda.

 No.616991

>>616971
>Trots supporting Belarus and Iran

Orly

 No.616998

>>616988
>what i like matters

 No.616999

>>616989
>Yes you have to
No. Watch this:
Xi Jinpings breath smells like old man cock from all the billionaires he ahs been sucking off.

 No.617003

>>616999
Holy shit, let's depose him with our proletarian billionaires

 No.617006

>>616991
If they are actually following Trotsky's position on the subject then yes.

 No.617007

>>616998
for me the only thing that matters

 No.617009

>>617003
>peepee
>breath

 No.617010

>>617007
your alienation is total and complete

 No.617012

>>617009
Uncritical support for biden reversing this trend and trying to save the uyghurs from the totalitarian Xi dynasty

 No.617013

>>617012
u mean the penis breath dynasty?

 No.617015

>>617006
Trotsky was changing his position twice a day. Doing anything at all will find support from some of Trotsky's works, probably.

 No.617017

>>617013
Thank you for clarifying my reasons to support all wars against the penis breathoids

 No.617018

>>616999
>b-b-but Xi allows billionaires! It must mean they are the real rulers of China!

Were Soviet millionaires during the NEP real rulers of USSR?

 No.617021

>>617017
well i wouldnt, but if thats your position ok I guess

 No.617022

>>617018
the nep was born from neccesity, chinas free market was born of dengs's need to have billionaire cuck to suck

 No.617032

>>616999
>>617022
You couldn't blame anybody for dismissing something like this.

 No.617037

>>617022
>the nep was born from neccesity

Actually, Deng's reforms were started by Mao. They were born out of necessity, too - USSR was fighting China and trying to encircle it, while USA did the same from the sea. They even focused on building their vital industries during Mao years in the dead center of the country - away from shoreline and Soviet border both. Except Manchuria, because couldn't relocate those.

If USSR didn't destalinize and continued being communist, there would be no NEP in China, as USSR would have continued to sell high tech stuff to China in exchange for Chinese goods. American demands included market liberalization, though.

 No.617039

>>617018
The NEP happened scarcely for years after the Russian Revolution, which was directly after the First World War, which Russia exhausted itself in, while also lead by a bumbling and incompetent monarch, which is why the revolution happened in the first place. While there was some capital development, the majority of the economy way extremely backward. Immediately after the revolution, the country was plunged into civil war. The NEP lasted 5 years.

Shhhhhst.

 No.617262

>>617018
Soviet millionaires during the NEP were widely reviled, barred from any political rights and got hunted down after a brief 7 years.
Here you have 42 years of NEP and entrepreneurs in the very core of the party at any level barring the highest one (Jiang Zemin made a fuckton of damage).

 No.617263

>>617037
This is possibly true sadly.

 No.617425

File: 1637891534781.jpg (16.85 KB, 473x532, 1634878276913.jpg)

>>616632
>The Soviet Union is a corrupt bureaucratic dictatorship!
You telling me under Gorbachev it wasn't?
>The Soviet Union is revisionist!
Post-Stalin you can certainly make that argument.
>The Soviet Union is reactionary!
How is deporting ethnic groups and outlawing homosexuality as "bourgoise decadence/ fascism" progressive?
>The Soviet Union is akchually capitalist now ever since Khrushchev!

Most Socialist projects that exist today are, that doesn't mean we can't still support them and understand the context of their situation as to why they had to take a step back.

>And look at where that got us, anon.

Yeah, a vanguard that neglected the will of the people and sold out to Pizza hutt.

Ruthless (albiet constructive and considerate) criticism of all that exists, my guy.

 No.617431

>>617425
Criticism of the USSR did not save the USSR because the critics had no power to influence the country. Leave the criticism to the likes of Aleksandr Buzgalin who actually got elected to the central committee in 1985 and actually had a plan to move the USSR towards communism though he was sadly thwarted by conservative factions in the CPSU. The best things someone outside can do is write useful analysis and proposals like Cockshott did with Towards a New Socialism.

 No.617442

>>617431
Fair enough. But if said criticism of the USSR didn't save it, by that logic said criticism of the USSR didn't exactly damn it either.
And criticising it after it is gone doesn't automatically destroy the legacy nor the overall tradition of Marxism-Leninism, nor will it stop people from being communists.

The USSR did some great things- destroying the nazis, improving the lives of citizens in education, life expectancy and being the first into space, but it also did some very shit stuff like what I mentioned before.

>The best things someone outside can do is write useful analysis and proposals like Cockshott did with Towards a New Socialism.

Agreed.

 No.617449

>>616650
Realpolitik

 No.617451

>>616634
Daily reminder sage was btfo several times for this stupid talking point in the china general, and has always ran away afterwards and pretended it never happened.

 No.617453

>>617442
I think more people need to see that TaNS is, in fact, a harsh critique of the USSR's economic system as it existed in the late 1980s.

 No.617500

>>617453
Well, you see, it's called Towards A New Socialism, because Cockshott wants to very clearly replicate what was done in the past.

 No.617512

>>617500
Cockshott started writing TANS in the late 80s during perestroika. Iirc he wanted it published in the USSR so the soviet people could read it.

We could've had CyberUSSR but we got le market pizza man instead.

 No.617516

cope

 No.617518

>>617425
>How is deporting ethnic groups and outlawing homosexuality as "bourgoise decadence/ fascism" progressive?

Deportations came through the same protocols as evacuations of slavs during the war. Deportations == evacuations. On top of that, deported nationalities got it's men started demobilizing in 1944. What kind of a repression is that?

Banning homosexuality as "bourgeois decadence" would be the same shit as banning CRT and gender yuppies today. No biggie. IT didn't fucking help that Yezhov (or was it Yagoda) had a collection of dildos. Moreso, communists back then didn't do medical experiments onto homosexuals, they actually considered it an illness, not a sin.

>Ruthless (albiet constructive and considerate) criticism of all that exists, my guy.


It really reads as "allow me criticize communisms through the lens of my liberal worldview" in most cases, though.

 No.617522

File: 1637903161947.jpg (301.2 KB, 1600x1067, 1637903158662.jpg)

>>616902
>I'm the anon who has a friend linked to this shit and who's condemned to death here btw, but apparently some here think I must be a CIA agent and that he deserves death for being a leftist.
I also have known Iranian asylum seekers who had to flee for their politics. Anyone who calls thrm CIA is probably just a sheltered kid or shitposting tourists.

 No.617562

File: 1637907149873.png (180.67 KB, 376x439, 973.png)

>>617518
>Deportations came through the same protocols as evacuations of slavs during the war. Deportations == evacuations. On top of that, deported nationalities got it's men started demobilizing in 1944. What kind of a repression is that?
<t-they were evacuated.
Bullshit. if they were evacuated their autonomous republics wouldn't have been dissolved as a result and were deported under fears that they were Nazi collaborators.

https://www.norkarussia.info/uploads/3/7/7/9/37792067/deportation_and_destruction_soviet_germans.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_German_Autonomous_Soviet_Socialist_Republic

The RSFSR officially recognized deportations of Crimean peoples by the USSR government from its territories as an act of genocide.

https://base.garant.ru/10200365/

>July 1, 1993 The renewal of Soviet society in the process of its democratization and the formation of the rule of law in the country requires the cleansing of all spheres of public life from deformation and distortion of universal human values. It created favorable opportunities for the rehabilitation of peoples repressed during the years of Soviet power, who were subjected to genocide and slanderous attacks. The policy of arbitrariness and lawlessness practiced at the state level in relation to these peoples was illegal, insulting the dignity not only of the repressed, but also of all other peoples of the country. Its tragic consequences still affect the state of inter-ethnic relations and create dangerous hotbeds of interethnic conflicts.


>On the basis of international instruments, the Declaration of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of 14 November 1989 "On the recognition as illegal and criminal of repressive acts against peoples subjected to forced relocation and the enforcement of their rights", the resolutions of the Congresses of People's Deputies of the RSFSR, as well as the current legislation of the RSFSR and the USSR, enshrining the equality of the Soviet peoples, and, striving to restore historical justice, the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR proclaims the abolition of all illegal acts, adopted against repressed peoples and adopts this Law on their rehabilitation.



>Banning homosexuality as "bourgeois decadence" would be the same shit as banning CRT and gender yuppies today. No biggie.

<Yeah dude, imprisoning people on the basis of sexuality and thinking homosexuality is linked to pedophilia is good actually.
https://slavamogutin.com/gay-in-the-gulag/

Mate, the fact that the soviet union initially had policies that allowed for gay couples to be autonomous INITIALLY only for that to change should tell you reactionary elements leaked into the vanguard party and warped it.

>It really reads as "allow me criticize communisms through the lens of my liberal worldview" in most cases, though.

<pointing out flaws in how the USSR treated its citizens is libural actually

It doesn't help that countries such as East Germany had a lot more progressive social policies than the USSR that were maintained up until its dissolution.


>IT didn't fucking help that Yezhov (or was it Yagoda) had a collection of dildos. Moreso, communists back then didn't do medical experiments onto homosexuals, they actually considered it an illness, not a sin.

How does that make it any better? Today trans people are considered "mentally ill". If a group of socialists considered them to be a symptom of "bourgoise decadence" and imprisoned them or categorised them as mentally ill, would you make excuses for it? Of course not, because you know that trans people aren't mentally ill.

Again, no one's denying the fact that the USSR, East Germany or other socialist experiments have achieved great things, but given what we know about gay people not being inherently pedophillic, or crimean tartars/ volga germans being fascistic etc. we can look back and go "yeah that was shit, let's not do that again".

 No.617567

>>617562
*today trans people are considered mentally ill by reactionaries and other right wing nutjobs

 No.617574

>>617425
>Ruthless global defeat everywhere, my guy!
Your "ruthless critique" doesn't help anything. The only thing "ruthless critique" did for the Soviet Union was get people who would have otherwise been its allies and staunchly opposed to the Cold War to become opposed to the USSR and become neocons, "third campists" (which is functionally the same thing as neocons) or worthless both-sidesists.

