No. I’m mad that the American left is so politically uneducated that they can’t tell the difference between a Liberal and a literal Fascist. You guys all think they’re the same…even though from a historical standpoint, Fascists hate Liberals almost as much as they hate Socialists.
And it makes me sad that people don’t even realize that it’s the Fascists that want you to think the Liberals are worse than they are…all while convincing the Liberals that Socialists are the ones that want to take away their freedoms.
What the fuck do you think the word nuance means, you fucking idiot?
Since the rest of your comment is just smugly talking to yourself, totally nailing the vapid ignorance. “Um actually the people you don’t like would like you because you were mean to me” stupid fucking baby.
So, do you think it’s just propaganda that the Nazis were anti-liberal? And by extension, do you think that the MAGA movement today is a pro-liberal movement?
The Nazis worked hand in hand with liberals, and after the war liberals helped protect them and use them for the US space program and to lead organizations like NATO.
Oh, wow. So, you don’t distinguish between the collaborators and those who opposed fascism? That’s a very interesting blindspot you have. Convenient, too.
Does that also work for the Soviet Union? They collaborated with the Nazis too, remember?
The liberals only opposed fascism once it was clear that the Nazis were going to attack them as well. Fascists like Batista in Cuba were worked with to the very end, never once opposing them. As for the soviets, they never did collaborate with the Nazis.
What happened was the soviets spent an entire decade trying to form an anti-Nazi alliance, while the liberals were gleefully working with the Nazis. The soviets signed a non-aggression pact on the eve of war to buy time.
Lol! Wut? The Soviets didn’t form an “anti-Nazi alliance”…they were allied with the Nazis. They made a deal with them to carve up Eastern Europe between their two empires. This was literally the same cynical opportunism that led the Americans to give sanctuary to Nazi scientists after the war. If this means that Liberals are somehow naturally aligned with fascism, in your mind…then so are Communists, by the same criteria. It simply isn’t true, either way.
You are being very selective with your outrage here, to the point of being completely disingenuous. A lot of people collaborated with the Nazis for a wide range of reasons. You claiming that paints everyone of that political type with the same brush, is just intellectually dishonest.
If you were arguing in good faith, you would have to acknowledge that fascists will use anyone of any political persuasion for their own advantage, right up until they are no longer useful…and then stab them in the back. Often literally killing them, en masse. Which is exactly what they did with all their political opponents, in the end.
That goes for Socialists, Liberals, Anarchists, whatever. Everyone NOT a fascist or a collaborator. There are distinctions between these groups, for a reason. You seem to be ignoring those distinctions, out of purely personal political bias.
Thanks for proving you’re as illiterate about history as you are about politics. Now there’s almost no chance any serious adults accidentally think you have anything intelligent to say.
The communists were never allies with the Nazis. A non-aggression pact is not an alliance. 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:
If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don’t want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances.
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.
I am being honest here, that’s why I can recognize that since fascism and liberalism are both built on capitalism, they are diametrically opposed to socialism and have more in common with each other than they do with socialism.
Lol! Wut? The Soviets didn’t form an “anti-Nazi alliance”…they were allied with the Nazis. They made a deal with them to carve up Eastern Europe between their two empires. This was literally the same cynical opportunism that led the Americans to give sanctuary to Nazi scientists after the war. If this means that Liberals are somehow naturally aligned with fascism, in your mind…then so are Communists, by the same criteria. It simply isn’t true, either way.
It’s amazing that every comment you post is so embarrassingly wrong.
The USSR spent years trying to build an anti-Nazi alliance. 1933 they proposed collective security at the League of Nations. 1935 they signed mutual defense pacts with France and Czechoslovakia. Spring 1939 they sat in Moscow for months begging Britain and France for a real triple alliance. The West stalled. Refused to guarantee the Baltics. Refused to let the Red Army cross Poland to actually fight Hitler. Poland’s elite, more scared of workers than of Nazis, said no too and instead joined Hitler in attacking Czechoslovakia. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact happened because liberals handed Hitler Eastern Europe rather than work with socialists.
