If you actively downplay Holodomor or deny it happened, or claim that Holodomor wasn’t real, you are one of the most deplorable people on the fucking planet!
The events were very well documented, the famine was man made by Stalin, and he EXPLICITLY targeted Ukrainians. It literally falls under the very definition of a Genocide for various fucking reasons, and yet when you are presented with the facts, you spiral into a rage of fury. You are no better than a Nazi or KKK member.
I like how they say “I have yet to hear them condemn famines under the monarchy” as if our opposition against communist atrocities somehow means we want the tsar back.
Also I don’t see many hardcore monarchists out there defending their ideologues atrocities, as opposed to tankies which are far more outspoken and aggressively so.
Ah yes, a strawman, because "the only victims or communism are nazis" is definitely not a common tankie claim. So the next question is, are the being wilfully dishonest, or are they just too stupid to know what a strawman is
I like that one of their responses was to immediately prove the premise right by linking an article that says the victims of the Holodomor were all just nazis anyway.
The whole point with 'famines under the monarchy' is a self-own because communism promised to be considerably better than Tsarism, and because it also exposes the great lie that was the ideological justification for the famine. Namely that there were any such things as 'rich peasants.' The reality of how much serfdom damaged and impoverished the Russian peasantry was the elephant in the room there was no neat means to end-run, which was the problem all the pre-war efforts at reform after abolition ran into.
Beyond that collectivization was specifically genocidal in a few contexts and the collapse of the USSR in 1991 shows precisely why the USSR feared what the UkSSR could do if it woke up one day and decided it wanted to be just plain Ukraine, as does the current war of 2014-present.
TIL: Grover Furr is a contributor at Counter Punch.
NOTE: Furr said the Hungarian Uprising of 1956 was because of anti-semitism, but then his source was a Nazis Holocaust denier who claims to be a historian, who said it was a good thing. Did I mention he thinks Khrushchev was a dirty revisionist and he wrote an entire book on it and Stalin's show trials were necessary and just?
The classic “it didn’t happen but they deserved it” argument. When you provide them with proof it happened they were Nazis/Fascists. When you point out they clearly weren’t it simply didn’t happen.
Apparently tankies think it's Nazi to not deny genocide.
Kazakhs who dared to try and escape the Asharshylyk were labelled as "class enemies" and were either shot or "repatriated" if they were caught.
Who do these tankies think they're kidding?
https://preview.redd.it/04cyqygmbp8g1.jpeg?width=407&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2fb4ca84122c99c3b475b44aeb4d19aa02d149a0
Yes, you fucking heard me!
If you actively downplay Holodomor or deny it happened, or claim that Holodomor wasn’t real, you are one of the most deplorable people on the fucking planet!
The events were very well documented, the famine was man made by Stalin, and he EXPLICITLY targeted Ukrainians. It literally falls under the very definition of a Genocide for various fucking reasons, and yet when you are presented with the facts, you spiral into a rage of fury. You are no better than a Nazi or KKK member.
Liberals: famous for their love of monarchies.
I feel like they just use "liberal" to describe whatever they don't like.
It’s kind of the same with “Fascist”, because now they throw that word around, and they are like “Scratch a Liberal and a Fascist bleeds”
They clearly have never read Benito Mussolini’s doctrine of Fascism, aka the literal primary source and very definition of fascism.
Saying the kulaks were the ones who caused the holodomor counts as holodomor denial
Well, if the kulaks had not died, there wouldn't have been a genocide; therefore, it's their fault! /s
I like how they say “I have yet to hear them condemn famines under the monarchy” as if our opposition against communist atrocities somehow means we want the tsar back.
Also I don’t see many hardcore monarchists out there defending their ideologues atrocities, as opposed to tankies which are far more outspoken and aggressively so.
So it's incomprehensible when it doesn't fit their narrative?
Commies: the victims were all nazis so it was okay that they all starved
Also commies: Who said we supported children starving? Obviously a strawman.
Holy whataboutism.
Those were also bad, and should not have happened, next question
Ah yes, a strawman, because "the only victims or communism are nazis" is definitely not a common tankie claim. So the next question is, are the being wilfully dishonest, or are they just too stupid to know what a strawman is
I like that one of their responses was to immediately prove the premise right by linking an article that says the victims of the Holodomor were all just nazis anyway.
The whole point with 'famines under the monarchy' is a self-own because communism promised to be considerably better than Tsarism, and because it also exposes the great lie that was the ideological justification for the famine. Namely that there were any such things as 'rich peasants.' The reality of how much serfdom damaged and impoverished the Russian peasantry was the elephant in the room there was no neat means to end-run, which was the problem all the pre-war efforts at reform after abolition ran into.
Beyond that collectivization was specifically genocidal in a few contexts and the collapse of the USSR in 1991 shows precisely why the USSR feared what the UkSSR could do if it woke up one day and decided it wanted to be just plain Ukraine, as does the current war of 2014-present.
TIL: Grover Furr is a contributor at Counter Punch.
NOTE: Furr said the Hungarian Uprising of 1956 was because of anti-semitism, but then his source was a Nazis Holocaust denier who claims to be a historian, who said it was a good thing. Did I mention he thinks Khrushchev was a dirty revisionist and he wrote an entire book on it and Stalin's show trials were necessary and just?
The classic “it didn’t happen but they deserved it” argument. When you provide them with proof it happened they were Nazis/Fascists. When you point out they clearly weren’t it simply didn’t happen.
Mentis made a good video on it