 No.617581

>>617562
One in ten Crimean Tartars were armed Nazi collaborators

 No.617588

>>617574
>Your "ruthless critique" doesn't help anything. The only thing "ruthless critique" did for the Soviet Union was get people who would have otherwise been its allies and staunchly opposed to the Cold War to become opposed to the USSR and become neocons, "third campists" (which is functionally the same thing as neocons) or worthless both-sidesists.

So Tito, Nasser, Castro, Ho Chi Minh and Nkrumah fall under these categories because they formed and were part of the "non-aligned movement"? I'd hardly say any of these people were useless, especially given how Cuba played a part in ending South African apartheid. How dare these communists and left-wingers crticise a global superpower and choose their own policies!

>But they should have been allies

>never mind how the soviet union went about treating its allies in the past, that shouldn't be a cause for concern!

Spare me the crocodile tears. Acting as if the USSR was innocent and a little goody two-shoe country is woefully reductive. That isn't to say the non-aligned movement was perfect either, as they were a hodge podge of countries (some of which had conflicting ideological ideas including anti-communist ones). That doesn't mean we shouldn't criticise them either. We should. But to say that there was no reason to not be trustworthy of the USSR is historical revisionism- we can lament about what could have been, but then that would just have us debating alternate history hypotheticals.

The USSR is dead and gone, as is Yugoslavia and a fuckton of other socialist governments but that doesn't mean that socialism dies with it, nor should we be shy to point out their fuck ups so we can learn from their mistakes and not repeat them.

 No.617648

>>617562
>Bullshit. if they were evacuated their autonomous republics wouldn't have been dissolved

Why's such a conclusion? Are you implying that the only way to have a democratic representation is through autonomous republics, lol?

>The RSFSR officially recognized deportations of Crimean peoples by the USSR government from its territories as an act of genocide.


Oh no, khruschevites/traitors condemned stalinsits! Must be true then

Khruschevites were the ones to erase crimean tatar heroes from history, while stalinists had it right from the very beginning. Khruschevites bascially slav-washed tatar resistance heroes and made them into russians, while claiming that 1/10 of tatar population sided with Nazis. Imagine how this bullshit impacted the friendship between nationalities. Same shit was propagandized towards caucasians and balts, with same slav-washing of heroes by official khruschevite propaganda.

It's the kind of nonsensical hills westerners-claiming-to-be-communists wish to die on, for no reason whatsoever except for being brainwashed by imperialist propaganda. Deportations literally followed the same procedures as evacuations, and on top of that, they got land and homes in the rear, while slavs got to live in shacks, there's plenty of memoirs where evacuated people were living in schools and hospitals for months because there was no housing ready.

Oh noooo, crimeans and caucasians got fertile unsettled Kazakhstan soil to live on instead of Crimea's desert and Caucasus' mountains! Such a repression! Guess fucking what happened when chechens were made to come back? They didn't come back to live in mountains, oh no, they came to cities in the lowlands, which historically were stolen from chechens back in 1800s by the Empire, who drove them into the mountains in the first place. And crimeans got their desert back, congrats! Today they are poor and destitute, and the only reason they are even living there is because tatar politicians get gibs due to token minority representation and votes. Their lands in Kazakhstan were after re-portations back to their historical homelands seized by kazakh nationalists. Yep, that was totally a restoration of justice for all sides involved!

Again, deportations happened like evacuations. Goal was a bit different - there was ethnic banditry that terrorized those peoples, so USSR resettled them all en masse and destroyed the very possibility for banditism like that. In comparison, USSR was still catching bandits in West Ukraine and Baltics for a decade afterwards. Chechens and crimeans, though, had no bandit problems in Kazakhstan whatsoever.

Oh, and repressed people in USSR had their voting rights taken away. Guess what didn't happen during the deportations!

>How does that make it any better? Today trans people are considered "mentally ill". If a group of socialists considered them to be a symptom of "bourgoise decadence" and imprisoned them or categorised them as mentally ill, would you make excuses for it?


Dude, whatever happens with the LGBT in the West, it's not healthy. I'm not going to debate this, because it's idpol bullshit we shouldn't bring here to discuss, but I will say that USSR had at the time the correct take of the issue - that only the (petit-)bourgeois fucks had enough free time on their hands to ONLY be concerned about sexuality issues.

 No.617649

>>617581
No, they weren't. It's a literal piece of Nazi propaganda.

 No.617652

>>617588
But you don't understand, the didn't USSR collapse because of long series of mistakes, structural issues and historical conditions, it was perfect you can't criticize it, the soviets were simply huh stabbed in the back by some dudes

 No.617657

>>617652
>the didn't USSR collapse because of long series of mistakes, structural issues and historical conditions

USSR collapsed because of destalinization. If under Stalin sabotages of socialism were curtailed and punished, later they were swept under the rug by labelling them "mistakes, structural issues and historical conditions". When you talk about "ruthless criticism", the first thing you need to understand that you are not actually ruthlessly criticizing the thing if you don't even entertain the possibility of intentional sabotage conspiracy lasting decades upon decades, all in order to destroy communism.

 No.617658

>>617588
>Tito
Was literally propped up by IMF loans and Western backing to troll the USSR and to give a false hope of a "third way" not aligned with Moscow or Washington. Of course as soon as Moscow was destroyed the West had no more need of such a fig leaf and dispensed with Yugoslavia post haste.
>Cuba/Castro
was supported by USSR subsidies the entire Cold War lmao the Cubans even call the period after the USSR died and stopped giving them stuff the "special period" as a euphemism for how shit things got without gas imports.
>Vietnam/Ho Chi Minh
Again the USSR was the staunchest ally of Vietnam; Vietnam's issues were with opportunist Maoist China, not Russia.
>Nasser
I"ll give you this one he was just a bourgeois nationalist only supported to try and stop Israeli encroachment in the middle east but even then had USSR backing however slight
>Nkrumah
Literally coup'd before he could get anything done.

Nice "non-aligned" movement you got here when 3/5 were USSR allies who didn't bother with "ruthless criticism" of their benefactor, 1/5 was almost Allende'd, and 1/5 was Western backed. Your historical illiteracy is hilarious.

 No.617659

>>617648
>Why's such a conclusion? Are you implying that the only way to have a democratic representation is through autonomous republics, lol?

That's what the soviet union did, mate. They had autonomous republics for a lot of Russia's minorities, including Armenians and Volga Germans, the latter of which was deported en-masse.

https://www.sciencespo.fr/mass-violence-war-massacre-resistance/fr/document/suerguen-crimean-tatars-deportation-and-exile.html

>Oh no, khruschevites/traitors condemned stalinsits! Must be true then

Broken clock. And besides, this isn't coming from Kruschevites, these are mostly from the victims of said soviet deportations.

>Khruschevites were the ones to erase crimean tatar heroes from history, while stalinists had it right from the very beginning. Khruschevites bascially slav-washed tatar resistance heroes and made them into russians, while claiming that 1/10 of tatar population sided with Nazis. Imagine how this bullshit impacted the friendship between nationalities. Same shit was propagandized towards caucasians and balts, with same slav-washing of heroes by official khruschevite propaganda.

<everything I don't like is kruschevite propaganda.
How is it that pointing out ethnic deportation (which wasn't at all evacuation), Kruschevite propaganda when this wasn't even made by Kruschev. These are based on eye witness testimonies.

For all your talks of "plenty of memoirs", there's not exactly memoirs that prove an overall favourable view.

>Crimean Tatars’ memories are in direct competition not only with the Soviet official narrative, but also with the memories of the Russian-speaking inhabitants of Crimea. Indeed, those inhabitants remember the Crimean Tatars’ collaboration with the occupying German army (Uelhing, 2004: 49-61). Conversely, the Crimean Tatars recall their active involvement in the ranks of the Red Army and in the Soviet partisan movement (Williams, 2001: 414). The Crimean Tatar soldiers who were decorated during the Second World War or killed in the line of duty are celebrated as personification of Crimean Tatars’ patriotism. Beyond that subjectivity of the memories, some aspects of Crimean Tatar history are ignored. Thus, the acts of collaboration of hundreds of Crimean Tatars are avoided, as well as the formation of self-defense units and their role during the German occupation. This period is greatly emotionally invested and gives still rise nowadays to competing interpretations


>Muh banditry, muh idpol, muh USSR was always correct

Non-arguments.

 No.617660

>>617657
>the backstabbing just lasted 50 years dude
great argument, very materialistic analysis

 No.617666

>>617660
I don't accept standard ML lines of "it was Khrushchev and the rot seeped in from there" since it's too simple but at the same time you have to understand that undermining an entire system and ideology takes a hell of a long time. It took the liberals centuries to finally stuff Christianity into a box and disempower the church and it's not like the USSR rested on the most stable foundations being constantly attacked by enemies. It's not unreasonable to believe that a cadre of corrupt opportunist sell outs slowly moved bit by bit like an unseen cancer mouthing all the party lines, until they finally had enough power to attempt an overthrow. The proof that this can happen is in the fact that the liberals did the same thing when overthrowing the feudal order.

 No.617674

File: 1637917304385.jpg (9.16 KB, 190x157, 1632971229660.jpg)

>>617658
>Was literally propped up by IMF loans and Western backing to troll the USSR and to give a false hope of a "third way" not aligned with Moscow or Washington. Of course as soon as Moscow was destroyed the West had no more need of such a fig leaf and dispensed with Yugoslavia post haste.

Copy-pasted from another source, but there's a lot more nuance to that.
>Yugoslavia had relatively low debt in the early 70s, but the oil crisis hit them hard, causing relative rises in import prices. Yugoslavia was highly dependent on remittances as a source of foreign currency and means of reducing unemployment, especially from skilled Yugoslavians working on foreign construction and engineering projects. As the global economy slowed down in the late 70s, there was a decline in major construction projects. By the 1980s, oil production had picked up, prices fell as the world experienced a massive oil glut, and drilling firms pretty much stopping hiring. Wealthy Western countries also began to allow more migrants from from other countries, causing further competition and downward pressure on wages. The rapid development of South Korea is also cited as a reason for Yugoslavia losing their niche in skilled construction labor.

