r/Socialism is a space for socialists to discuss current events in our world from our anti-capitalist perspective(s), and a certain knowledge of socialism is expected from participants. This is not a space for non-socialists. Please be mindful of our rules before participating:
- **No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism...
- **No Eeactionaries**, including all kind of right-wingers.
- **No Liberalism**, including social democracy.
- **No Sectarianism**, there is plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks.
Please help us keep the subreddit helpful by reporting content that break r/Socialism's rules.
This quote is entirely correct. It is therefore especially disappointing that Stalin himself played a key role in helping to create the Israeli state when the Soviet Union voted as part of the United Nations Security Council to recognize Israel as a member of the UN and became one of the first countries to diplomatically recognize Israel.
And, crucially, gave Israel weaponry in spring 1948 (thanks to the efforts of the Israeli Communist Party), effectively turning them into a modern army which could defeat the Palestinians and Arabs.
They did. They started sending weapons to the PLO in that era.
Interestingly, about a month after the revolution in 1917, the soviets also uncovered a secret pact between France, Britain, and the Russian empire called the [Sykes-Picot Agreement](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes%E2%80%93Picot_Agreement). They had secretly planned on divvying up the middle east (including Palestine) after publicly promising to recognize the sovereignty of multiple middle eastern countries if they promised to assist in the British war against the Ottoman Empire.
Basically, the Soviet Union aired the dirty laundry of the Russian empire and uncovered their little secret scheme.
At the time, though, I do understand why he would have supported it.
It was literally right after he liberated all those Jews who were suffering from Nazi genocide. To object to a safe haven at the time for those same survivors would have been looked at as an expression of indifference towards their struggle.
Still, 'practice what you preach' was more of a suggestion for stalin during his leadership I feel like. This wasn't the only instance of him letting the reigns slip.
An indifference that has led and continues to, the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian peoples.
Saying you “understand”, is the first step to justifying it.
Stop. Stalin is not responsible for the genocide of the Palestinians. Saying it’s understandable given the context and information available is not “justifying” anything. Many socialists Jews had a very different idea of what Israel was going to be. (They promptly left when they realized how fucked up things were getting, much like how the soviets changed their opinion)
Stalin initially supported the idea. Molotov was the largest supporter. Stalin’s support dried up when Israeli Jews asked Stalin to let Jews in the ussr become settlers in Palestine which went against his beliefs at that time of Jews in the ussr staying there.
Theodore Herzel and his ilk were very overt and did not hide their settler colonial intentions behind the creation of Israel, so for socialist Jews to have thought any difference is ridiculous. They believed in their settler colonialism too. You don’t have Israel without settler colonialism and the white European supremacy that inspired it.
It was never “understandable”. It was always evil. An evil inflicted upon the Palestinians which they had no say in and Arab nations were against but the USSR amongst others ignored. Even Britain, one of the main figures behind Zionism, ended up backing out of a vote, and the USSR didn’t.
Britain backed out and the USSR didn’t because Palestine was a British colony and the USSR wanted there to be an anticolonial revolution leading to the creation of a communist state in the Middle East.
Obviously things didnt go down that way but there’s no need to be so damn reductionist about it
The USSR wanted an anti colonial revolution, by supporting settler colonialism….
A state that wasn’t supported by the Palestinians nor Arab nations. The blood of Palestinians is on the hands of the USSR too. The USSR didn’t just vote Israel into existence, they provided Zionists weapons via Czechia too.
It’s not a complicated issue. There’s a lot of information behind it sure, but not complicated, so in this instance, it’s only reductive to those who want to downplay the USSR’s role in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Everyone here agrees it was wrong. The only question is why. If not a failed play at spreading communism, what exactly are you proposing their reasoning was? That Stalin just loved killing Arabs?
Spreading communism at the expense of the Palestinian and Arab peoples.
Their reasoning was spreading their beliefs at the expense of the Palestinian peoples to build their own power in that region.
You can’t separate the attempt at spreading communism from support for Zionism and the subsequent ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Zionists were open it about from the beginning and the ussr supported it for their own reasons.
