Comment on Personalized Political Spectrum

HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

• taygaloocat@leminal.space ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  The political left and authoritarianism are not contradictory. Leftists are not always Libertarians, and many of them will and do trade freedom for safety regularly.

  source

  • Tja@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    For safety, or for power.

    source

    • Riverside@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Terrible analysis based on cold-war líes. The USSR for example saw a massive reduction in the wealth and power of leaders compared to what came after and what existed before:

      Image

      Tell me again how Che Guevara and Rosa Luxembourg were chasing power when they sacrificed their lives for the betterment of others

      source

      • custard_swollower@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Uh, your graph is missing power levels for Lenin and Stalin.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • RidderSport@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Whatt your graph shows is only a reduction in percentage. The top 10% still amount to around 25% of the wealth - which is wild considering that companies that were privatly owned didn’t exist. So what equity positions are we talking about?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Riverside@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Tankies support systems that have historically brought massive improvements to working and peasant classes in the oppressed world. Doubling and tripling life expectancy wherever communism arrives and succeeds, literacy from 20-30% to 100% in a few decades, women’s rights, worker rights, free massive healthcare, free education… You just argue against tankies because you’re a westerner whose leftism is conformed by CIA propaganda. You don’t support any historically successful socialist movement (Cuba, Soviets, China, Vietnam, Laos) precisely because they defeated capitalism and fascism.

  Especially hurtful as a Spaniard, where we leftists lost our civil war because the biggest leftist movements were anarchists and they couldn’t win a war.

  source

  • Saledovil@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    The nazis’ economy was a shell game of debt, and they were overextended militarily. Their regime would have fallen even if they had won the war. Secondly, the USSR at first joined forces with the nazis until they were betrayed by them, and after the soviets joined the allies, they received massive aid under the lend-lease act. And even with the aid, they still had to rely on human-wave tactics.

    source

    • Riverside@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      the Nazis would have fallen either way

      Perhaps in the long run, not without genociding the entirety of Eastern Europe first. Not an argument to me.

      the USSR at first joined forces with the Nazis

      It takes a lot of information to dispel misinformation, so forgive me but I’m gonna paste a comment that I wrote some time ago responding to the whole “Soviets sided with the Nazis” phrase that is often propagated on Lemmy. Feel free to respond to it, I’d love to engage with you in its contents:

      The only country who offered to start a collective offensive against the Nazis and to uphold the defense agreement with Czechoslovakia as an alternative to the Munich Betrayal was the USSR. From that Wikipedia article: “The Soviet Union announced its willingness to come to Czechoslovakia’s assistance, provided the Red Army would be able to cross Polish and Romanian territory; both countries refused.” Poland could have literally been saved from Nazi invasion if France and itself had agreed to start a war together against Nazi Germany, but they didn’t want to. By the logic of “invading Poland” being akin to Nazi collaboration, Poland was as imperialist as the Nazis.

      As a Spaniard leftist it’s so infuriating when the Soviet Union, the ONLY country in 1936 which actively fought fascism in Europe by sending weapons, tanks and aviation to my homeland in the other side of the continent in the Spanish civil war against fascism, is accused of appeasing the fascists. The Soviets weren’t dumb, they knew the danger and threat of Nazism and worked for the entire decade of the 1930s under the Litvinov Doctrine of Collective Security to enter mutual defense agreements with England, France and Poland, which all refused because they were convinced that the Nazis would honor their own stated purpose of invading the communists in the East. The Soviets went as far as to offer ONE MILLION troops to France (Archive link against paywall) together with tanks, artillery and aviation in 1939 in exchange for a mutual defense agreement, which the French didn’t agree to because of the stated reason. Just from THIS evidence, the Soviets were by far the most antifascist country in Europe throughout the 1930s, you literally won’t find any other country doing any remotely similar efforts to fight Nazism. If you do, please provide evidence.

      The invasion of “Poland” is also severely misconstrued. The Soviets didn’t invade what we think of nowadays when we say Poland. They invaded overwhelmingly Ukrainian, Belarusian and Lithuanian lands that Poland had previously invaded in 1919. Poland in 1938, a year before the invasion:

      Image

      “Polish” territories invaded by the USSR in 1939:

      Image

      The Soviets invaded famously Polish cities such as Lviv (sixth most populous city in modern Ukraine), Pinsk (important city in western Belarus) and Vilnius (capital of freaking modern Lithuania). They only invaded a small chunk of what you’d consider Poland nowadays, and the rest of lands were actually liberated from Polish occupation and returned to the Ukrainian, Belarusian and Lithuanian socialist republics. Hopefully you understand the importance of giving Ukrainians back their lands and sovereignty?

