Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

celebratedrecluse moderator wrote

This is disgusting. I don't want me or my politics associated with people who split hairs over the killing of millions of people for political purposes. Not even, uh..."good" purposes. Utterly debased way of thinking and speaking, has literally no purpose for contemporary politics except to justify and excuse the same when it pleases the speaker, and this is all against the very clear ToS.

4

Amorphous wrote

I'm pretty sure I also heard one of you raddle authority figures say that you wouldn't let "tankies" be mods on this site. Is that not the case?

1

ziq OP wrote

Genocide apologia breaks the terms of service. Redfash that have been mods here in the past have banned people from forums for simply using the word "Holodomor". They even deny the Tiananmen massacre:

https://raddle.me/f/China/78465/tiananmen-the-massacre-that-wasn-t

We are very lapse tho since mls like /u/sudo have been modded on several forums that had no mods. But we're not going to give a forum that already has mods over to some random tankies from discord just because they decide they should be in charge. They can make f/chapotraphouse2 if they want but tankies have no ownership over a demsoc podcast fandom.

5

Amorphous wrote

Genocide apologia breaks the terms of service. Redfash that have been mods here in the past have banned people from forums for simply using the word "Holodomor"

Are you aware of where the word "Holodomor" comes from, how it was popularized, what sorts of people initially spread news of it, and so on? Genuine question. I know many people aren't familiar with all that stuff, but it's important to keep in mind when you're making claims as strong as "genocide apologia"

−1

suma wrote

https://raddle.me/f/History/109188/was-the-holodomor-a-genocide

Is this were you get your doublethink from, "anarchist"?

3

Amorphous wrote

From a 4 month old downvoted raddle post? No, surprisingly not.

1

suma wrote

If all your talking points are ripped straight from red fascists like that, why are you so convinced you're an anarchist?

4

Amorphous wrote

I've explained before quite thoroughly where I got my political orientation from. I read anarchist authors and agreed with them. I simply don't agree that being an anarchist means I have to agree with the CIA on every topic regarding their enemies.

2

mofongo wrote

Newsflash: Most propaganda is true!

What makes something propaganda is its political use.

4

ziq OP wrote

Shut the fuck up

2

Amorphous wrote

Come on. I'm just saying, opposition to the popular narrative of the holodomor is not "genocide apologia." The narrative was constructed by literal nazis and their liberal allies. There's a book called Fraud, Famine, and Fascism by a guy called Douglas Tottle which goes over a lot of how this narrative was spun and how it traveled, and I'd highly recommend reading it. I could link you to the PDF, even.

2

ziq OP wrote

There are Ukrainians on this site whose relatives were starved to death by the imperialist force you're stanning for. The USSR stole their grain at gunpoint, sent it to Russia, and then sat back and watched them all slowly die. Stop shitting on the dead.

4

Amorphous wrote (edited )

the imperialist force you're stanning for.

You are literally aligning yourself with actual nazis right now. It's hard to even overstate the absurdity of calling someone out for "stanning for imperialist forces" when you are so strongly in support of a story made up by actual nazis. Like, people who lived in the 30s and 40s and supported the german nazi party at that time. Not neo-nazis. Not kekistan-pepe-epic-gamer coward nazis. The kind of nazis who actually fucking supported real-world genocide at the time it was happening. Those are the people you are aligning yourself with. And somehow you don't see any issue with that.

Amazing.

−2

ziq OP wrote (edited )

/u/celebratedrecluse, /u/bloodrose - enough is enough, genocide denial is against the terms of service. I asked them to stop denying that millions of Ukrainians were murdered and they dug their heels in, calling it fascist propaganda. They're denying millions of gruesome murders by an imperial power in the usual redfash manner (accusing anyone who acknowledge the genocide of being alligned with nazis). I think it warrants at least a temp ban.

4

Amorphous wrote (edited )

I mean sure, feel free to ban me for that. But can you then read the book I linked and learn some history? I'd like to point out that banning someone for "genocide denial" for citing an extremely thorough, well sourced history book is quite ridiculous, though I fully expect it to happen.

Edit: Apologies, never actually linked it. Here it is: https://archive.org/details/DouglasTottleFraudFamineAndFascism

2

ziq OP wrote

It's up to the mods whether or not to ban you, I'm not banning someone I'm arguing with.

I read that book when I wrote w/tankies and unlike you I didn't come out of it a genocide denying bootlick. Fascists using the many atrocities of the USSR against MLs does not makes those atrocities cease to exist - but I guess critical thinking is in short supply in anarcho-Stalinist circles.

1

Amorphous wrote

Wait, you have read the book then. That's interesting. I'm curious how you still consider it a genocide, then. If the picture that book paints is true (and it's definitely the most thoroughly sourced document I've ever seen on the topic, so I have no reason to doubt it is) then the famine in Ukraine was, at worst, a matter of mismanagement on the part of the USSR. Exacerbated, of course, by bad actors -- both from foreign governments and from within. The foreigners, of course, hoping to make the USSR weaker, and the ones within selfishly attempting to hold on to their position as landlords.

But ultimately the famine was started entirely naturally. The region was prone to famines throughout history, and it is only during the lifespan of the USSR that those regular famines came to an end. I see no reason to believe Stalin hated Ukrainians or whatever, or wanted to starve people to death, or made any effort to starve people to death. I'd be happy to be proven wrong, though. I'm definitely not a fan of Stalin. I respect him more than, say, Churchill, but that's not a high bar to clear.

2

mofongo wrote

Even if that's the case, he certainly did not make an effort to prevent them from starving to death.

4

Bezotcovschina wrote

The region was prone to famines throughout history

What? The most fertile region in USSR and, probably, Europe was always prone to famines?

We can argue over terminology here, but taking all the grain from peasants and do nothing while millions starve - is as bad as any other tankie-approved genocide.

1

Bezotcovschina wrote

I get my Holodomor narrative from actual Ukrainians I trust much more than some Douglas Tottle.

4

ziq OP wrote

Who btw got his "info" directly from the Russian governmemt who commissioned his book as counter propaganda. Totally unbiased source.

4

Bezotcovschina wrote (edited )

Can you see a difference between "non-anarchist" and "tankies"?

3

Amorphous wrote

Is the implication that succdems/liberals would be allowed to be mods, but not MLs? Where is the logic in that, and how is that any better / not basically summed up in what Beatnik said?

0

Bezotcovschina wrote

Can you see a difference between "MLs" and "tankies"?

Where is the logic in that, and how is that any better / not basically summed up in what Beatnik said?

Beatnik lied. Me not.

1

[deleted] wrote (edited )

1

CryMoreZiq wrote

lmao youre just sour cause people are donating $2872 a year to his librepay vs $0 a year to yours

people actually like him lol

−7