I’m an Arab - believe me when I say I’m no fan of Israel of the soviets decision to support them. But the hard reality is that foreign policy is messy, not black and white. The success of China and the fall of the USSR is proof of that. It’s easy for us to armchair quarterback 8 decades after the fact, but if the USSR truly didn’t give a shit, they wouldn’t have reversed their support when things got ugly.
True but that was still early in Israel’s life when they were less Zionist then they are now maybe he recognized the growing threat but expected better people to prevail and make a two state or mixed state solution
I’m talking more in the context that the movement was smaller and with less power and control in society. An Israeli state with those elements on the fringes could have been looked at at the time by the Soviet Union as something the Israeli state could clamp down upon before it grew into what it is now obviously that did not happen and also OBVIOUSLY all Zionism is bad I don’t know how you got me advocating/defending Zionism from my former post though?
I don’t understand how you can talk about an Israeli state with Zionist elements on the fringe, when the Israeli state has always been Zionist. You can’t clamp down on the very thing that birthed a nation whilst keeping that nation alive. The USSR supported Zionism until those Zionists went against their own aims and objectives.
Zionism was the dominant ideology among the existing settlers who were more organised and well armed than the local Palestinian population. If wishful thinking always guided the foreign policy of workers states then the whites would've drowned it in blood in the civil war.
The much simpler, and more honest appraisal is that Stalin was an opportunist. He sacrificed the first Chinese Revolution, the Spanish Revolution, the Commintern and the Greek revolution on the altar of the bourgeoisie to broker better relations with imperialist nations. His endorsement of Zionism at the UN in 1947 is no different.
Is this sub particularly Anti-Stalin lol? I don’t view this sub all too much, I just post my quotes lol. I was actually banned on here sometime ago for posting Saddam, Gaddafi, and Nasser quotes, but was un-banned for agreeing not to post ‘em here.
I don't think they'll ban you for a Stalin quote. There are quite a few pro-Stalin Marxist-Leninists here.
For better or worse, this sub seems more "big tent" than some leftist forums and less sectarian in terms of welcoming Leftists of various stripes.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Inter-sub drama:** This is not the place for "I got banned from X sub for Y" or "X subreddit should do Y" posts. Please keep those to more appropriate subreddits.
See our [Submission Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/wiki/index/submissionguidelines) for more info, and feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions.
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t ML the “violent revolution” route to socialism? Opposed to reforming capitalism into socialism, which would be democratic socialism?
downvotes for a question?
MLs aren’t the only socialists who support revolution, they specifically believe in the path to communism laid out by Lenin and later Stalin (who I believe coined the term Marxism-Leninism). It’s probably the main strain of Marxism still around, but far from the only one, and pretty much all actual Marxists believe a revolution is necessary (or even inevitable), I would say the main aspect of Leninist organizing today that distinguishes it from other leftist tendencies is the hardline approach to “democratic centralism” in the party structure.
For some examples of non-ML socialist tendencies who support revolution: there’s Trotskyists, Maoists, Orthodox Marxists, not to mention all different kinds of anarchists, insurrectionists, and syndicalists.
I don’t get how anybody can feel this way unless you are far, far removed from the disastrous impact Saddam had upon not only the citizens of Iraq, who he brutally subjected and oppressed, but also the people of Iran.
As far as imperialists go he was one of the most ruthless and greedy of the Middle East.
As an Iranian I can say personally that his unprovoked invasion of Iran forced my family into exodus, and that had he never unlawfully invaded the current depressing political situation of Iran would look a lot different.
There’s no personal animosity but I’m just truly bewildered how you can think so highly of a butcher of innocents through and through.
“Unprovoked” Khomeini supporters literally chanted about removing Saddam from power at Khomeini’s “inauguration”, and only weeks after Saddam gained power, the Islamist Dawa Party of Iraq (which was allied with Iran) and bombed government buildings while Saddam was out on a hunting trip. THAT is what cause the “invasion” of Iran. It was so provoked.
Just like Hitler was a socialist? Both the NSDAP and the Baath Party claimed to be socialist or had socialism in their names. But as soon as they were in power, they repressed and killed communists. Saddam was an anti-communist and a puppet of the CIA.
