LWDT VI: Kropotkin's Bread Dead Redemption.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Would you say the same about nazis? Obviously, they need to be educated as just ignoring or attacking them isn't going to change their views. But, they shouldn't be allowed to spread there hate online or offline.

I think I've said on here before that I don't necessarily hate nazi's.
The difference, of course, is that tankies are ostensibly on our "side". They might not be the best of folks, they're often the worst of folks, but they're our folks.

To plagiarise somone much smarter than me, The people that any ostensible leftist is obligated to stand up for will not always be likable. Usually they won’t even be leftists. They will have different politics, values and cultures than you. They will overcook their steaks. They will enjoy, and perhaps even prefer, the later seasons of The Simpsons. They will make atrocious decisions in facial hair, which you will suspect they styled in a pretentious effort to look “more ethnic.” They will act in bad faith. They will have bad manners. They will be dull, they will be snobs. They will get on your fucking nerves.

but, well, they're us.

Come down from there, you're on too many levels of left unity.

[Kubra]

I think I've said on here before that I don't necessarily hate nazi's.
The difference, of course, is that tankies are ostensibly on our "side". They might not be the best of folks, they're often the worst of folks, but they're our folks.

To plagiarise somone much smarter than me, The people that any ostensible leftist is obligated to stand up for will not always be likable. Usually they won’t even be leftists. They will have different politics, values and cultures than you. They will overcook their steaks. They will enjoy, and perhaps even prefer, the later seasons of The Simpsons. They will make atrocious decisions in facial hair, which you will suspect they styled in a pretentious effort to look “more ethnic.” They will act in bad faith. They will have bad manners. They will be dull, they will be snobs. They will get on your fucking nerves.

but, well, they're us.

Come down from there, you're on too many levels of left unity.

Solidarity with those who overcook steaks is how you know a guy ain't fucking around

[Dumb Ideologies]

Come down from there, you're on too many levels of left unity.

Solidarity with those who overcook steaks is how you know a guy ain't fucking around

I like my steaks medium-well, pls no bulli

[Kubra]

Solidarity with those who overcook steaks is how you know a guy ain't fucking around

I like my steaks medium-well, pls no bulli

Well if you're still keeping it medium something there's hope for you yet

[Korouse]

It doesn't really matter if "they're us" - how about the fact that their existence contributes to debate on the left, and the popularization of communist ideas and knowledge online? I groan at "StalinFuckerYolo69" as much as anyone else, but if they're an actual serious Marxist-Leninist, they're really not all that hard to convince into a nuanced view of the Soviet Union. It's why Michael Parenti is so popular with many MLs and non-MLs (liberals even); he takes you through the emotional rollercoaster and lands you up in critical thought.

[Kubra]

It doesn't really matter if "they're us" - how about the fact that their existence contributes to debate on the left, and the popularization of communist ideas and knowledge online? I groan at "StalinFuckerYolo69" as much as anyone else, but if they're an actual serious Marxist-Leninist, they're really not all that hard to convince into a nuanced view of the Soviet Union. It's why Michael Parenti is so popular with many MLs and non-MLs (liberals even); he takes you through the emotional rollercoaster and lands you up in critical thought.

The problem is what they popularise, which is the soviet state, particularly under Stalin, which is never really a sign of "nuance" on the topic. Get the lot to tell you about piece-wage in Capital Vol 1, see how it goes.

[Korouse]

It doesn't really matter if "they're us" - how about the fact that their existence contributes to debate on the left, and the popularization of communist ideas and knowledge online? I groan at "StalinFuckerYolo69" as much as anyone else, but if they're an actual serious Marxist-Leninist, they're really not all that hard to convince into a nuanced view of the Soviet Union. It's why Michael Parenti is so popular with many MLs and non-MLs (liberals even); he takes you through the emotional rollercoaster and lands you up in critical thought.

The problem is what they popularise, which is the soviet state, particularly under Stalin, which is never really a sign of "nuance" on the topic. Get the lot to tell you about piece-wage in Capital Vol 1, see how it goes.