When Soviet troops entered eastern Poland September 17 1939, the Polish state had already collapsed. Government fled to Romania September 15. Warsaw was burning. The army was broken. The lands the USSR moved into? Not Poland proper. Territories Poland had seized and occupied by force in 1919-1921 from Belarus, Ukraine, and Lithuania.
And spare me the nonsense about liberals and fascists. They share a foundation: defense of capitalist property. When capital feels threatened, liberalism drops the mask. Chile 1973. Indonesia 1965. Greece 1967. The Soviet Union abolished the capitalist class. That is a total category difference.
Then there is denazification. The contrast couldn’t be clearer. In the Soviet zone, former Nazis went to labor camps. They worked. They earned minimum wage like other inmates. In the West? Operation Paperclip handed over 1,600+ Nazi scientists, officers, and spies. Wernher von Braun, who used slave labor to build V-2 rockets, became head of NASA’s Apollo program. Adolf Heusinger, Hitler’s Chief of the General Staff, became Chairman of the NATO Military Committee. Johannes Steinhoff, Nazi ace, also chaired NATO’s military committee. Heinz Reinefarth, who massacred civilians in Warsaw, became a respected mayor in West Germany.
I genuinely cannot fathom how someone can be this historically, politically, and materially illiterate and still type with such confidence.
The democrats are a party of imperialists, just like the republicans. Neither party is capable of changing the US Empire for the better, because both are fully committed to the imperial project. Fascists and liberals actually get along a lot better than you think, because both are fundamentally on the same side of imperialism and capitalism while socialists are on the opposite.
That shows a remarkable lack of understanding about how democracy works. Voters decide who makes up those parties. And Democrats especially are not all the same. Many of them are not imperialists. Unfortunately, many of them are…but it isn’t universal. And the only way to tip the balance against imperialism, is to run leftists for every possible position there is. Up and down the ballot.
But, then you have to actually show up and vote for them when they are in the race. If you don’t…then nothing will ever change.
Really? That’s funny, I seem to remember the DNC canceling the primary last election. Huh. Odd for a party where, “the voters decide who makes up the party”.
No, voters do not decide who makes up the DNC and the GOP. Their donors do. Who you can vote for is already pre-approved by their donors. Secondly, the DNC is an imperialist party, because they all wish to retain the IMF, NATO, capitalism itself, and all that goes into imperialism as the necessary endpoint of late-stage capitalism.
The only way to fight against the US Empire is by overthrowing it. As long as capitalism is maintained, so too will imperialism be maintained. You cannot have late-stage capitalism without imperialism, and the democrats can’t go against their donor-base, which is where they derive their political power from.
So, your only solution is violence? Not solidarity?
I mean, if you think you can achieve anything using the first, without having the second already locked in…you will have cracked the code for universal regime change. I’m pretty sure you could just wave that magic wand and overthrow any government in the world.
What do you mean by “violence, not solidarity?” Revolution can only come from an organized revolutionary class. The working classes cannot be organized within the boundaries of a capitalist-controlled and dominated party that focuses entirely on legal measures.
You are contradicting yourself with those statements…
Revolution can only come from an organized revolutionary class.
…directly contradicts your next sentence…
The working classes cannot be organized within the boundaries of a capitalist-controlled and dominated party that focuses entirely on legal measures.
This all makes it sound like the only way to organize your revolution, is to already have overthrown the system that prevents you from organizing your revolution.
How so? You cannot organize for revolution within the confines of the DNC. You need working class parties like PSL that exist outside of parties like the DNC and GOP, and you need to organize for revolution, not just continue to try to beat the house at a game we all know the house has rigged and can pull the plug at any time.
Democrats have been just as bad as Republicans when it comes to Central and West Asia. Just because you think people there don’t matter doesn’t mean everyone does
We get it, you’re still mad at the commies for not falling in line behind Girlboss Hitler
No. I’m mad that the American left is so politically uneducated that they can’t tell the difference between a Liberal and a literal Fascist. You guys all think they’re the same…even though from a historical standpoint, Fascists hate Liberals almost as much as they hate Socialists.