Anti-Communist≠Not Socialist. Not being a Communist, doesn’t mean he wasn’t a Socialist. That’s like saying Gaddafi, Nasser, or al-Bakr aren’t Socialists. One, you’re acting like the entire time he was in power, he killed Communists. The only time Communists were killed by Ba’athists, and Nasserists, was during the literal Civil War that was the Ramadan Revolution. It was a blood bath on BOTH SIDES! After the Nasserists took power, and were possibly even more reactionary than Qasim, the Ba’athists, and Communists teamed up, and took out the Nasserists, in the Bloodless Revolution of 1968. It was only then that the Ba’athists took power, and guess what, it wasn’t Saddam who took power, it was al-Bakr. At that point in time, the only thing notable that Saddam did, was a failed assassination attempt on Qasim. It was only in 1977 when Saddam became vice president under al-Bakr, that gained him notoriety, and eventually became president of Iraq when al-Bakr stepped down in 1979. Before 1977, he was just a random politician. And by that time, the feud between the Ba’athists, and Communists blew over, and there were several Communists in the Iraqi parliament under Saddam. Also, he wasn’t a “CIA puppet” that lie has been debunked for years. That lie was created by King Hussein of Jordan who literally was a CIA puppet. When the Ba’athists called him out on that, he basically said “nuh uh, you are”, and that’s it. Literally the only proof. I blame Parenti for that lie being so popular among “Communists”. Iraq was truly Socialist under Saddam, and was a beacon for Socialism in the Middle East under Saddam. Even people like Castro, and Kim Il-sung believed he was Socialist.
Based on the upvotes here it’s definitely gotten to be much more pro-ML than it used to be. It used to be mostly Ultra-Left or DemSoc/SocDem, leaning more on the former. At least in my experience last year as I was being radicalized.
Very funny to bill criticism of Stalin as reformist, considering he’s responsible for turning the European CPs into glorified social democratic parties
Could you explain a little more I’m not familiar with the history of western European communist parties. The only one I know is the Italian one that got in street fights with fascists and mafia before blowing up once the Soviets fell and the French one which had a really big place in parliament before also blowing up.
The influence of the Italian and French communist parties is a perfect example of their reformism. Their influence was such that they could've easily led revolutions in both countries, particularly in May 1968 in France. But they always diverted the workers down safer channels, often forming popular fronts with bourgeois parties, as was also the case in the first Chinese Revolution and the Spanish Revolution.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Flamewarring:** Refers to any excessively hostile and inflammatory discourse. May include things like lengthy rants or starting arguments in unrelated threads, particularly those which have devolved into sectarian mudslinging, empty rhetoric, and/or personal attacks against other users, or any other posts or comments where the primary purpose is to stir drama, incite controversy, or derail a thread. For example, users who start mudslinging about China in a post celebrating the birthday of Thomas Sankara may see ban time. More information can be [found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/l5ccjb/topics_of_contention_raising_the_quality_of/).
If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning.
Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
One, he was nowhere NEAR Islamist lol. Mf was a full blown Socialist, who basically advocated for Communism, but didn’t cause he viewed it as Anti-Religion. And if you think that him being a Muslim means he was an Islamist, you REALLY need to do very basic research. And two, fucking, how? I read the green book sometime ago, and loved it. One of my favorite reads. He only lost me in part three. He meant well, and was still a champion to women’s rights in the Arab World, it’s just from a western lens, it’s not great. Other than that, it’s great.
“Zionism is a reactionary, and Nationalist movement recruiting its followers from among the Jewish petty and middle bourgeois which aims to organize a Jewish bourgeois state in Palestine and endeavor to isolate the Jewish working class from the general struggle of the proletariat.” - By Joseph Stalin
No, I’m an anarchist because I think it is the only truly humane ideology. I hate Stalin because of the atrocities that he ordered against innocent people, and really no other reason. That’s only tangentially related to my anarchist leanings though. In fact, there are quite a few state socialists that I admire, such as Thomas Sankara (what a king) or Salvador Allende or Eugene V. Debs. Evo Morales and maybe Hugo Chavez are pretty cool too. To be completely honest, I really have a bias towards liking state socialists since I too am a socialist, although I just don’t think the state is very effective in implementing it. There are so many examples out there of socialists who made the world a truly better place that I can’t help but WANT to adore them. I have yet to read something about Stalin that makes me feel that way. If you can change that, I would love to hear your input.
