this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2025
-4 points (48.0% liked)
Memes
52343 readers
738 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Comrade earlier you said that the CPSU was a failure, why are you so critical of glorious leaders, comrade? Would it be so bad if they were in charge of everything, comrade? You need to read more theory, comrade.
This is just incoherent slop, are you doing it for your personal amusement? Is defending an antisemitic homophobic fed worth it to you?
Plus, I never said the CPSU was a failure.
The one of the defensive is you, and the people you're defending allied with the nazis to split Europe between themselves as well as enabled the nazis war effort via trade of necessary materials.
A thread. TL;DR no, lol.
The communists spent the decade prior trying to form an anti-Nazi coalition force, such as the Anglo-French-Soviet Alliance which was pitched by the communists and rejected by the British and French. The communists hated the Nazis from the beginning, as the Nazi party rose to prominence by killing communists and labor organizers, cemented bourgeois rule, and was violently racist and imperialist, while the communists opposed all of that.
When the many talks of alliances with the west all fell short, the Soviets reluctantly agreed to sign a non-agression pact, in order to delay the coming war that everyone knew was happening soon. Throughout the last decade, Britain, France, and other western countries had formed pacts with Nazi Germany, such as the Four-Power Pact, the German-French-Non-Agression Pact, and more. Molotov-Ribbentrop was unique among the non-agression pacts with Nazi Germany in that it was right on the eve of war, and was the first between the USSR and Nazi Germany. It was a last resort, when the west was content from the beginning with working alongside Hitler.
Harry Truman, in 1941 in front of the Senate, stated:
Not only that, but it was the Soviet Union that was responsible for 4/5ths of total Nazi deaths, and winning the war against the Nazis. The Soviet Union did not agree to invade Poland with the Nazis, it was about spheres of influence and red lines the Nazis should not cross in Poland. When the USSR went into Poland, it stayed mostly to areas Poland had invaded and annexed a few decades prior. Should the Soviets have let Poland get entirely taken over by the Nazis, standing idle? The West made it clear that they were never going to help anyone against the Nazis until it was their turn to be targeted.
Ah glorious theory to read thank you comrade much reading to do comrade.
Hey man, I saw some of your posts and while you're here, I just want to thank you for all the work you do making anticommunists look both factually ignorant and personally deranged.
Again, are you doing this for your own amusement, or what?
Are you? Or do they pay you for this?
It's useful to use generic anticommunists as a springboard. I don't get paid to do this, I'm a communist for free.
You don't promote communism, though. You promote dictators.
Source? I talk about theory, current events, etc, and even made an intro ML reading guide that a few people seem to like.
lmao
comrade doesn't get it, it conflicts with the theory they've read
Didn't say that, you just outright didn't clarify your vague, vacuous statement. You, on the other hand, defended a homophobic, anti-semitic, rapist fed.
Goddamn you're dumb
You have no credibility and no dignity
You're bad at this