>Yugoslavia had loans from both the Western and Eastern blocs, but as the global oil glut was wrecking havoc on the Soviet Economy in the 1980s, the West became the main source for credit.


>One thing to consider is that in the 1970s the IMF wasn't really known for demanding austerity as a condition for refinancing loans. John Maynard Keynes' original vision for the fund was as a cooperative fund upon which member states could draw to maintain economic activity and employment through periodic crises. This view suggested an IMF that helped governments and to act as the United States government had during the New Deal to the great recession of the 1930s. Tito was generally able to play both sides in the Cold War, and negotiate the best deal possible. The Yugoslavian government might have assumed that this special status could continue indefinitely, and that neither side wanted to harm them and push them into the arms of the other. As the USSR weakened and eventually broke apart, that "threat" to Western power subsided, and Washington was free to impose structural adjustment in the Balkans.


https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1999/04/imf-a17.html

I'm not saying what Yugoslavia or Tito had the best system in place, but i don't exactly see how them trying to avoid en-masse world conflict via torpedoes and war (like China) has to do with this. Yugoslavia didn't want to be dragged into war.

>was supported by USSR subsidies the entire Cold War lmao the Cubans even call the period after the USSR died and stopped giving them stuff the "special period" as a euphemism for how shit things got without gas imports.

True, but you also have to take into consideration that they were being heavily blockaded and had already been able to fend of the bay of pigs- which although an impressive feat was also due in fact to the Kennedy administration fucking up with the operation. All these countries listed did deals with the USSR, but none of them wanted to be dragged into their conflicts and wanted to remain neutral. Not to mention are we going to forget the bitterness between the two countries after the Cuban missile crisis?

Castro straight up wanted to keep the missiles and launch a pre-emptive strike on the US in order to prevent them from CONTINUING to be blockaded. Man actually urged the Soviet Union to launch the missiles on the US due to this.

Khrushchev sent letters to Kennedy on October 23 and 24 that claimed the deterrent nature of the missiles in Cuba and the peaceful intentions of the Soviet Union. On October 26, the Soviets offered to withdraw the missiles in return for US guarantees to avoid carrying out or supporting an of invasion of Cuba and to remove all of the missiles in southern Italy and in Turkey. The deal was accepted, and the crisis abated.
Castro was not consulted throughout the Kennedy-Khrushchev negotiations and was angered by the unilateral Soviet withdrawal of the missiles and bombers. Also, the People's Republic of China publicly criticized the outcome.

So after being fucked over by the soviets, albeit still doing deals with them, there's a reason why Cuba was part of the non-aligned movement.

>Again the USSR was the staunchest ally of Vietnam; Vietnam's issues were with opportunist Maoist China, not Russia.

Vietnam was also recovering from the War that they were waging with the USA, and also had to deal with the fuckery of Khmer Rouge and China. Even if they allied with the USSR publically, this would likely escalate conflict, and they had to recover from consecutive wars.

>I"ll give you this one he was just a bourgeois nationalist only supported to try and stop Israeli encroachment in the middle east but even then had USSR backing however slight

I'll also concede he had pro-USSR people chucked into prison, but for the most part he wanted an independent self-reliant egypt.

>Literally coup'd before he could get anything done.

He achieved independance for Ghana and was one of the founding members of the African union. I don't think that counts as "nothing".
Hell, on a related note, People like Thomas Sankara were also outspoken against the USSR, going as far to accuse them of imperialism for what they were doing in Afghanistan. Did he not get anything done either?

Each of these soviet leaders had successes in their own countries, but there were reasons why some of them, based on previous negative affairs with the soviet union, and note how ALL of them did trade deals with the USSR. The point of the non-aligned movement was not to get dragged into the USSRs cold war, especially when they had either violated trust between them or didn't have the strength to contribute. This is real politik 101 mate.

 No.617676

>>617674
Should point out, these people aren't devoid of criticism, but neither is the USSR. To be fair, I should have been a lot more clearer with my intent to point out that neither side was innocent and each had their flaws which contributed to where we are now.

 No.617678

Why the fuck should I defend Iran and Belarus? Fuck them both, fuck Allahcucks and Soviet era LARP'ers.

 No.617679

>>617676
*and to add why they did the things they did.

 No.617686

>>617659
>That's what the soviet union did, mate.

Did what? You know that a lot of tatars in Russia don't even live in Tatarstan, right? And Tatarstan itself is barely majority tatar. Same is true for most of autonomous republics.

Next. We know that in USA, Black Panthers weren't wanting New Afrika. Nationalist Nation of Islam wanted it, but not communist Black Panthers. Why's that? Kazakhstan at that time was a very mixed place, with every nationality from USSR living there, and kazakhs being a minority there, basically, and the whole Kazakhstan territory being the full extent of kazakh nomadic migrations. At times, it had more ukrainians living there than kazakhs, ffs.

>And besides, this isn't coming from Kruschevites, these are mostly from the victims of said soviet deportations.


Oh yes, the famous eye witnesses spewing anti-communist nonsense to win points with the audience. Totally reliable sources, yep-yep.

>How is it that pointing out ethnic deportation (which wasn't at all evacuation), Kruschevite propaganda when this wasn't even made by Kruschev.


Because those evacuations became deportations under Khruschev. Khruschevites were the ones who stirred ethnic nationalism with this bullshit propaganda.

>For all your talks of "plenty of memoirs", there's not exactly memoirs that prove an overall favourable view.


You literally posted a quote from somewhere which says: tatar memoirs don't mention Nazi collaboration; yet official history says they were collaborating with Nazis like mad. I gave you a solution to this fucking problem - IT WAS LITERAL NAZI PROPAGANDA. Didn't you know that Nazis claimed to have the support of people living in USSR against Bolshevik menace? Claimed that they had million large armies of russian collaborators? Nothing fucking new, except for the fact that khruschevites made this Nazi propaganda into a "truth" by retranslating it officially.

>>617666
>"it was Khrushchev and the rot seeped in from there" since it's too simple

Khruschev came from Trotsky's gang, though, and Trotsky was blood from blood of mensheviks who weaseled their way into the Party. In essense, Khruschev was representing the reactionaries inside USSR, who survived through purges and continued with their sabotages, after Stalin's death, completely unopposed. Hence, they rewrote the history and labelled everyone purged an innocent victim of Stalin's paranoia. Literally "it wasn't a sabotage, it was just a mistake! A structural ineffficiency! They didn't do anything bad, it was Stalin who murdered them for no reason!" They covered for their own who died and were exposed before 1953, and they did it since then, labelling every sabotage they did as a honest mistake.

What, you think it's impossible to have such a lingering hate for communism even if you live in a communist country and are part of it's apparatus? Kek, read Yakovlev, the ideolog of perestroika, or any number of those people in charge who got cozy positions after destroying USSR. They ALL have claimed, when they felt secure in their conquest, that from the very beginning they were anticommunists, that they consciously sabotaged socialism, and that they wanted nothing else than "liberation of their country from totalitarianism" by the hands of USA.

This sounds simplistic to you? Really now?

 No.617694

>>617686
I've lost my point somewhere.

As a rule of thumb, autonomous republics were created whenever there was a national tension between the big nationality and a lesser one. We don't want big nation chauvinism to oppress minorities. Kazakhstan was full of minorities. It was not necessary to artificially distort democracy to protect minorities, it was fine as it was.

 No.617773

>>617666
>I don't accept standard ML lines of "it was Khrushchev and the rot seeped in from there" since it's too simple but at the same time you have to understand that undermining an entire system and ideology takes a hell of a long time.

In 1948 (at the height of Soviet prestige when the socialist system had the entire worlds respect. Even in the degenerate West Communist Parties were large/connected with the masses and pro soviet) an economist that was basically a revisionist came out in the open with even Pravda praising his ideas

<Voznosensky therefore demanded that the prices of commodities should be "market prices", "based on their values or "prices of production" (the latter term being defined by Marx, in his analysis of capitalist economy, as cost of production plus an average profit). He therefore emphasised the need to enhance the role of "cost accounting" (accounting based on the profitability of individual enterprises and industries) in the organisation of production, together with that of economic incentives in the form of bonuses to the personnel of enterprises:

https://www.marxists.org/archive/bland/1980/restoration-capitalism-soviet-union/appendix-3.htm

<"Voznosensky's book…soon became popular amongst economists. Some of its these began to be cited on the same level as theses from Stalin".

(R. Medvedev: Let History Judge; London; 1972; p. 482).

Which led to the Leningrad affair of 1950 where Voznosensky is repressed alongside his collaborators.

It takes 4 years to publicly counter attack but Stalin does with Economic Problems in the USSR
< "It is sometimes asked whether the law of value exists and operates in our country, under the socialist system. Yes, it does exist and does operate. Wherever commodities and commodity production exist, there the law of value must also exist… Does this mean that…the law of value…is the regulator of production in our country…? No it does not. Actually, the sphere of operation of the law of value under our economic system is strictly limited and placed within definite bounds… Totally incorrect, too, is the assertion that under our present economic system… the law of value regulates the 'proportions' of labour distributed among the various branches of production.
<"If this were true, it would be incomprehensible why our light industries, which are the most profitable, are not being developed at the utmost, and why preference is given to our heavy industries, which are often less profitable, and sometimes altogether unprofitable.
<"If this were true, it would be incomprehensible why a number of our heavy industry plants which are still unprofitable…are not closed down, and why no light industry plants, which would certainly be profitable…are not opened."
<"If this were true, it would be incomprehensible why workers are not transferred from plants that are less profitable, but necessary to our national economy, to plants which are more profitable — in accordance with the law of value, which supposedly regulates the 'proportions' of labour distributed among the branches of production…
<"The law of value can be a regulator of production only under capitalism,…
<"If profitableness is considered not from the standpoint of individual plants or industries, and not over a period of one year, but from the stand point of the entire national economy and over a period of, say, ten or fifteen years, which is the only correct approach to the question, then the temporary and unstable profitableness of some plants or industries is beneath all comparison with that higher form of stable and permanent profitableness which we get from the operation of the law of balanced development of the national economy and from economic planning".
(J.V. Stalin: Economic Problems of the USSR; Moscow; 1952; p. 23, 25, 27-9).