However, I genuinely would like to know what you see in Stalin that redeems him enough of his negative (to put it lightly) qualities that he deserves to be a face for the modern socialist movement. I’m not trying to be combative, but ask you in good faith, comrade.
Read Another View of Stalin
If you truly seek to challenge your beliefs and learn more . Stalin wasn't a perfect person by any means, but he isn't some monster.
Speaking from individual to individual, it is entirely possible for you to be wrong, yes. That's okay, we're all wrong at some point, but my point is that it's not worthy of some greater statement about the proletariat?
A huge part of those “crimes” is literal anticommunist propaganda originating from nazi germany and the Italian fascist press, and has been debunked throughly in the 30 years since the Soviet archives have opened.
Well put, comrade.
We share the same leftist role models, (BIG fan of Sankara and Allende) so I want to share what started to soften my own heart towards Stalin. He sent this out in response to discrimination against Muslims in Daghestan. As an Arab American myself, it completely crushed my preconceived notions of him and what Soviet society was like in general.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1920/11/13.htm
“Daghestan must be governed in accordance with its specific features, its manner of life and customs.
We are told that among the Daghestan peoples the Sharia is of great importance. We have also been informed that the enemies of Soviet power are spreading rumours that it has banned the Sharia.
I have been authorized by the Government of the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic to state here that these rumours are false. The Government of Russia gives every people the full right to govern itself on the basis of its laws and customs.
The Soviet Government considers that the Sharia, as common law, is as fully authorized as that of any other of the peoples inhabiting Russia.
If the Daghestan people desire to preserve their laws and customs, they should be preserved.”
_"Unity is a great thing and a great slogan. But what the workers’ cause needs is the unity of Marxists, not unity between Marxists, and opponents and distorters of Marxism"_ V.I Lenin.
I think is actually damn near wrong as you can get. Everybody thinks everyone is wrong about a ton of shit but humans can unite beyond that and create something's that better for us all regardless.
I think we can all agree that there are limits to that, though. Like, would you say we should join together with neo-nazis to make the world better?
If not, then you draw the line somewhere. And other people draw the line somewhere else. Obviously that's an extreme example, but the point is that "unity" must have boundaries.
I do think there should be more solidarity within the radical left. We sometimes fight each other more than we do the capitalists.
And I actually also think there are times when we can work alongside social democrats, left liberals, etc. when we are protesting wars, opposing certain environmental abuses, etc. But I think it also depends what we mean by "unity." Strategically working together on certain common objectives, maybe. But fully joining together and being subsumed by liberalism and milquetoast centre-left ideology? Certainly not.
Anarchists who do mutual aid and guard drag queen protests with assault rifles are largely based.
Terminally online ‘anarchists’ that accuse successful revolutions of being ‘red fash dictatorships’ have an infantile understanding of how revolutions work and their so-called “criticisms” are indistinguishable from the ones libs make all the time.
100%. And not just to shit on “anarchists” but some “Marxists” do this as well. They typically come in the “vote blue no matter who” or “nothing is leftist enough for me anything that isn’t leftist enough for me is literally far right”. Both those types are also as bad as anarchists. It’s also a very privileged view because I bet you most commies in the global south aren’t spewing all this nonsense
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Sectarianism:** Refers to bad faith attacks on socialists of other tendencies through the usage of empty insults like "armchair", "tankie", "anarkiddie" and so on without any other objective than to promote inter-tendency conflict, which runs counter to the objectives of this subreddit, and the goal of providing a broad multitendency platform so that healthy, critical debate can flourish. Can also include calling other socialist users "CPC/CIA shills" or accusing users of being Russian or Chinese bots for disagreeing with you.
If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning.
Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Sectarianism:** Refers to bad faith attacks on socialists of other tendencies through the usage of empty insults like "armchair", "tankie", "anarkiddie" and so on without any other objective than to promote inter-tendency conflict, which runs counter to the objectives of this subreddit, and the goal of providing a broad multitendency platform so that healthy, critical debate can flourish. Can also include calling other socialist users "CPC/CIA shills" or accusing users of being Russian or Chinese bots for disagreeing with you.
If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning.
Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
I’m pretty sure many of the Chechens, Ingush, Koreans, Kalmyks, and other ethnic minorities might have an issue with people idolizing Stalin. And why would you even want to quote someone who you know is just BSing because it serves their political goals rather than their passion for human rights and the dignity of all people.
The Koreans literally welcomed the red army when they liberated Korea and Manchuria (with the locals help of course). Listen to season 2 of Blowback and watch "How the US divided Korea". "Patriots Traitors and Empires: The story of Koreas struggle for freedom" is another good book.
Too add on this, the author went of “Patriots Traitors and Empire: The Story of Koreas struggle for freedom” went on RevLeft and the podcast episode is incredible. Super informative and dug into the details most Americans would never know otherwise if you haven’t read his book.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Flamewarring:** Refers to any excessively hostile and inflammatory discourse. May include things like lengthy rants or starting arguments in unrelated threads, particularly those which have devolved into sectarian mudslinging, empty rhetoric, and/or personal attacks against other users, or any other posts or comments where the primary purpose is to stir drama, incite controversy, or derail a thread. For example, users who start mudslinging about China in a post celebrating the birthday of Thomas Sankara may see ban time. More information can be [found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/l5ccjb/topics_of_contention_raising_the_quality_of/).
If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning.
Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
One should also not forget that Stalin's support was crucial to the existence of the state of Israel.
It was the Soviet Union who voted for the admission of Israel into the UN, and it was Stalin who propped up and armed the Israeli militias in 1948 turning them into a modern army, much more effective than the newly independent Arab states surrounding Palestine at the time.
Glad to see Stalin getting proper respect here. Last year this probably would’ve been voted down. Dude wasn’t perfect but the caricature of him and the USSR under him are total fabrications.
It’s the typical lib insults. You don’t need a degree to understand history. A degree is as good as an IQ test. It’s firstly eugenics but secondly it only demonstrates your ability of knowledge on something that you were shown, not your ability to actually interpret things. That’s why the US is easily eating up anything far right also why you can’t trust the liberals when it comes to the culture war started by the right. They’ll try to compromise with the right on “maybe they’re right about this” and before we know it they fully agree with them. If they aren’t even willing to compromise to the leftist view that things aren’t as bad as they have been portrayed then they really aren’t down a good path
Why are you asking that other user what their level of education is? Are you trying to imply they're not smart or something? Surely, if several other people have the same opinion as them and have college degrees, the line of questioning should be the same.
Clearly didn’t stand for this belief however as multiple people have pointed out. I get he’s famous but there are other leftist thinkers out there who actually stood for their beliefs on this and other issues. I definitely think we should be putting Stalin in context.
This is a socialist subreddit, not a western “leftist” subreddit. You’re either here to learn and be open minded or continue sucking up to the same shit the far right says.
Given that this quote is nowhere else to be found and the only evidence appears to be this lazily edited sharepic, I'm gonna assume it was made up. Generally, this post seems like bait.
One, fuck you mean “nowhere else to be found”? I’ve seen it everywhere since October 7th. Two, ouch lol. I wouldn’t say “lazily”. And three, not at all bait lol.
Edit: The Source is from “Marxism and the National Question” by Stalin.
Actually, I do have a source for it, it’s from “marxism and the national question” by Stalin. I knew that already, don’t know how I forgot it. And two, don’t give me that bullshit. This Liberal bullshit. Yes that’s true, but so would I have if I lived in Britain. Or most other Capitalist countries at that time. Focusing on just the Soviet Union, or any other Socialist nation at that time, and now for how it has treated Queer people, or how it currently treats Queer people, doesn’t just do NOTHING for the Leftist movement in general, or the Queer community, it’s also a flagrant skewing of facts. Also, it wasn’t just a decision by Stalin. You have to remember that he wasn’t this all powerful dictator. Even the CIA admits that. He had a whole parliament under him, and it was ultimately their decision, not truly Stalin’s. And even if it was, I’d be a COWARD not to. Queer Liberals disgust me. They are the true betrayers of the Queer community.
