this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2026
43 points (80.3% liked)
Memes
55033 readers
427 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 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Stalin is a flawed figure, but goddamn did he kill some Nazis
Murdering your own people = "flawed"? He was a monster. Him helping to defeat a different monster doesn't change that.
Hell yeah dude, you're 12!
Queen Victoria killed like 80 million of her own subjects, literally in the name of capitalism, but nobody ever talks about that. It's all "Stalin and Mao!" This is deeply misogynistic, erasing the fact that a powerful woman did it better first.
#girlboss #slayqueen
Who here was glorifying Queen Victoria? Not me.
But a dozen of you are tripping over yourself to defend Stalin. For no reason. Seems you're the misogynists here. You love Stalin despite him falling short of a woman's (who you hate) accomplishments.
Being born into royalty and, by pure happenstance, becoming empress of the largest empire in history at its zenith is no accomplishment.
So you're changing your own argument, now? It's more impressive that Stalin worked his way up the ladder before killing all those people? That's what you admire?
You’re very bad at this, and you’re convincing no one. We know what Stalin actually did & didn’t do, because we’ve actually investigated. We grew up under exactly the same propaganda as you, but all you’ve got is that unexamined propaganda, which we’ve examined and found wanting.
It's very telling that _every single one of you _ have jumped in with a whataboutism as if that's remotely a valid argument. It's not even on topic. That's the childish response. At no point had I mentioned communism at all, but that's what your minds jump to. You can't even admit that: tyrant bad. Being a tyrant communist doesn't make the tyranny part not exist.
He wasn’t a tyrant. He was elected, several times.
CIA COMMENTS ON THE CHANGE IN SOVIET LEADERSHIP
Nazi = stalins (a communist) own people?
The context clues in my statement show that's clearly not remotely close to what I said. Fuck, this community is full of the illiterate.
Abraham Lincoln also "murdered his own people",
The differences are
The Soviet Union was never a safe haven
for fascists and other right-wing extremists,
so no slave owners fled over there to claim
that Lincoln "destroyed their family business forever".
The Soviet Union never paraded US Afro-nationalists that would make claim that since they're oppressed,
that the lack of population growth of Afro-Americans
compared to Euro-Americans,
should be counted of dead Afro-nationalist victims at the hands
of Abraham Lincoln and other US presidents.
Like every US president,
Abraham Lincoln oppressed the indigenous people of the US,
which I #will count as 'own people' and that equals at least 300 million people,
because that's what the population would have been if they hadn't been viciously
and brutally murdered at the hands of the Usonians during US history.
I see someone hasn't done the reading.
Start with an easy one, work your way up to the 19th century theory.
Source: Welsh Underground Network https://share.google/hhOibo9wTsGbvooLi
What part of this book which both confirms and agrees there were many politically motivated murders/imprisonments (even if it argues they were fewer than other sources claim) makes Stalin not a monster? It's arguing over the scale of the bad shit he did, not whether he did it or not. Holy shit.
Stalin is not a monster because monsters aren’t real.
The scale of bad shit he did you got from lifelong exposure to anti-communist propaganda. This misinformation isn’t neutral. It has a clear goal, and billions of dollars behind it over the last 100+ years, because the capitalist class fears nothing more than communism, because to date it’s been the only successful alternative to capitalism.
Your own source said he murdered a ton of people. That's a bad person, regardless of the economic system the country they lead used. Why is that such a hard thing to grasp?
If you want to promote communism, don't use a goddamn mass murderer to market it.
I didn’t provide any sources.
Killing bad people doesn't undo killing good people. This isn't the argument you think it is.
Hitler killed Hitler, didn't undo all the bad he did. And wasn't he a capitalist? Stalin wasn't a good person just because Hitler stabbed his own ally in the back, and the ussr started killing their former allies . Or are we pretending Stalin hadn't allied with the nazis in the beginning of the war, here?
Look man, I'm gonna tell you something you're probably gonna write off as Bad Guy Villain dialogue or an attempt to "brainwash" you:
Good People and Bad People don't exist in real life. They exist in movies and comic books written by people who grew up in societies less than a century out of the domination of various religions. These are magical, religious ideas about the nature of reality you've unquestionably accepted because that's what was in the entertainment you grew up on, same as the rest of us. But it's not real life. In real life, there's just People.