Now Alexei Kosygin was a close comrade of Voznosensky and Kosygin survives this purge
<"A Russian defector who was in Leningrad at the time (1948-9 — WBB) and was in close contact with Kosygin during his visits to the city, reports that Kosygin became drunk at a birthday party he attended late one night and referred to Stalin as a 'pockmarked bastard', adding words to the effect that the Soviet Union could become a great country…if only the dictator could be removed. There is little reason to doubt this story". (M. Page: The Day Khrushchov Fell; New York; 1965; p. 186-7).

The Kosygin reforms of 1965 (literally named after Alexei Kosygin) which returned the market, destroyed central planning
etc was implemented by the same Voznosensky faction that wanted to do all the stuff Voznosensky advocated in 1947, what Stalin warned against in 1952 (in Economic Problems) and what was finally implemented in 1965 by the Kosygin faction

Your post:
>"it was Khrushchev and the rot seeped in from there" since it's too simple
Is "too simple" only because you're not familiar with opportunism in Soviet history and how it was always present in the Bolshevik party (from the Mensheviks/SRs/Trotskyites/Bukharinites/Zinovievites/Liquidators etc) and the coming to power of Kruschev signalled the supremacy in that moment of history of the opportunists ascending to power

 No.617807

>>617676
>Next. We know that in USA, Black Panthers weren't wanting New Afrika. Nationalist Nation of Islam wanted it, but not communist Black Panthers. Why's that? Kazakhstan at that time was a very mixed place, with every nationality from USSR living there, and kazakhs being a minority there, basically, and the whole Kazakhstan territory being the full extent of kazakh nomadic migrations. At times, it had more ukrainians living there than kazakhs, ffs.

Yeah and there were multiple ethnicities living in Volga, yet they too lost a home. The Crimean tartars also had their own autonomous soviet republic, which was destroyed by the USSR under similar bullshit claims of their entire population being Nazi collaborators.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Autonomous_Soviet_Socialist_Republic

This is not an argument. And as for the black panthers, different material conditions, different cultures, and for your talk of black panthers not wanting a new Afrika.

>Im

>fucking
>plying

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Afrikan_Black_Panther_Party


>Oh yes, the famous eye witnesses spewing anti-communist nonsense to win points with the audience. Totally reliable sources, yep-yep.

>Muh propaganda
Not an argument. The fact that the USSR admitted they did this isn't "muh propaganda". If they actually didn't do it, they'd admit to it as such. You just cant handle the fact that your beloved Soviet Union fucked up, as if simping for them will ruin the reputation of Marxism Leninism and Communism as a whole. And this isn't just eye witness testimony, this is from writings and records as provided in the sources, sources that you brush off as propaganda.


>You literally posted a quote from somewhere which says: tatar memoirs don't mention Nazi collaboration; yet official history says they were collaborating with Nazis like mad. I gave you a solution to this fucking problem - IT WAS LITERAL NAZI PROPAGANDA. Didn't you know that Nazis claimed to have the support of people living in USSR against Bolshevik menace? Claimed that they had million large armies of russian collaborators? Nothing fucking new, except for the fact that khruschevites made this Nazi propaganda into a "truth" by retranslating it officially.


The Soviets falsified a lot of their claims surrounding the chechneans, and you swallowing up Soviet Propganda is laughable. The Crimeans bore the brunt of the Nazi invasion, having a mass amount of their territories occupied by the Nazi scourge. To collectively punish an ethnic group WHO ALSO WENT OUT OF THEIR WAY TO FIGHT SAID NAZIS is fucked, which is what the Soviet Union did, despite claims of Soviet officials had also recognized this and rejected claims that the Crimean Tatars had betrayed the Soviet Union en masse. The presence of Muslim Committees organized from Berlin by various Turkic foreigners appeared a cause for concern in the eyes of the Soviet government, already weary of Turkey at the time

Many Crimean Tatar communists strongly opposed the occupation and assisted the resistance movement to provide valuable strategic and political information.Other Crimean Tatars also fought on the side of the Soviet partisans, like the Tarhanov movement of 250 Crimean Tatars which fought throughout 1942 until its destruction.Six Crimean Tatars were even named the Heroes of the Soviet Union, and thousands more were awarded high honors in the Red Army.

Soviet publications blatantly falsified information about Crimean Tatars in the Red Army, going so far as to describe Crimean Tatar Hero of the Soviet Union Uzeir Abduramanov as Azeri, not Crimean Tatar, on the cover of a 1944 issue of Ogonyok magazine - even though his family had been deported for being Crimean Tatar just a few months earlier. The book In the Mountains of Tavria falsely claimed that volunteer partisan scout Bekir Osmanov was a German spy and shot, although the central committee later acknowledged that he never served the Germans and survived the war, ordering later editions to have corrections after still-living Osmanov and his family noticed the obvious falsehood

https://day.kyiv.ua/ru/article/istoriya-i-ya/k-synu-ot-otca-zakalyat-serdca

http://www.qirimbirligi.ru/news/uzeir-abduramanov-%E2%80%94-geroj-slavnyj-syn-krymskotatarskogo-naroda.html


Official history (like the sources I provided) fucking debunk your delusional claim. All you fucking do is scream "muh propaganda". If you want to actually deny genocide, go nuts, but you have yet to actually contribute something substantial. Screaming propaganda is a pathetic buzzword and shows you actually have no argument.

 No.617812

>>617773
<"A Russian defector who was in Leningrad at the time (1948-9 — WBB) and was in close contact with Kosygin during his visits to the city, reports that Kosygin became drunk at a birthday party he attended late one night and referred to Stalin as a 'pockmarked bastard', adding words to the effect that the Soviet Union could become a great country…if only the dictator could be removed. There is little reason to doubt this story". (M. Page: The Day Khrushchov Fell; New York; 1965; p. 186-7).

You shouldn't believe those accounts. Look at China in the eyes of defectors and Westerners - it's supposed to be a cutthroat competition at the top, factions upon factions, and everyone murdering each other.

Kosygin's original reform plan was supposed to give workers the greater ability to establish their own companies without the state's involvement. Reform that got implemented was fully state-controlled, and at the same time, it reduced the amount of resonsibility bosses and companies had, as well as lessened state involvement in the companies' operations.

Liberman ( https://crystalbook.ru/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/%D0%9B%D0%B8%D0%B1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD-%D0%95.-%D0%9F%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%BD-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B1%D1%8B%D0%BB%D1%8C-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%8F.pdf his works) was the one whose version of reform came to be. Kosygin was promoted by Stalin himself. Like, every source claims that people liked him because he was focusing on light industries - you know, the stuff people required, but overall economic planning still went to heavy industries - in a similar manner today USA's MIC is siphoning money and resources from the real economy for no real benefit to that economy.

 No.617833

>>617807
>Not an argument. The fact that the USSR admitted they did this isn't "muh propaganda". If they actually didn't do it, they'd admit to it as such.

Wut. You know that khruschevites admitted to Stalin's mistakes, not their own, right? It wasn't USSR admitting to IT'S mistakes, it was the ruling faction trying to smear stalinists. In fact, khruschevites went out of their fucking way to highlight "the victories" the likes of Khruschev and Brezhnev had at the frontlines, lol

>To collectively punish an ethnic group WHO ALSO WENT OUT OF THEIR WAY TO FIGHT SAID NAZIS is fucked, which is what the Soviet Union did


And I tell you, you illiterate, that USSR did not fucking PUNISH them. Again, the main cause of resettlement was GODDAMN BANDITRY. WHICH THEY DIDN'T HAVE IN KAZAKHSTAN. Even your sources confirm my words - they didn't want to return, because new land was fucking fine. And they didn't get their voting rights taken away, like what USSR did to repressed categories of people. Imagine fucking that - you repress people, and leave them with full voting rights, with full ability to form their own soviets, and to talk freely on TV and media, etc etc. Like, what the fuck is wrong with you? Do you fucking think USA let interned Japanese to have self-government, to keep their votes?

>Soviet publications blatantly falsified information about Crimean Tatars in the Red Army, going so far as to describe Crimean Tatar Hero of the Soviet Union Uzeir Abduramanov as Azeri, not Crimean Tatar, on the cover of a 1944 issue of Ogonyok magazine - even though his family had been deported for being Crimean Tatar just a few months earlier


Didn't find that in your source. Straight up doesn't have Azerbaijan or Azeri mentioned at all. It wasn't HIS opinion, either, it was of his descendant(s), brainwashed by khruschevite propaganda.

>The book In the Mountains of Tavria falsely claimed that volunteer partisan scout Bekir Osmanov was a German spy and shot, although the central committee later acknowledged that he never served the Germans and survived the war, ordering later editions to have corrections after still-living Osmanov and his family noticed the obvious falsehood


Or maybe the book was using metaphores, and described the death of a german spy as a cry of indignation at the guy who served germans now being hailed as hero by khruschevites. Apparently, Bekir Osmanov even tried to sue Lysenko, and got burned by that at the time.

>Official history (like the sources I provided)


Those are not official history sources, those are just random articles from somewhere, lol. But whatever.

>If you want to actually deny genocide, go nuts, but you have yet to actually contribute something substantial.


Khruschev called for rewriting of history in his speech, and let out of prisons and rehabilitated a ton of reactionaries - rewriting of history required to make those seem like decent human beings. Do you fucking think there would be easily accessible proofs of them being liars? Every goddamn time somebody actually ventures into the archives, they bring out proofs that Khruschev's rehabilitations were done to actual criminals and traitors. Bekir Osmanov might as well have been an example of such a thing - his personal history getting rewritten to make him NOT being a criminal anymore. And then he glorified his sueing of an author as a restoration of justice.

 No.617866

File: 1637929537169.jpg (96.45 KB, 802x840, 1634868579991.jpg)

>>617833
>And I tell you, you illiterate, that USSR did not fucking PUNISH them. Again, the main cause of resettlement was GODDAMN BANDITRY. WHICH THEY DIDN'T HAVE IN KAZAKHSTAN.