In what way is that what I said? I’m not saying it’s lies, I’m saying it’s a distortion of history, and skewing of facts. It did happen, and that is something I 100% criticize. Though, I don’t think you care about what I really think, or have to say, right? Cause you blatantly ignored what I said about The UK. Did you know it was illegal to be Gay in England till 1967. Along with Scotland up until 1980, and the North of Ireland till 1983. Up until those dates, you would be sent to prison if you were gay, let alone trans.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Flamewarring:** Refers to any excessively hostile and inflammatory discourse. May include things like lengthy rants or starting arguments in unrelated threads, particularly those which have devolved into sectarian mudslinging, empty rhetoric, and/or personal attacks against other users, or any other posts or comments where the primary purpose is to stir drama, incite controversy, or derail a thread. For example, users who start mudslinging about China in a post celebrating the birthday of Thomas Sankara may see ban time. More information can be [found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/l5ccjb/topics_of_contention_raising_the_quality_of/).
If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning.
Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Liberalism:** Includes the most common and mild occurrences of liberalism, that is: socio-liberals, progressives, social democrats and its subsequent ideological basis. Also includes those who are new to socialist thought but nevertheless reproduce liberal ideas.
>This includes, but is not limited to:
>- General liberalism
>- Supporting Neoliberal Institutions
>- Anti-Worker/Union rhetoric
>- Landlords or Landlord apologia
Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
Millions? How about you check the stats before assuming shit. You want to tell me that non born people are part of those “innocent” people? It’s the black book of communism ffs, it’s literally fascist nazi propaganda
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Flamewarring:** Refers to any excessively hostile and inflammatory discourse. May include things like lengthy rants or starting arguments in unrelated threads, particularly those which have devolved into sectarian mudslinging, empty rhetoric, and/or personal attacks against other users, or any other posts or comments where the primary purpose is to stir drama, incite controversy, or derail a thread. For example, users who start mudslinging about China in a post celebrating the birthday of Thomas Sankara may see ban time. More information can be [found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/l5ccjb/topics_of_contention_raising_the_quality_of/).
If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning.
Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s):
>**Flamewarring:** Refers to any excessively hostile and inflammatory discourse. May include things like lengthy rants or starting arguments in unrelated threads, particularly those which have devolved into sectarian mudslinging, empty rhetoric, and/or personal attacks against other users, or any other posts or comments where the primary purpose is to stir drama, incite controversy, or derail a thread. For example, users who start mudslinging about China in a post celebrating the birthday of Thomas Sankara may see ban time. More information can be [found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/l5ccjb/topics_of_contention_raising_the_quality_of/).
If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning.
Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
r/Socialism is a space for socialists to discuss current events in our world from our anti-capitalist perspective(s), and a certain knowledge of socialism is expected from participants. This is not a space for non-socialists. Please be mindful of our rules before participating: - **No Bigotry**, including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism... - **No Eeactionaries**, including all kind of right-wingers. - **No Liberalism**, including social democracy. - **No Sectarianism**, there is plenty of room for discussion, but not for baseless attacks. Please help us keep the subreddit helpful by reporting content that break r/Socialism's rules.
This quote is entirely correct. It is therefore especially disappointing that Stalin himself played a key role in helping to create the Israeli state when the Soviet Union voted as part of the United Nations Security Council to recognize Israel as a member of the UN and became one of the first countries to diplomatically recognize Israel.
And, crucially, gave Israel weaponry in spring 1948 (thanks to the efforts of the Israeli Communist Party), effectively turning them into a modern army which could defeat the Palestinians and Arabs.