There's many problems on the left, many people who don't know as much as they could, or aren't doing as much as they really should. It's about taking up the responsibility of direction. If we're talking about what being a leftist is "all about" then how come it's some phony idea about people we have some obligation to defend, rather than advancing a flexible and honest political understanding appropriate for the modern day movement to abolish the state of things? I don't think that's possible by sitting back and testing people about theory, or deriding them just because they're ignorant albeit eager.

[Ardoki]

Would you say the same about nazis? Obviously, they need to be educated as just ignoring or attacking them isn't going to change their views. But, they shouldn't be allowed to spread there hate online or offline.

I think I've said on here before that I don't necessarily hate nazi's.
The difference, of course, is that tankies are ostensibly on our "side". They might not be the best of folks, they're often the worst of folks, but they're our folks.

To plagiarise somone much smarter than me, The people that any ostensible leftist is obligated to stand up for will not always be likable. Usually they won’t even be leftists. They will have different politics, values and cultures than you. They will overcook their steaks. They will enjoy, and perhaps even prefer, the later seasons of The Simpsons. They will make atrocious decisions in facial hair, which you will suspect they styled in a pretentious effort to look “more ethnic.” They will act in bad faith. They will have bad manners. They will be dull, they will be snobs. They will get on your fucking nerves.

but, well, they're us.

Genocide is wrong, regardless of who is doing it. When the right does it, bad. When the left does it, bad. I would rather a law-abiding right-winger than a genocidal left-winger any day. One's actions effect the world, one's beliefs don't necessarily. Don't support human rights criminals just because they are on the 'same side' as you.

[Bakery Hill]

6. A massive amount of deaths in this process up to including half of the population is legitimate.[/b] Is it a "crime" for the NKVD to herd families into train cars and leave them to freeze and starve? Or to summarily execute people who refuse to leave their houses? Or to burn down barns with hundreds of people inside? Regrettably perhaps, but ultimately you seem to think Stalin did nothing wrong?

Where did this happen? Many people starved and died, but so did people who voluntarily evacuated from the frontline because there was a specific policy of capturing Soviet food supplies and destroying their farms. I've never heard of deliberate and hateful killings happening from all of the academic articles I've read, and I'm pretty sure "burn down barns (or a church) with hundreds of people inside" is a trope regularly ascribed to Nazi-like bad guys in films lol.

This is what I had in mind.

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

[Bakery Hill]

Actually let's dissect this because I've heard it a few times from people calling themselves Marxist Leninists. If you think this process was not nice but legitimate, and certainly not a crime, then what you are saying is that under a socialist state:

1. Judging another (or rather all people) for the crimes committed by members of their own ethnicity is legitimate. This reactionary assertion that you have is the real foundation of your argumentmust fall upon it's something that you would have more in common with amongst people on the fascist right then the genuine socialist left.

Following on, we realise your logic is by necessity selective. The fact that the Russian ethnicity was not deported to Siberia (despite hundreds of thousands of Russians fighting with the Nazis) says a lot. These ethnicities were deported as they were between the Germans (and to a more limited extent the Japanese) and the Russian heartland, it is then implied that 2. Persecution of ethnic minorities deemed troublesome in a way that privileges the master ethnicity is legitimate. Again something you have far more in common with the far right than the socialist left.

Once we establish these, we realise that as a punishment for the crimes of the minority of the minority 3. Ethnic cleansing and internal exile is legitimate. A little Babylonian in outlook, but once we establish the first two peversions of socialism, it stands to reason.

But the punishment does not cease here, we also realise that 4. State expropriation of the assets of workers and their families for crimes committed by members of their own ethnicity is legitimate. Rather than workers controlling the means of production, here is one master ethnicity expropriating the means of production of another as a form of collective punishment. I don't think that was included in the manifesto.