This has nothing to do with Kazakhstan you mouth breather. This is to do with the Crimeans.

>Even your sources confirm my words - they didn't want to return, because new land was fucking fine. And they didn't get their voting rights taken away, like what USSR did to repressed categories of people.

<didn't want to return.
From the source that you CLEARLY read.
>most of the Crimean Tatar men who were fighting in the ranks of the Red Army were demobilized and sent into labor camps in Siberia and in the Ural mountain region. The demobilized soldiers were released after Stalin’s death in 1953 and allowed to return to their families in their place of exile.
>they were excluded from the processes of rehabilitation led by Nikita Khrushchev in 1956. Thus, whereas most of the punished people regained their political rights and were authorized to return to their former homelands, Crimean Tatars, as well as Volga Germans and Turk-Meskhetians, were sentenced to a prolonged exile. If from this year on they regained their civic rights as individuals, going back to Crimea remained forbidden. Moreover, this decision meant the negation of the collective existence of Crimean Tatars.

In other words they didn't return because THEY DIDN'T HAVE A FUCKING SAY.

>Didn't find that in your source. Straight up doesn't have Azerbaijan or Azeri mentioned at all. It wasn't HIS opinion, either, it was of his descendant(s), brainwashed by khruschevite propaganda.

<didn't find that in your source.
I don't actually believe you read the sources, because the ones I used wind up damning Kruschev and the post stalin era.. But of course I'm the illiterate one. fuckwit

From the sources you CLEARLY read.
>After the war, the history of the Crimean partisans was unrecognizably falsified and the exploits of some partisans were attributed to others, many books were published without mentioning the participation of the Crimean Tatars in the partisan movement. For example, in the falsified book by I. Vergasov "In the Mountains of Tavria", Bekir Osmanov is depicted as a German spy and was allegedly shot. The question of this book was discussed in 1957 in the Central Committee of the CPSU and later it was remade. Bekir Osmanov joined the CPSU in 1942 in a partisan forest and was expelled from the party in 1966 by the regional party committee in Uzbekistan against the will of his primary organization for writing a letter to Brezhnev saying that the treatment of the Crimean Tatar people did not conform to the principles of socialism. Thanks to the very name of the legendary partisan intelligence officer, thousands of Crimean Tatars participated in the national movement, seeking the truth.

>Today I understand that it is impossible to understand Yura without knowing the biography of his father: he is its organic and worthy continuation, just as inconvenient for the authorities. Therefore, he, the creator and inspirer of Reskomnats, was not allowed by the Communist Party authorities of Crimea to head him, giving the ready-made committee to a man whom the Crimean Tatars still do not respect. And the entire committee resigned. In fact, the reason for this was that Y. Osmanov refused to register the construction plan for 1991, which contradicted the then union guidelines developed in Moscow with the participation of vice-President of the USSR Yanayev: in it, 50 million rubles from the resettlement program were arbitrarily transferred to the social needs of the entire Crimea. Thus, the organized resettlement of the Crimean Tatars was actually disrupted, the spontaneous return, the self-return of the land, the conflicts of the Crimean Tatars and the authorities began.


>Azerbaijan or Azeri mentioned at all.

Jesse what the fuck are you talking about.


Imagine fucking that - you repress people, and leave them with full voting rights, with full ability to form their own soviets, and to talk freely on TV and media, etc etc. Like, what the fuck is wrong with you? Do you fucking think USA let interned Japanese to have self-government, to keep their votes?

We're talking about an ethnic deportation, not people who served in the gulag. Different punishments, different contexts, different results. Still ethnic deportation.

>Or maybe the book was using metaphores,

This is pathetic, even for you. You speculating that something is a metaphor without substantiating your claims other than "Muh kruschev is laughable". And the rest of the argument is just "muh kruschev, muh kruschev muh kruschev. Again, you have no point and are just poisoning the well.

But keep up with that genocide denial.

 No.617912

File: 1637931484854.gif (2.07 MB, 498x237, tenor.gif)

>>617866
Unironically believes Kruschevite history
Please continue to use flag so I know to ignore everything you write

 No.617920

>>617866
>most of the Crimean Tatar men who were fighting in the ranks of the Red Army were demobilized and sent into labor camps in Siberia and in the Ural mountain region.

Prove THIS happened, lol. It's yet another retarded meme version of the "Stalin put returning soldiers into gulags!" meme

>they were excluded from the processes of rehabilitation led by Nikita Khrushchev in 1956.


Lolwut. This your link http://www.qirimbirligi.ru/news/uzeir-abduramanov-%E2%80%94-geroj-slavnyj-syn-krymskotatarskogo-naroda.html says this:

>18 мая 1944 года всех выселяли из Татарбарына — две семьи со множеством детей попали в Бухарскую область, в совхоз «Нарпай» (ныне это Навоийская область, Узбекистан). Здесь и нашел семью — родителей, младших сестер, брата, родственников фронтовик, Герой Советского Союза Узеир Абдураманов.


>В «Нарпае», зайдя однажды на почту, чтобы отправить письмо, Узеир увидел телеграфистку Муневер (она была родом из Бахчисарая). Это была его судьба. Поженились они 9 мая 1945 года.


So, he got demobilized IN 1944 AND WENT STRAIGHT BACK TO HIS FAMILY! Not in gulag like you have claimed, lololol

Note that repressed were all resettled by ENTIRE VILLAGES, so that people don't get lost and don't get separated. Again, such a cute repression - deporting entire villages, but not breaking families apart, not even breaking neighborhood bonds apart. What the fuck, Stalin? Can't you even do a genocide right?

>Было в его судьбе и такое — в 1948 году Герою Советского Союза предлагали вернуться на Родину — в Крым. Разрешали взять с собой свою семью — отца, братьев, сестер, жену.


He was allowed to return to Crimea in 1948. It's whatever.

>С 1951 года жили уже в городе Гиждуван Бухарской области — Узеир Абдураманов заведовал отделом кадров, был парторгом на хлопкоочистительном заводе.


1951, repressed crimean tatar was HR boss and Party's cell boss at a factory. Huh.

Funny how accounts of the events contradict each other. Almost as if… someone's lying?

>In other words they didn't return because THEY DIDN'T HAVE A FUCKING SAY.


But this guy was allowed to return in 1948, and he decided against it, because apparently he would be leaving others behind if he did that.

>I don't actually believe you read the sources, because the ones I used wind up damning Kruschev and the post stalin era..


Wut. I went back to make sure and searched the page for "азер" and didn't find anything. There's straight up no Azerbaijan or azeri mentioned in either of your sources. Uzeir Abduramanov being an Azeri is not mentioned in your sources.

>We're talking about an ethnic deportation, not people who served in the gulag.


But you said half-a-post earlier that:

<most of the Crimean Tatar men who were fighting in the ranks of the Red Army were demobilized and sent into labor camps in Siberia and in the Ural mountain region. The demobilized soldiers were released after Stalin’s death in 1953 and allowed to return to their families in their place of exile.


Huh.

>You speculating that something is a metaphor


https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2,_%D0%98%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%8F_%D0%97%D0%B0%D1%85%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

Vergasov also participated in a war, and he was a COMMANDER of "united partisan region" in Crimea. I mean, if we pit a guy who tried to sue Lysenko and a COMMANDER OF PARTISANS, i'd rather believe a COMMANDER OF PARTISANS, you know?

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Османов,_Юрий_Бекирович

OHLOL, this guy is the son of that supposed partisan scout. Mother with two children was EVACUATED TO AZERBAIJAN shortly after the war, huh? Didn't know Stalin cared about ordinary people enough to evacuate them, tbh. Father got into a spar with Lysenko as an agronom, and THEN in 1942 supposedly became a Party member, and got expelled in 1966 for anti-soviet agitation. With his son, later they made a self-reported census of crimean tatars, and apparently inflated the number of people deported by a factor of 2. Also, was sent into a psychiatry ward for 3 years for insisting that his shit was totally real.

Then that guy got into power in Crimea in 1991 and was travelling to Turkey for who knows what reason, and then died in 1993 "to hooligans". Jesus Christ, imagine THAT happening in USSR in 1950-80s!

You seriously going to claim that THIS character is a more reliable source than a COMMANDER OF PARTISANS WHO TOTALLY WAS 100% OF TIME ON SOVIET SIDE? You know, "scout" means that he was supposed to travel to the enemy's territory; what if, I dunno, but what if, Bekir was a polizei, who got shot by partisans, and then claimed to be a partisan scout, and then got transferred into a hospital in the rear in what, 1944?

 No.617931

>>616357
>Iran
isn't Iran arresting their own communists?

 No.617935

>So, he got demobilized IN 1944 AND WENT STRAIGHT BACK TO HIS FAMILY! Not in gulag like you have claimed, lololol

Which again, wasn’t the fate of all Crimeans. Again you’re ignoring how Crimeans despite being rewarded for their service to the Soviet Union were mistreated. This isn’t something unique in history.



>Note that repressed were all resettled by ENTIRE VILLAGES, so that people don't get lost and don't get separated. Again, such a cute repression - deporting entire villages, but not breaking families apart, not even breaking neighborhood bonds apart.

>he thinks you have to break families apart to engage in ethnic deportations
By that logic, the Nazis didn’t do genocide because some Jewish families were deported together. Fuckwit .

>

But you said half-a-post earlier that:

<most of the Crimean Tatar men who were fighting in the ranks of the Red Army were demobilized and sent into labor camps in Siberia and in the Ural mountain region. The demobilized soldiers were released after Stalin’s death in 1953 and allowed to return to their families in their place of exile


Yeah, 1. These were soldiers not civillians and 2. They were allowed to meet their families IN THEIR PLACE OF EXILE.

Where do you think that is, dipshit?

You seriously going to claim that THIS character is a more reliable source than a COMMANDER OF PARTISANS WHO TOTALLY WAS 100% OF TIME ON SOVIET SIDE? You know, "scout" means that he was supposed to travel to the enemy's territory; what if, I dunno, but what if, Bekir was a polizei, who got shot by partisans, and then claimed to be a partisan scout, and then got transferred into a hospital in the rear in what, 1944?