And it makes me sad that people don’t even realize that it’s the Fascists that want you to think the Liberals are worse than they are…all while convincing the Liberals that Socialists are the ones that want to take away their freedoms.
Haha, lol, lmao even
Free Palestine
Your good guys literally committed a genocide. You’re a fucking clown.
GUESS THE DIFFERENCE ISN’T FUCKING GENOCIDE
The raw fucking irony of whining about people’s political literacy and then saying this shit.
The amount of guilt by association in this comment would make Israeli propagandists proud. You nailed the total lack of nuance perfectly.
Oh, are israeli propagandists bad or something? Is it a mark on your character to support them or something?
What the fuck do you think the word nuance means, you fucking idiot?
Since the rest of your comment is just smugly talking to yourself, totally nailing the vapid ignorance. “Um actually the people you don’t like would like you because you were mean to me” stupid fucking baby.
We slaughtered a hundred thousand or so but we didn’t say fuck words, it’s very nuanced honey
they’re the same thing where it matters; you need to go back and study history that isn’t written by a capitalist.
So, do you think it’s just propaganda that the Nazis were anti-liberal? And by extension, do you think that the MAGA movement today is a pro-liberal movement?
The Nazis worked hand in hand with liberals, and after the war liberals helped protect them and use them for the US space program and to lead organizations like NATO.
Oh, wow. So, you don’t distinguish between the collaborators and those who opposed fascism? That’s a very interesting blindspot you have. Convenient, too.
Does that also work for the Soviet Union? They collaborated with the Nazis too, remember?
The liberals only opposed fascism once it was clear that the Nazis were going to attack them as well. Fascists like Batista in Cuba were worked with to the very end, never once opposing them. As for the soviets, they never did collaborate with the Nazis.
What happened was the soviets spent an entire decade trying to form an anti-Nazi alliance, while the liberals were gleefully working with the Nazis. The soviets signed a non-aggression pact on the eve of war to buy time.
Lol! Wut? The Soviets didn’t form an “anti-Nazi alliance”…they were allied with the Nazis. They made a deal with them to carve up Eastern Europe between their two empires. This was literally the same cynical opportunism that led the Americans to give sanctuary to Nazi scientists after the war. If this means that Liberals are somehow naturally aligned with fascism, in your mind…then so are Communists, by the same criteria. It simply isn’t true, either way.
You are being very selective with your outrage here, to the point of being completely disingenuous. A lot of people collaborated with the Nazis for a wide range of reasons. You claiming that paints everyone of that political type with the same brush, is just intellectually dishonest.
If you were arguing in good faith, you would have to acknowledge that fascists will use anyone of any political persuasion for their own advantage, right up until they are no longer useful…and then stab them in the back. Often literally killing them, en masse. Which is exactly what they did with all their political opponents, in the end.
That goes for Socialists, Liberals, Anarchists, whatever. Everyone NOT a fascist or a collaborator. There are distinctions between these groups, for a reason. You seem to be ignoring those distinctions, out of purely personal political bias.
Thanks for proving you’re as illiterate about history as you are about politics. Now there’s almost no chance any serious adults accidentally think you have anything intelligent to say.
The communists were never allies with the Nazis. A non-aggression pact is not an alliance. 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.
I am being honest here, that’s why I can recognize that since fascism and liberalism are both built on capitalism, they are diametrically opposed to socialism and have more in common with each other than they do with socialism.
It’s amazing that every comment you post is so embarrassingly wrong.
The USSR spent years trying to build an anti-Nazi alliance. 1933 they proposed collective security at the League of Nations. 1935 they signed mutual defense pacts with France and Czechoslovakia. Spring 1939 they sat in Moscow for months begging Britain and France for a real triple alliance. The West stalled. Refused to guarantee the Baltics. Refused to let the Red Army cross Poland to actually fight Hitler. Poland’s elite, more scared of workers than of Nazis, said no too and instead joined Hitler in attacking Czechoslovakia. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact happened because liberals handed Hitler Eastern Europe rather than work with socialists.