From here enters the ludicrous image of the state and Uncle Joe as merciful and reasonable because upon resettlement you seem to say that 5. The state partially compensating these workers and their families by "giving them valuable economic assets" is not only legitimate but generous. This is at most a partial redress for the injustices committed against these people particularly considering the final point.

Although presumably unfortunate, 6. A massive amount of deaths in this process up to including half of the population is legitimate. Is it a "crime" for the NKVD to herd families into train cars and leave them to freeze and starve? Or to summarily execute people who refuse to leave their houses? Or to burn down barns with hundreds of people inside? Regrettably perhaps, but ultimately you seem to think Stalin did nothing wrong?

1) This is not true. The Soviet Union did not have time to sort through every person of an ethnic group that collaborated with the Germans or the resources. The Soviet Union was not racist in the slightest here, as deporting ethnic groups was not done out of a dislike of those groups. Had that been true, the USSR would not have given economic assets to them and provided supplies.

2) The issue was high rates of collaboration. The millions of Soviet partisans and Tripp’s that fought for the Soviet Union versus the groups that fought against it make for a low rate among Russians. Even then, the Soviet government took measures after the war to make sure that Russian collaborators did not get away by keeping all former POWs in camps while they sorted through them, eventually releasing 80% of them.

3) Ethnic cleansing is not legitimate, and the reason why I dispute your idea that this was ethnic cleansing is because the deported were given supplies and houses in Central Asia to establish themselves. Had the USSR wanted to remove them permanently, they’d have exiled them from the country or something.

4) Yes, there was expropriation. Yes, the exiles were a bad thing, and I’d prefer it if they could have been avoided. However, for points described above, this does not constitute evidence of racism or evidence of a master ethnicity.

5) It is not generous. It is the bare minimum the Soviet state should have done and did.

6) I can find no evidence that they starved, only that they froze and had disease problems. I already said before that I don’t like either of these things and that I do not think it was deliberate.

Also, I don’t think the NKVD killed people. I can only find some statements that they wrote down the names of those they didn’t get to deport later. I can however find claims that the NKVD did burn people to death and kill prisoners at the start of WWII. It is not a coincidence these claims come from Nazi Germany.

And lastly, I will never unironically say “stalin did nothing wrong”. Stalin made mistakes, many of which I think could have been avoided had he done things differently.

1. Judging one person by the crimes of another of their ethnicity is pretty much racism. To assert that it was justified or legitimate is ridiculous.
2. How high do the rates have to be to visit punishment on an entire ethnic group?
3. Ethnic cleansing simply means you push people from a particular ethnicity from an area. That's what it is.

[Napkiraly]

One example: Around 5,000 Kalmyks collaborated with the Nazis. Around 8,000 Kalmyks recieved medal and award from the Red Army for their service. Around 20,000 Kalmyks were killed by German troops. The solution of course is to round up all 100,000 of them and rip them from their home country, killing 50,000 on the way due to neglect. An ethnicity cannot be guilty of a crime. Ethnic cleansing is not a legitimate political option. If you think this is the case, you are not a socialist.

I want to make it very clear that I do not like that policy. I can see, however, why the Soviet leadership thought it necessary at the time. NKVD agents did these operations very quickly, and it’s my opinion that these deaths in transit, while they certainly could have been avoided, were not due to deliberate policy but rather the quickness of the operations. I do not pretend like “ethnic cleansing” is a good thing but you’ve got to put yourself in Stalin’s boots here. There were hostile elements among these ethnic groups in high percentages. Deporting all of them was the easiest and most effective option. And again, it was not a good option.

Hello Adolf.

[Napkiraly]

The Nazis also claimed that the Jews, Poles, etc were security threats.

[Mardla]

We need to move past democracy, tbh. It's time to move on.

And what if the person running your post-democratic country was your mortal enemy?

I don't have any afaik. You're asking if they were pinkos? Obviously communism would be even worse, it's democracy on steroids.

[Napkiraly]

Tbf Stalin's regime was often complimented by Hitler, Mussolini, etc with both thinking that Stalin was effectively creating a form of Slavic fascism, so perhaps Comrade Bakery we should not be surprised about the pro-ethnic cleansing sentiment being expressed.