Yes, considering Soviet officials were also known to lie. In conclusion, you still have no argument, and are still denying genocide while having the literacy rate of a /pol/yp.

 No.617953

>>617935
And to add, that man isn’t the only one who was mistreated, and again, despite the fact that Soviets actually rewarded Crimean tartars and made an effort to actually not have these people generalised as a whole despite this should tell you there was inner conflict.

Furthermore, again, with multiple testimonies from Crimeans, yeah I’m likely to take the word of the victim.

This isn’t some North Korean sob story used to serve a narrative, this is history AFTER THE FACT. Criticising the USSR won’t diminish the legacy of communism or the USSR overall, because as I said before ITT, there are amazing things they did.

Ethnic deportations and mistreatment of Crimeans wasnt one of them.

 No.617957

>tfw you spend your time on internet in 2021 on an obscure website slandering communist heroes with zero evidence, making up shit to fit your larper narrative of the USSR did nothing wrong

 No.617960


 No.617970

>>617935
>Which again, wasn’t the fate of all Crimeans.

Prove it.

>Again you’re ignoring how Crimeans despite being rewarded for their service to the Soviet Union were mistreated.


Were they, though? Crimeans were resettled by entire villages, without getting separated; they had their voting rights intact, and families didn't lose each other; their men were demobilized in 1944, in order to reunite with their families as soon as possible; they got juicy positions on their new places of living, they were writing books in their own language, literature got carried over from Crimea, etc, and they had their own political organizations back then as well.

HEY GUYS! Seriously, what do you think, does this sounds like a collective punishment of a nationality to you? To me, it looks like an evacuation.

>Yeah, 1. These were soldiers not civillians and 2. They were allowed to meet their families IN THEIR PLACE OF EXILE.


Wut. I have no fucking where the claim of soldiers getting sent into gulags after the war originated from, but it is a 100% bullshit. As proven by BOTH OF YOUR FUCKING SOURCES, where the crimean men both returned to their families in 1944 without passing through any gulag. Wanna bet that we won't find a crimean memoir of them going through gulag after the war, lol?

>Yes, considering Soviet officials were also known to lie.


Ah, but on one hand we have a hero of the union, with medals, who commanded partisans and who wrote a book having lots of positive reviews, to a guy, who had no medals, no works except random bullshit about deportations, who falsely claimed that there were 400k tatars deported instead of 200k, who went through prisons multiple times for antisovietism, and who got into the leadership of Crimea in 1991 and got murdered in 1993 by supposedly his political opponents… Again, why do you believe an anti-soviet liberal instead of a Soviet hero?

>>617953
>This isn’t some North Korean sob story used to serve a narrative, this is history AFTER THE FACT.

Lolno, it's literally a "North Korean defector sob story"-level of bullshit.

>>617957
Eh, that "partisan scout" guy didn't have any medals. He just claimed to be a partisan and a scout.

>>617960
Your clown source claims this:

>The activists of the Crimean Tatar national movement also tried to evaluate the demographic consequences of the deportation. They carried out a census in all the scattered Tatar communities in the middle of the 1960s. The results of this inquiry show that 109,956 Crimean Tatars of the 238,500 deportees died between July 1, 1944 and January 1, 1947. Thus 46.2 % of the deported Tatar population would have died during the first eighteen months of forced exile.


Doesn't provide source to your claim that crimean soldiers were gulagged either. Shame.

 No.617984

>>617970
>Again, why do you believe an anti-soviet liberal instead of a Soviet hero?
Because he's an anti-soviet liberal.

 No.617987

>>617970
> Were they, though? Crimeans were resettled by entire villages, without getting separated; they had their voting rights intact, and families didn't lose each other; their men were demobilized in 1944, in order to reunite with their families as soon as possible; they got juicy positions on their new places of living, they were writing books in their own language, literature got carried over from Crimea, etc, and they had their own political organizations back then as well.

> Even if their arrival was planned, the deportees’ resettlement had been prepared poorly. Local authorities were informed belatedly, if at all. In a context marked by war and the flood of deported peoples to Central Asia, the local authorities did not have the necessary time and means to absorb physically and psychologically weakened people. The lack of accommodation and food, the failure to adapt to new climatic conditions and the rapid spread of diseases had a heavy demographical impact during the first years of exile.


The Tatar deportees, from now on considered « special settlers », were placed under the special settlement regime. This punitive regime had deprived them, for thirteen years, of their rights, and particularly of their freedom of movement. They could not go as far as five kilometers away from their imposed place of residence, and once or twice a month they had to go to the local kommandatur administered by the NKVD and sign an attendance register

African Americans are also allowed to form political orgs in America. Are you saying they’re not oppressed?

> Wanna bet that we won't find a crimean memoir of them going through gulag after the war, lol?


Hard to do that when a lot of their memoirs were subject to censorship.

> >The activists of the Crimean Tatar national movement also tried to evaluate the demographic consequences of the deportation. They carried out a census in all the scattered Tatar communities in the middle of the 1960s. The results of this inquiry show that 109,956 Crimean Tatars of the 238,500 deportees died between July 1, 1944 and January 1, 1947. Thus 46.2 % of the deported Tatar population would have died during the first eighteen months of forced exile.


And If you read earlier you’d see:
An official document establishes that 44,887 special settlers from Crimea died in 1944-1945, that is to say 19.6% of the peninsula’s population deported in 1944. In the Republic of Uzbekistan alone, 16,052 of them died in 1944 and 13,183 in 1945 (Bugaj, 1995: 156). These figures do not include the people who passed away during the transfer by train. Rywkin thinks there were 7,900 (1994: 67), an estimate that seems to be rather underestimated. It remains however very difficult to be more precise, failing that only a general census of the victims of the forced deportation can be done. A recent study, based on those same documents of the NKVD and on demographic projections, estimates that 18.01% of the deportees perished between 1944 and 1952, and that demographic deficit rose to 44.7% between those two dates (Ediev, 2004). These conclusions have to be considered cautiously again, because of the very nature of the documents consulted and of the uncertainties around them.

>but muh scout

Again, not an argument. Majority of evidence proves that these people were mistreated and deported. You trying to badmouth partisans who DARE criticise the USSR is the biggest cope, and you’re just willing to believe anything because “durr this guy has shiny medal”

>but where does it say they were sent to gulags

I’m the source provided, the source you repeatedly shrieked as being kruschev propaganda despite it criticising kruschev. Fuckwit.

 No.617988

>>617987
*in the source provided

 No.617992

>>617987
*in the sources provided

 No.617997

>>617987
>The Tatar deportees, from now on considered « special settlers », were placed under the special settlement regime. This punitive regime had deprived them, for thirteen years, of their rights, and particularly of their freedom of movement. They could not go as far as five kilometers away from their imposed place of residence, and once or twice a month they had to go to the local kommandatur administered by the NKVD and sign an attendance register

Did they, though? Pretty sure a fuckwit author just copied a gulag special settlement rules and pasted it onto crimean tatars, while they didn't have that at all. Afterall, your source about Uzeir Abduramanov LIVED IN A FUCKING CITY SINCE 1951. A CITY. That's pretty far away from a special settlement he was settled in, no?

>18% to 46% died by deportation!


Did that happen, though? We know that anti-soviet liberals have invented 200k deported crimean tatars out of thin air, so, what's to stop them from inventing 100k dead crimean tatars by deportation, either?

>Again, not an argument. Majority of evidence proves that these people were mistreated and deported. You trying to badmouth partisans who DARE criticise the USSR is the biggest cope, and you’re just willing to believe anything because “durr this guy has shiny medal”


I mean, I haven't read the book and just throwing out a theory. BUT that book was written by a war hero, who had no blemishes on his reputation, and the other guy is a troublemaker who got pretty deep into antisovietism, up to the point of being labelled a german spy by a said war hero.

>Majority of evidence proves that these people were mistreated and deported.


But that evidence is based off sources like the one you provided. Made by anti-soviet liberals and nationalists, that is. Who got archives into their basically private ownership after the 1990s, and who produced plenty of fakes over the years, and before that, khruschevites were doing the same.

>I’m the source provided, the source you repeatedly shrieked as being kruschev propaganda despite it criticising kruschev. Fuckwit.


I don't fucking care if it criticizes Khruschev or not. A lot of American propaganda criticizes USA, lol. That's not a fucking proof it's not an American propaganda, is it?

Soldiers getting sent into gulags after the war is FUCKING INSANE. They were demobilized in 1944, for fuck's sake, because their people were resettled in Kazakhstan. So, USSR demobilized them 1 year earlier than the rest to let them find their families and to help them there.

Like, why do you want so fucking much to believe anticommunists over communists? You just have to read their self-written biographies of those anticommunists to see that they are full of shit.

 No.618012

>>617997
> Did they, though? Pretty sure a fuckwit author just copied a gulag special settlement rules and pasted it onto crimean tatars, while they didn't have that at all. Afterall, your source about Uzeir Abduramanov LIVED IN A FUCKING CITY SINCE 1951. A CITY. That's pretty far away from a special settlement he was settled in, no?

>not seeing the bigger picture of Crimean tartars still being treated like shit.


> Did that happen, though? We know that anti-soviet liberals have invented 200k deported crimean tatars out of thin air, so, what's to stop them from inventing 100k dead crimean tatars by deportation, either?

<muh anti Soviet liberals
Again, you poisoning the well doesn’t disprove what happened. No ones denying that Crimean nationalists took advantage of this, but for the most part the man you’re having a fit over served his country and was reprimanded for criticising it. You trying to discredit him with your Soviet LARP speaks volumes that you don’t actually have an original thought to call your own and lack critical thinking skills.

> I mean, I haven't read the book and just throwing out a theory

<I haven’t read the book but I’ll let my confirmation bias inform my views
K lol

> Soldiers getting sent into gulags after the war is FUCKING INSANE. They were demobilized in 1944, for fuck's sake, because their people were resettled in Kazakhstan.