When Soviet troops entered eastern Poland September 17 1939, the Polish state had already collapsed. Government fled to Romania September 15. Warsaw was burning. The army was broken. The lands the USSR moved into? Not Poland proper. Territories Poland had seized and occupied by force in 1919-1921 from Belarus, Ukraine, and Lithuania.
And spare me the nonsense about liberals and fascists. They share a foundation: defense of capitalist property. When capital feels threatened, liberalism drops the mask. Chile 1973. Indonesia 1965. Greece 1967. The Soviet Union abolished the capitalist class. That is a total category difference.
Then there is denazification. The contrast couldn’t be clearer. In the Soviet zone, former Nazis went to labor camps. They worked. They earned minimum wage like other inmates. In the West? Operation Paperclip handed over 1,600+ Nazi scientists, officers, and spies. Wernher von Braun, who used slave labor to build V-2 rockets, became head of NASA’s Apollo program. Adolf Heusinger, Hitler’s Chief of the General Staff, became Chairman of the NATO Military Committee. Johannes Steinhoff, Nazi ace, also chaired NATO’s military committee. Heinz Reinefarth, who massacred civilians in Warsaw, became a respected mayor in West Germany.
I genuinely cannot fathom how someone can be this historically, politically, and materially illiterate and still type with such confidence.
Historical illiteracy and false equivalence.
“scratch a liberal, a fascist bleeds”
The democrats are a party of imperialists, just like the republicans. Neither party is capable of changing the US Empire for the better, because both are fully committed to the imperial project. Fascists and liberals actually get along a lot better than you think, because both are fundamentally on the same side of imperialism and capitalism while socialists are on the opposite.
That shows a remarkable lack of understanding about how democracy works. Voters decide who makes up those parties. And Democrats especially are not all the same. Many of them are not imperialists. Unfortunately, many of them are…but it isn’t universal. And the only way to tip the balance against imperialism, is to run leftists for every possible position there is. Up and down the ballot.
But, then you have to actually show up and vote for them when they are in the race. If you don’t…then nothing will ever change.
Really? That’s funny, I seem to remember the DNC canceling the primary last election. Huh. Odd for a party where, “the voters decide who makes up the party”.
No, voters do not decide who makes up the DNC and the GOP. Their donors do. Who you can vote for is already pre-approved by their donors. Secondly, the DNC is an imperialist party, because they all wish to retain the IMF, NATO, capitalism itself, and all that goes into imperialism as the necessary endpoint of late-stage capitalism.
The only way to fight against the US Empire is by overthrowing it. As long as capitalism is maintained, so too will imperialism be maintained. You cannot have late-stage capitalism without imperialism, and the democrats can’t go against their donor-base, which is where they derive their political power from.
So, your only solution is violence? Not solidarity?
I mean, if you think you can achieve anything using the first, without having the second already locked in…you will have cracked the code for universal regime change. I’m pretty sure you could just wave that magic wand and overthrow any government in the world.
You voted for a genocide as a solution instead of having solidarity with it’s victims.
Because you wanted to go back to not caring about politics.
What do you mean by “violence, not solidarity?” Revolution can only come from an organized revolutionary class. The working classes cannot be organized within the boundaries of a capitalist-controlled and dominated party that focuses entirely on legal measures.
You are contradicting yourself with those statements…
…directly contradicts your next sentence…
This all makes it sound like the only way to organize your revolution, is to already have overthrown the system that prevents you from organizing your revolution.
How so? You cannot organize for revolution within the confines of the DNC. You need working class parties like PSL that exist outside of parties like the DNC and GOP, and you need to organize for revolution, not just continue to try to beat the house at a game we all know the house has rigged and can pull the plug at any time.
Democrats have been just as bad as Republicans when it comes to Central and West Asia. Just because you think people there don’t matter doesn’t mean everyone does