[Cekoviu]

And what if the person running your post-democratic country was your mortal enemy?

I don't have any afaik. You're asking if they were pinkos? Obviously communism would be even worse, it's democracy on steroids.

w o t

[Democratic Communist Federation]

I am a right-leaning centrist who thinks both sides have good ideas, and i think communism could work, but its losing my trust with it having no freedom of speech.

What makes you think that communism has no freedom of speech? There are dozens of communist tendencies. Freedom of speech is one of the bedrocks of mine.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

I don't have any afaik. You're asking if they were pinkos? Obviously communism would be even worse, it's democracy on steroids.

I didn't provide any specific alternative to democracy. However, you said that we need to move beyond democracy. Therefore, I asked, What if the person running your post-democratic nation was your mortal enemy?

[Eodor]

I am a right-leaning centrist who thinks both sides have good ideas, and i think communism could work, but its losing my trust with it having no freedom of speech.

What makes you think that communism has no freedom of speech? There are dozens of communist tendencies. Freedom of speech is one of the bedrocks of mine.

Because that's what all the liberals love to talk about.

Also communism bad why can't you see /s

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Because that's what all the liberals love to talk about.

Also communism bad why can't you see /s

Communism is not liberalism. Why can't I see it? Perhaps because I am a communist, and I love communism.

[Eodor]

Because that's what all the liberals love to talk about.

Also communism bad why can't you see /s

Communism is not liberalism. Why can't I see it? Perhaps because I am a communist, and I love communism.

Do you know what /s means?

And I know full well Communism isn't liberalism, I am saying that liberals always talk about how communism has no freedom of speech.

[Dumb Ideologies]

I want to make it very clear that I do not like that policy. I can see, however, why the Soviet leadership thought it necessary at the time. NKVD agents did these operations very quickly, and it’s my opinion that these deaths in transit, while they certainly could have been avoided, were not due to deliberate policy but rather the quickness of the operations. I do not pretend like “ethnic cleansing” is a good thing but you’ve got to put yourself in Stalin’s boots here. There were hostile elements among these ethnic groups in high percentages. Deporting all of them was the easiest and most effective option. And again, it was not a good option.

Hello Adolf.

Oh shit. I'm fleeing the forum and going into hiding.

[Eodor]

I want to make it very clear that I do not like that policy. I can see, however, why the Soviet leadership thought it necessary at the time. NKVD agents did these operations very quickly, and it’s my opinion that these deaths in transit, while they certainly could have been avoided, were not due to deliberate policy but rather the quickness of the operations. I do not pretend like “ethnic cleansing” is a good thing but you’ve got to put yourself in Stalin’s boots here. There were hostile elements among these ethnic groups in high percentages. Deporting all of them was the easiest and most effective option. And again, it was not a good option.

Hello Adolf.

Did you legit just compare Stalin to Hitler?

[Second Empire of America]

Would you say the same about nazis? Obviously, they need to be educated as just ignoring or attacking them isn't going to change their views. But, they shouldn't be allowed to spread there hate online or offline.

So long as you leave the nice cuddly Strasserists alone.

Strasserists are Nazis. They were literally a branch of the Nazi Party. They should be treated like any other Nazis, and you know my position on Nazis.

[Greate Boston]

So long as you leave the nice cuddly Strasserists alone.

Strasserists are Nazis. They were literally a branch of the Nazi Party. They should be treated like any other Nazis, and you know my position on Nazis.

You're an Absolute Monarchist. The Left should treat you just about as well as it treats the black sheep of the Fascist clan. If I recall correctly, it does.

[Dumb Ideologies]

So long as you leave the nice cuddly Strasserists alone.

Strasserists are Nazis. They were literally a branch of the Nazi Party. They should be treated like any other Nazis, and you know my position on Nazis.

Seems a bit like "all communists are the same and Stalinists", but lovely to be here and nice to meet you.