<despite the fact that the NKVD sought to collectively punish them because they were occupied by the Nazis
<completely forgetting that some were accused/ suspected of being nazi collaborators.

>So, USSR demobilized them 1 year earlier than the rest to let them find their families and to help them there.

<despite a good chunk of them dying and being deported on the basis of nationality
<but they moved with their families
That’s still genocide dude.

>but where’s the source

In the articles I posted AD NAUSEUM. Little thing you may want to check called “citations”.

>Like, why do you want so fucking much to believe anticommunists over communists? You just have to read their self-written biographies of those anticommunists to see that they are full of shit.

<everything I don’t like is anti communist propaganda, an emotional child’s guide to argumentation
Ah yes, noted Chechnean heroes who fought alongside the Soviets and for socialism are somehow anti communists and liberals because they didn’t like how the Soviets treated them.

>hey dude, I get we’re fighting for communism, but could you not deport us en masse. We’re not all nazis.

>tHis IS anTI sOVIeT bEHaviour

You’re pathetic.

 No.618018

File: 1637936937494.png (1.16 MB, 960x598, grand_bazar.PNG)

>>617997
>>617970
>>617920
>>617833
holy shit, I'll drink russian boomer kool aid to that, mate

 No.618064

>>618012
1 in 10 Crimean Tartars were armed Nazi collaborators
Evacuating them away from their victims likely saved their lives

 No.618069

>>616998
>what i dislike matters
By that logic, shitting on or defending iran wouldnt matter so why make this thread

 No.618090

>>617935
lmao that dude blew your arse out like a fucking hippo yawn

 No.618118

>>616357
>Anyone who attacks:
>Claiming to "side with the people against their government" isn't good enough.
If constructing the future and settling everything for all times are not our affair, it is all the more clear what we have to accomplish at present: I am referring to ruthless criticism of all that exists, ruthless both in the sense of not being afraid of the results it arrives at and in the sense of being just as little afraid of conflict with the powers that be.

 No.618119

File: 1637941357778.png (39.89 KB, 258x273, 1478951539846.png)

>>618090
stalinoid cope

 No.618124

Whats with the red-painted /pol/ackchins excusing ethnic cleansings above?

 No.618129

>>618124
it's an exclusive new retard fashion - to LARP either as 1940s soviet communists or as 1990s boomers, lol

 No.618135

>>618119
malding trotskist.

 No.618137

File: 1637942604496.jpg (140.44 KB, 828x581, 6fa.jpg)

>>618135
>malding trotskist.

 No.618159

>>618137
>Wojaking off already
Coping, Seething, About Rage.

 No.618172

>>618159
cope+seethe+don't care + you'll die just like Stalin - pissing and shitting yourself : )

 No.618183

>>618172
so will you sweetcheeks, if you don't know, loosing you bowells is a common thing when you die :)

 No.618204

>>616357
>what kind of leftist are you if you don't support fully capitalist countries

Absolutely retarded, stalinist-dengist take. Good guys vs bad guys. Geopolitics isn't a sports game, and principled radicals don't side with governments.

God you morons can't drop your regressive nationalism from /pol/
All you did was switch the nation you back. Nauseating, anti-dialectical, anti-Left posturing.


Btw, in what way are you actually helping those governments?

Sending them money? Weapons? What? Just telling people as irrelevant as you are not to criticize them? It's just a bunch of pathetic posturing.

Down with Merkel! Down with Xi! Down with Biden! Down with the Saud and Kim dynasties!

Up with the working class!

 No.618222

>>618012
>No ones denying that Crimean nationalists took advantage of this, but for the most part the man you’re having a fit over served his country and was reprimanded for criticising it.

Dude, one of crimeans from your two sources remained Soviet patriot and lived his life to the fullest, and the other one became a nationalist, and raised his son to be an anti-soviet liberal. Guess who's voice isn't as represented?

<despite the fact that the NKVD sought to collectively punish them because they were occupied by the Nazis


You failed to prove that.

<despite a good chunk of them dying and being deported on the basis of nationality


Again, you failed to prove that. We all know how antsovietists LOVE to add zeroes to death tolls of USSR, going as far as inventing alternative reality where gazillion people were shot under secret orders.

>In the articles I posted AD NAUSEUM. Little thing you may want to check called “citations”.


No, it's called bibliography, and it's a) all written after 1990s, even 2000s, except for a couple of books from 1970s, b) i have no will or intention of reading that shit, and just going to point out that it's bullshit based off the sheer insanity of claim that crimeans could have lost every fourth person, hell, even tenth, and not be in direct rebellion due to it. Heck, if there was a hunger, mistreatment, whatever of such a scale, they would be not in any fucking capacity to work on their new place, but they did. It's just retarded, those death estimates.

>Ah yes, noted Chechnean heroes who fought alongside the Soviets and for socialism are somehow anti communists and liberals because they didn’t like how the Soviets treated them.


Same as crimeans, actually. There's heroes, who were Soviet patriots to the end, and then there were antisovietists. And no popular unrest, either, despite your claims of injustice and massive population losses USSR inflicted upon them.

For fuck's sake, okay, let's assume they were gulagged into special settlement. Would you bother finding the number of NKVD personnel overlooking them? Because, you know, how would you even keep repressed population docile.

<hey dude, I get we’re fighting for communism, but could you not deport us en masse. We’re not all nazis.


Let's summarize yet again.

>Crimeans were resettled by entire villages, without getting separated; they had their voting rights intact, and families didn't lose each other; their men were demobilized in 1944, in order to reunite with their families as soon as possible; they got juicy positions on their new places of living, they were writing books in their own language, literature got carried over from Crimea, etc, and they had their own political organizations back then as well.


And all you have to disprove, but more like "b-but it doesn't matter!", is claims of 18%-46% of them dying in transit, and unsubtantiated claims of their men getting sent into gulags for 9 years after the war.

You know that it's schizo behavior, right? Soviet ideology was communist one; don't you fucking think that people serving USSR wouldn't get fucking insane if they were trying to fulfill what you accuse USSR of doing, while also talking about communist values? Next, how the fuck neither of your sources didn't lose their family members, and no losses of their neighbors and friends and in their families are mentioned either? Moreso, authorities in Kazakhstan/Uzbekistan were notified, right, and were ordered to prepare land for N number of settlers/families. So, deaths in transit. What happened to the land prepared for settlers who did not arrive? You know that it's money, right? It can be traced, then, right? As well as rotted food supplies, materials for home, lost fucking harvests, plans destroyed by kolkhozes/sovkhozes on the other side not fulfilling them, etc etc.

Come on now.

 No.618249

File: 1637946711564.jpg (164.73 KB, 1080x1080, lenin imperialism.jpg)


 No.618257

>>618249
So Iranian communists can't expose the US bourgeoisie, got it

 No.618295

>>618257
You’re an illiterate

 No.618368

>>618172
>cope+seethe+don't care + you'll die just like Stalin
Based. I hope 1/100 of the people that turned up to Stalin's funeral attend mine
>pissing and shitting yourself : )
You mean in my 70s having spread socialism all over the globe.
So based
And pissing and shitting yourself at death (especially in your 70s) is standard

 No.618369

File: 1637950813828.jpg (76.61 KB, 912x693, image4-2(1).jpg)


 No.618378

>>618257
No need for Iran to expose anything
USAs booj are fully exposed

 No.618391

>>618222
>You failed to prove that.
Here is the order:
https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/trans-l2tartar.html

 No.618395

>>618391 (me)
Note the part:
>All Tatars are to be banished from the territory of the Crimea
>All Tatars
The punishment is administered specifically per ethnic origin of a person.

 No.618408

File: 1637954413641.jpg (98.83 KB, 598x564, 1621893993864-0.jpg)

>>618395
>>618391
>The special settlers will be allowed to take with them personal items, clothing, household objects, dishes and utensils, and up to 500 kilograms of food per family.

Genocide, that allows families to take 500 kilos of food.

>Exchange receipts will be issued in every populated place and every farm for the receipt of livestock, grain, vegetables, and for other types of agricultural production.


And all the livestock and goods taken from those settlers to be given out to those settlers in equal measure when they settle.

>To each train of special settlers, the USSR People's Commissariat of Public Health (comrade Miterev) is to assign, within a time frame to be coordinated with the USSR NKVD, one physician and two nurses, as well as an appropriate supply of medicines, and to provide medical and first-aid care to special settlers in transit;


As well as doctors and nurses to look after them.

>To accept and settle within the Uzbek SSR 140 to 160 thousand special settlers – Tatars, sent by the USSR NKVD from the Crimean ASSR.


Ugh, what was the antisovietist number again?

>To grant plots of farm land to the newly arrived special settlers and to help them build homes by providing construction materials;


To help build houses.

>Seven-year loans of up to 5,000 rubles per family, for the construction and setting up of homes, are to be extended by the Agricultural Bank (comrade Kravtsov) to special settlers sent to the Uzbek SSR, in their places of settlement.

>Every month during the June-August 1944 period, equal quantities of flour, groats, and vegetables will be allocated by the USSR People's Commissariat of Procurement (comrade Subbotin) to the Uzbek SSR Council of People's Commissars for distribution to the special settlers, in accordance with Appendix No. 2.

Loans and free food, pooled by ENTIRE USSR, on top of whatever settlers took with them.

Dude, you do realize that you are a CLOWN at this point? Literal fucking CLOWN.

 No.618412

>>618391
>>618395
Oh, sorry for calling you a clown. You have a different flag from this guy >>618012 I thank you, then, for helping to prove my point.

 No.618419

>>618408
Oh, and by the way, Crimean tatars were settled in Ferghana, you know?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fergana_Canal

>In 1940–41, the Northern and Southern Fergana canals were also constructed. As a result, the water supply to the irrigation systems of the valley increased considerably, as did the area irrigated, and the cotton harvest doubled.[5] This irrigation project successfully resulted in massive crop production and led to population increase in the Central Asian region due to industrial settlement in the valley.[6] The canal alone irrigates about 39 percent of the land in the Fergana Valley.[7]


>cotton harvest doubled


Highly fucking fertile land, not some goddamn desert. HIGHLY FUCKING FERTILE.