People are animals who seek comfort and propserity by making decisions within a predetermined range of possibilities, and that's it. No angels, no demons, no omnipoten god watching in judgement. The terms these religions use have no scientific wight or meaning, and Marxism is scientific. We are concerned with what can be observed and measured. Good and Evil don't mean shit when you're talking about observable reality, any more than Karma or Sin or any of the other mystical ways in which people have tried to make sense of the world in the past. Your way of analyzing reality and human beings is fundamentally mystical, hypocritical and disconnected from reality.
There is no person on earth who couldn't be classified as a "bad person". It's less than meaningless: it actually impairs understanding and paralyzes decision making, because there is no "Good" choice. All the hallowed saints of liberal civic religion were "Bad" people. MLK cheated on his wife. Ghandi was a fucking creep to his niece. Lincoln committed indigenous genocide. But they are venerated anyway because they were either effective at advancing the interests of those who are now powerful enough to culturally mandate their veneration, or were coopted by the powers they opposed in order to make harmless sanitized icons of their messy human existence. That's it. That's the entire calculus behind who you hold in esteem and who you hold in contempt. You like who you were told to like, and you hate who you were told to hate, without ever really considering why. If you were born in Soviet Russia, you would have the exact opposite opinion, as millions of Russians did and still do. The difference would be that approval of Stalin is much, much easier to make an evidence-based case for than mystical condemnation is.
It's like how liberals think that communist theory has some magical eldritch power that will instantly turn you into a communist if you read and understand it. It doesn't. It just presents a well-reasoned case, grounded in observable reality, for the abolition of the world-drstroying system of omni-exploitation we all suffer under. It starts with facts and works it's way towards a conclusion, rather than starting from a conclusion and working it's way backwards with carefully curated facts. And to a liberal, that might as well be magic. That's why you have all these cute little phrases like whataboutism that in practice simply mean "I refuse to consider what you are saying for longer than it takes to dismiss it out of hand with a gesture at some social rule built just for this purpose."
Your entire worldview has been constructed by bourgeois high priests not for the function of understanding the world, but crippling your ability to understand anything. It's a hermetically sealed library of pre-existing, neatly labeled boxes for messy realities to be roughly shoved into and examined no further. This is Idealism: the belief that there are eternal, ironclad categories that reality comports itself to. This is wrong: reality comports itself however it wants, and we invent the categories after the fact. The categories of Good and Bad people are as invented as the categories of Good and Bad music. People and music simply are, formed and determined by their relationship with the world around them. It is reality that determines itself, not our post-hoc ideas about it, and certainly not ideas from the medieval era.
See this is what we're talking about, you correctly see through some lazy capitalist mythologies (such as anarchists being mindless drug-addled destruction junkies with no political goals other than chaos) but fail to see through others, such as "Stalin was The Guy in charge of the USSR and he killed eighty bazillion people through nonspecific means, for no reason other than he was The Joker".
Like with Hitler we all know the story, we can be specific. He came to power with bourgeois support on the back of a wave of fascist resentment following an economic crash caused by the sudden contraction of Germany's colonial empire. He was an effective mouthpiece for capitalist interests, who instituted mass privatization and applied colonial doctrine to other Europeans with a war of conquest and extermination externally and a war of antocommunist and racial liquidation internally, as a way of shoring up profits. The methods used were bombs, bullets, starvation and gas, and there is ample firsthand documentation of both action and motive, a million papers that say "we are killing all the jews because they are part of a communist plot to undermine us, plus all the slavs, roma and disabled while were at it."
Meanwhile, "the story" we all "know" about Stalin and the soviet union is uhh...revolution against the king bad for some reason, new boss same as old boss, something something power corrupts, one guy in charge of everything, George Orwell 1984, communism no food 100 morbillion dead. It's a loosely strung together list of unsubstantiated cliches peddled by the biggest propaganda machine in human history, usually with the intent of building up to "so that's why we prop up fascists all over the world, because communists worse, and maybe actually fascists not that bad?👉👈"
This form of propaganda, this smearing of the historical lens until one smudge can be said to look like another, is a mainstay of liberal propaganda. They can't justify themselves or their actions, can't make themselves look good, so they equivocate, stretch facts and outright fabricate things in order to claim that everybody is "equally bad", a position that conveniently justifies them continuing to support their "equally bad" side over anyone who stands up to then. It's supremacist thinking wrapped in the faux-modesty of Chruchill, the notion that "ho ho, ours is the worst system, except for all the others". Ain't we stinkers, but you should see the other guys. Israel bad, but how can you support Hamas? USA bad, but how can you support Iran? Nazi Germany bad, but how can you support the Soviet Union? Don't you know these things are all equivalent to each other, somehow, conveniently, and the only smart position is to ride the fance so hard you get splinters in your crack?