      Additionally, the Soviets didn’t invade Poland together with the Nazis, they invaded a bit more than two weeks after the Nazi invasion, at a time when the Polish government had already exiled itself and there was no Polish administration. The meaning of this, is that all lands not occupied by Soviet troops, would have been occupied by Nazis. There was no alternative. Polish troops did not resist Soviet occupation but they did resist Nazi invasion. The Soviet occupation effectively protected millions of Slavic peoples like Poles, Ukrainians and Belarusians from the stated aim of Nazis of genociding the Slavic peoples all the way to the Urals.

      All in all, my conclusion is: the Soviets were fully aware of the dangers of Nazism and fought against it earlier than anyone (Spanish civil war), spent the entire 30s pushing for an anti-Nazi mutual defence agreement which was refused by France, England and Poland, tried to honour the existing mutual defense agreement with Czechoslovakia which France rejected and Poland didn’t allow (Romania neither but they were fascists so that’s a given), and offered to send a million troops to France’s border with Germany to destroy Nazism but weren’t allowed to do so. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a tool of postponing the war in a period in which the USSR, a very young country with only 10 years of industrialization behind it since the first 5-year plan in 1929, was growing at a 10% GDP per year rate and needed every moment it could get. I can and do criticise decisions such as the invasion of Finland, but ultimately even the western leaders at the time seem to generally agree with my interpretation:

      “In those days the Soviet Government had grave reason to fear that they would be left one-on-one to face the Nazi fury. Stalin took measures which no free democracy could regard otherwise than with distaste. Yet I never doubted myself that his cardinal aim had been to hold the German armies off from Russia for as long as might be” (Paraphrased from Churchill’s December 1944 remarks in the House of Commons.)

      “It would be unwise to assume Stalin approves of Hitler’s aggression. Probably the Soviet Government has merely sought a delaying tactic, not wanting to be the next victim. They will have a rude awakening, but they think, at least for now, they can keep the wolf from the door” Franklin D. Roosevelt (President of the United States, 1933–1945), from Harold L. Ickes’s diary entries, early September 1939. Ickes’s diaries are published as The Secret Diary of Harold Ickes.

      "One must suppose that the Soviet Government, seeing no immediate prospect of real support from outside, decided to make its own arrangements for self‑defence, however unpalatable such an agreement might appear. We in this House cannot be astonished that a government acting solely on grounds of power politics should take that course” Neville Chamberlain House of Commons Statement, August 24, 1939 (one day after pact’s signing)

      I’d love to hear your thoughts on this

      source

      • RidderSport@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Now that is quite a fun game of gymnastics, but just to pick one out and ohrase it differently.

        The Soviets invaded Poland to weaks late according to the treaty with Germany, because they were held back in Belarus, the Baltics and Ukraine, but gladly took the promised lands.

        Yeah right. However you spin this the USSR was by no means an innocent country, nor were they anti-imperialist. They might have seen themselves that way. But that’s like me saying I am dilligent and disciplined, lying to oneself is what we do best.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • aketawi@quokk.au ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    saved Europe from fascism

    a fascist state fought a war against a competing fascist state. simply being on the side opposing Nazi Germany doesn’t magically make your state a perfect divine utopia

    source

    • Riverside@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Nobody talked about divine utopias, Engels settled this topic 150 years ago in his “Socialism: scientific and Utopian”. The USSR was scientific socialism, not utopian.

      Calling the USSR fascist just proves how little educated you are about its realities. Free education to the highest level, free universal healthcare, guaranteed employment with high working rights and the highest rates of unionization at the time in the world, women’s rights, guaranteed housing for everyone at 3% of the monthly income on average, quality and affordable public transit, heavily subsidized utilities and foodstuffs, lowest rates of economic inequality in the history of the region, respect for different ethnicities and their cultures and languages, strong investments in infrastructure and industrial development… All of this is very accessible information, you could read Albert Szymanski’s “human rights in the Soviet Union” and check the sources there if you don’t believe me.

      source
• tristynalxander@mander.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  [deleted]

  source

  • HazardousBanjo@lemmy.world ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    The political compass isn’t an objective model

    source
• spuriousMoot@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Found the tankie.

  source