 No.618447

>>616710
> pre-monopoly capitalism
Fucking dumbass, stupid fucking bitch, that quote debunks your point

 No.618508

>>618419
>>618408

>b-but the order said to give them food and not seperate them from their families


First and foremost, dumb cunt let’s actually go over the definition of ethnic deportation as defined by international law

https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/ethnic-cleansing.shtml

>A United Nations Commission of Experts mandated to look into violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia defined ethnic cleansing in its interim report S/25274 as "… rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove persons of given groups from the area." In its final report S/1994/674, the same Commission described ethnic cleansing as “… a purposeful policy designed by one ethnic or religious group to remove by violent and terror-inspiring means the civilian population of another ethnic or religious group from certain geographic areas.”


The Commission of Experts also stated that the coercive practices used to remove the civilian population can include: murder, torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, extrajudicial executions, rape and sexual assaults, severe physical injury to civilians, confinement of civilian population in ghetto areas, forcible removal, displacement and deportation of civilian population, deliberate military attacks or threats of attacks on civilians and civilian areas, use of civilians as human shields, destruction of property, robbery of personal property, attacks on hospitals, medical personnel, and locations with the Red Cross/Red Crescent emblem, among others.

FORCEABLE RELOCATION OF A POPULATION is considered an act of ethnic cleansing

>but they were given food and shelter and families

>they had a plan to not treat them all bad!

And how did that plan go?
> The terrible conditions, which characterized the first years of exile, prove that improvisation prevailed when the deportees arrived at the places of exile. In some camps, the deportees had to build themselves huts in order to shelter from winter harshness. The first year, especially the lack of food and clothes seem to have been deeply felt. The deportees were also deprived of the most basic health care (Broŝevan and Tygliânc, 1994: 86). Several official reports acknowledged the situation. In October 1944, Colonel Malkov, the head of the NKVD "special settlers" department, noted that Crimean Tatar deportees' situation was catastrophic in some regions: the building of the huts was not finished; bread rations, of poor quality, were not sufficient (on average 150 grams per person and per day); clothes and shoes were lacking; wages had not been paid since July and several infectious diseases had appeared (Bugaj, 2002, doc. 130, October 10, 1994: 142-143). However no measures were planned to solve this situation, which confirms the little case made of the deported peoples.

Again, your only argument is poisoning the well. WHEN EYE WITNESS testimonies and reports from soviet aren’t enough you then either down play or deliberately ignore.

Secondly, for all your talks of
>where are the soldiers chucked in the gulag
Again, these were within the sources and citations
>but they’re from 1950s and early 2000s
How does this matter. You trying to draw conspiracies here is laughable when evidence is right in front of your face. You call me a clown, but you’re the entire circus.

>but they were transported to a really fertile place that had doubled its grain output in 1941.


What does that have to do with anything? The Crimean tartars were deported in 1944.
This is about as silly as you saying that a Crimean tartar being from the city means that this genocide couldn’t have happened, despite Crimean tartars having cities in their areas. Wild to think not all of them lived in villages.

And as for your areas not all of them were given one area to settle in
-In total, 151,136 Crimean Tatars were deported to the Uzbek SSR; 8,597 to the Mari Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic; and 4,286 to the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic; and the remaining 29,846 were sent to various remote regions of the Russian SFSR.

>but one is a Soviet hero the other is a liberal

Yeah and both didn’t exactly like how the USSR treated their people overall. That’s like an African American soldier receiving a medal and you saying “see, his people aren’t oppressed and aren’t treated like shit by the government”.

But please, keep rejecting evidence.

 No.618935

>>618508
> Commission described ethnic cleansing as “… a purposeful policy designed by one ethnic or religious group to remove by violent and terror-inspiring means the civilian population of another ethnic or religious group from certain geographic areas.”

No terror or violent means. Soviet treatment of it's population does not follow neither letter or spirit of a definition of ethnic cleansing.

Funnily enough, some of those human rights courts have already declared USSR NOT commiting ethnic cleansing or genocide because it was fucking painfully obvious that even if we believe that 40% of crimeans died in transit, it was due to errors and mistakes on the ground, but not through deliberate policy. It was a kind of a weasel way out of paying reparations for capitalist Russia, you see - admit to communism, present day Russia has no relationship to, was horrible, horrible thing, but Russia as a rightful heir to USSR has no need to pay reparations because it was actually not intentional because USSR's government did everything in it's power to not let it happen - and what could have been, if USSR's communism was even a little bit more efficient, or even better, if USSR was capitalist!

I'm not fucking joking, that's the official position of every side. Only you here are claiming to be both leftist and intentionally choosing the worst possible explanation for events for communism. It's like if a communist would declare USSR a fascist country, thus making capitalist Eltzin coming to power an upgrade and a good thing.

>And how did that plan go?


Oh no, antisovietists found yet another gazillion dead! Please prove that out of 150k resettled 100k died, lololol.

>WHEN EYE WITNESS


DPRK defectors are EYE WITNESSES!!!!1 KIM FORCES EVERYONE TO HAVE THE SAME HAIRCUT CONFIRMED!!!1

>What does that have to do with anything? The Crimean tartars were deported in 1944.


Oh yes, what does it matter that they got better land and were treated the best possible way during transfer, weren't reduced in rights, and so on and so forth.

>And as for your areas not all of them were given one area to settle in

>-In total, 151,136 Crimean Tatars were deported to the Uzbek SSR; 8,597 to the Mari Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic; and 4,286 to the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic; and the remaining 29,846 were sent to various remote regions of the Russian SFSR.

Oh no????

>Yeah and both didn’t exactly like how the USSR treated their people overall.


Nah, one was a warhero we know about from other people's accounts, and the other one was a lib through and through. We don't know what warhero actually was thinking, but I bet he was hating Khruschev, not Stalin.

>But please, keep rejecting evidence.


Dude, you clowned your way into declaring a most civil way to transfer people to another land ethnic cleansing. Like, show when and where a similar thing ever happened, lol.

 No.618960

>you’re a glowie for critiquing your own country of not being left enough
COME ON NOW

 No.618968

>>618960
Off to gulag you go.

 No.618988

>>616398
Fedjacketing is pretty based honestly

 No.619016

>>618935
>No terror or violent means. Soviet treatment of it's population does not follow neither letter or spirit of a definition of ethnic cleansing.
And if you actually read the article as well you'd see

>The Commission of Experts also stated that the coercive practices used to remove the civilian population can include: murder, torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, extrajudicial executions, rape and sexual assaults, severe physical injury to civilians, confinement of civilian population in ghetto areas, forcible removal, displacement and deportation of civilian population, deliberate military attacks or threats of attacks on civilians and civilian areas, use of civilians as human shields, destruction of property, robbery of personal property, attacks on hospitals, medical personnel, and locations with the Red Cross/Red Crescent emblem, among others.


>The Commission of Experts added that these practices can “… constitute crimes against humanity and can be assimilated to specific war crimes. Furthermore, such acts could also fall within the meaning of the Genocide Convention.”


>Funnily enough, some of those human rights courts have already declared USSR NOT commiting ethnic cleansing or genocide because it was fucking painfully obvious that even if we believe that 40% of crimeans died in transit, it was due to errors and mistakes on the ground, but not through deliberate policy.


Yeah on certain groups. I won't lie I think the holodomor being categorised as a genocide is bullshit. But this is not the case for the Crimean Tartars.

>it was due to errors and mistakes on the ground, but not through deliberate policy.


Deliberate policy was forced population transfer. That is ethnic cleansing, no matter how you spin it.

>Oh no, antisovietists found yet another gazillion dead! Please prove that out of 150k resettled 100k died, lololol.

Not an argument.

>DPRK defectors are EYE WITNESSES!!!!1 KIM FORCES EVERYONE TO HAVE THE SAME HAIRCUT CONFIRMED!!!1

Not an argument.

>Oh yes, what does it matter that they got better land and were treated the best possible way during transfer, weren't reduced in rights, and so on and so forth.

Despite evidence to the contrary, evidence which you still ignore or deliberately downplay. Again, not all Crimean tartars were sent to these "fertile lands" and many of them starved due to this forced population transfer.

>Nah, one was a warhero we know about from other people's accounts, and the other one was a lib through and through. We don't know what warhero actually was thinking, but I bet he was hating Khruschev, not Stalin.

Not an argument. This was not about Stalin, this was about the USSR and what they did to its populace.

>Dude, you clowned your way into declaring a most civil way to transfer people to another land ethnic cleansing. Like, show when and where a similar thing ever happened, lol.


Not an argument.

 No.619136

>>616630
> I know it will hurt for you to recognize this but there's a reason Grayzone isn't allowed as a source on wikipedia beyond the fact that they criticize imperialism,
Nobody even brought up the Grayzone. The word just triggers every ghoul funded by a major corporation or western government. You cannot debunk a single piece brought out by them. All they show are simple statistics and connections.
The fact that you brought it up is pretty suspicious. Would a real socialist praise or believe media from the same people they supposedly hate?

 No.619213

>>616357
Don't fucking bring up foreign countries unless it accomplishes something to do so. Defending those regimes to scared westerners is political suicide for socialism, and demanding people do it makes YOU the glowie. Focus exclusively on how socialism can benefit your OWN people and your OWN country.

 No.619228

>>619213
>We shouldn’t debunk liberal talking points because of optics
Shouldn’t you be masturbating to horse cock, Agent Kochinski?

 No.619233

>>618988
upvoted!

 No.619296

>>619213
I agree to an extent.
Obviously if your political movement participates in elections or whatnot to raise awareness it's better to not have your representatives banging on about anti-imperialism. This was Corbyn's failure in which he kept getting successfully baited by pretty much everyone into being contrarian simply because he didn't trust the MI6 and the MI6 knew they could use that to make him look weak on security.

On the other hand if your political movement is named "socialist" "communist" etc. you're already tarred by association so might as well be honest and go all out and vehemently defend your positions.


Unique IPs: 62

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / booru ]