In reality of course, yours is simply the worst system. Your insistence on supporting the lesser evil every four years when it comes time to yell at people that they have to vote for genocide mysteriously vanishes when it's time to extend that critical support to factions fighting the most wretched empire on earth: ours. It's the last hurdle before you become a member of the global human community: abandoning the nationalism, exceptionalism and impotent chauvinist supremacism that we were raised in, that tells us to sit in judgement of the way our victims breathe even as we choke them, and tell ourselves we would do a better job even as we do nothing. That's why I have endless arguments with liberals who still, after centuries of lies and warmongering, still believe what the US fascist empire says about the people it's wants to kill, still believe western corporate news media: because deep down, you want to, because it's hard to accept that we're the bad guys and always have been. But I promise you that acceptance is the necessary first step towards beginning to understand the world as it actually is: not as the static child's diorama of heroes and villains that we've been taught by a fundamentally childish society, but as the wonderfully complex and eternally moving machine that it is.
This is a good post! 🎉
Non specific means? Even if you ignore the orchestrated famine, He enacted paranoid political purges of engineers, scientists, academics, etc. Those are direct murders of people he didn't like. And you're over here like: he's misunderstood. And your defense is: nuh uh/Whataboutism.
At no point did I defend capitalism. I said Stalin was a monster. And that's an indisputable fact.
Hell yeah dude, you're 12
Utterly incorrect, as even "cold warrior" historians like Robert Conquest were forced to attest after the opening of the Soviet archives. And again, no motivation. Just "because evil".
Getting rid of monarchist figureheads is Good, Actually. Unkess you want to argue that people like Nick Fuentes should just be left alone to spread fascism during the fragile birth of a revolution? Utterly unserious. And again: "He". As if the Soviet union was ruled by one guy. An utterly historically illiterate take, you are simply repeating lazy mythology.
This is like when fascists say "you can't just call people you disagree with nazis." Oh really? Whats the disagreement? Who were these people the Soviet union didn't like? Might it have something to do with the genocide that was perpetrated on them, and the massive US invasion perpetrated before that? The fact that you cannot be specific at all is a dead giveaway that you're just regurgitating childlike mythology, on the level of "Hamas hates Jews".
Oh no, this is not a defense. History has shown that the actions of the Soviet union need very little defending. This is an attack on your Mormon-level incuriosity and refusal to engage with anything that challenges your mythology.
You did. You do. You pretend to oppose everyone while uncritically swallowing the most ridiculous capitalist propaganda about the people they fear. You guys are doing it right now with the "Free Iran" shit. You're a german in 1939 saying "Fuck the nazis of course, but how can you possibly support the baby-eating Bolsheviks??" In 70 years there will be another version of you talking about Mandani's communist genocide of new yorkers, unaware or unconcered with the fact that they are repeating wholesale fabrications from fascist sources.
This is you wishcasting. You very badly wish for it to be an indisputable fact, because you've built so much of your identity around it but fundamentally lack the knowledge to back it up. That's why you fall back on religious truisms. In the end, your only defense for your willful ignorance is "it is known": the chorus of the scared and incurious throughout history. And yet again, you frame him the The One Guy in charge when he was absolutely, unequivocally not. You have zero understanding of the subject and are desperately throwing out cold war cliches.
By the way, who did you vote for this past election?
Liberals can’t back it up because they’ve never needed to because
Even if we believed the wildly exaggerated numbers from the black book of communism, that still doesn't compare to the victims of capitalism, Churchill alone killed millions in Bengal but you don't care about that do you
Ah but you see Bengalis are brown so they tuned everything after that out.
I'm not the one defending atrocities, you guys are. Whataboutism doesn't stop the guy YOU'RE actively choosing to idolize from being terrible.
"If I condemn everything and everyone, that makes me the most pure! Actually try to make the world better? That would only degrade my purity!'
Let's start with the basics, do you condemn Churchill?
If your claim is that he's bad because he killed people and we show that capitalists killed more people that seems like a relevant counterargument, no? Or do bad things only count when state department propaganda agrees with you?
What do you think you're countering with that argument? No one was discussing communism vs capitalism in this argument. Just: Stalin was an evil man.
Saying someone else was more evil doesn't unmurder all those people, does it? You've countered no part of anyone's argument because no one mentioned anything about what you think you've countered. You just tried to distract from the fact that you idolize a piece of shit. It's bizarre you can't grasp that.
Glorifying a murder doesn't help gather support for your economic system of choice. Get a better face for your movement.
He’s more of a son of a bitch than Randy Walters!