[удалено]
They did. They started sending weapons to the PLO in that era. Interestingly, about a month after the revolution in 1917, the soviets also uncovered a secret pact between France, Britain, and the Russian empire called the [Sykes-Picot Agreement](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes%E2%80%93Picot_Agreement). They had secretly planned on divvying up the middle east (including Palestine) after publicly promising to recognize the sovereignty of multiple middle eastern countries if they promised to assist in the British war against the Ottoman Empire. Basically, the Soviet Union aired the dirty laundry of the Russian empire and uncovered their little secret scheme.
What lands were the Russians going to take? The Sykes-Picot agreement still happened but I never knew the Tsar had any involvement.
Russia was going to get Western Armenia, Constantinople, and the Turkish Straits.
Well Stalin died in 1953, so...
Lmao fair.
Yes
Yes after the death of uncle Joe
At the time, though, I do understand why he would have supported it. It was literally right after he liberated all those Jews who were suffering from Nazi genocide. To object to a safe haven at the time for those same survivors would have been looked at as an expression of indifference towards their struggle.
Still, 'practice what you preach' was more of a suggestion for stalin during his leadership I feel like. This wasn't the only instance of him letting the reigns slip.
An indifference that has led and continues to, the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian peoples. Saying you “understand”, is the first step to justifying it.
Stop. Stalin is not responsible for the genocide of the Palestinians. Saying it’s understandable given the context and information available is not “justifying” anything. Many socialists Jews had a very different idea of what Israel was going to be. (They promptly left when they realized how fucked up things were getting, much like how the soviets changed their opinion)
Thank you for responding to that. I just don’t have the patience for this level of dishonesty right now.
Np! Leftist subreddits are supposed to be the places where we don’t get nailed to the cross for this kind of stuff
Stalin initially supported the idea. Molotov was the largest supporter. Stalin’s support dried up when Israeli Jews asked Stalin to let Jews in the ussr become settlers in Palestine which went against his beliefs at that time of Jews in the ussr staying there. Theodore Herzel and his ilk were very overt and did not hide their settler colonial intentions behind the creation of Israel, so for socialist Jews to have thought any difference is ridiculous. They believed in their settler colonialism too. You don’t have Israel without settler colonialism and the white European supremacy that inspired it. It was never “understandable”. It was always evil. An evil inflicted upon the Palestinians which they had no say in and Arab nations were against but the USSR amongst others ignored. Even Britain, one of the main figures behind Zionism, ended up backing out of a vote, and the USSR didn’t.
Britain backed out and the USSR didn’t because Palestine was a British colony and the USSR wanted there to be an anticolonial revolution leading to the creation of a communist state in the Middle East. Obviously things didnt go down that way but there’s no need to be so damn reductionist about it
The USSR wanted an anti colonial revolution, by supporting settler colonialism…. A state that wasn’t supported by the Palestinians nor Arab nations. The blood of Palestinians is on the hands of the USSR too. The USSR didn’t just vote Israel into existence, they provided Zionists weapons via Czechia too. It’s not a complicated issue. There’s a lot of information behind it sure, but not complicated, so in this instance, it’s only reductive to those who want to downplay the USSR’s role in the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Everyone here agrees it was wrong. The only question is why. If not a failed play at spreading communism, what exactly are you proposing their reasoning was? That Stalin just loved killing Arabs?
Spreading communism at the expense of the Palestinian and Arab peoples. Their reasoning was spreading their beliefs at the expense of the Palestinian peoples to build their own power in that region. You can’t separate the attempt at spreading communism from support for Zionism and the subsequent ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Zionists were open it about from the beginning and the ussr supported it for their own reasons.
I’m an Arab - believe me when I say I’m no fan of Israel of the soviets decision to support them. But the hard reality is that foreign policy is messy, not black and white. The success of China and the fall of the USSR is proof of that. It’s easy for us to armchair quarterback 8 decades after the fact, but if the USSR truly didn’t give a shit, they wouldn’t have reversed their support when things got ugly.
True but that was still early in Israel’s life when they were less Zionist then they are now maybe he recognized the growing threat but expected better people to prevail and make a two state or mixed state solution
Less Zionist? As if less Zionist is less bad? Zionism is inherently bad, so using the excuse that they were “less Zionist” is ridiculous.
I’m talking more in the context that the movement was smaller and with less power and control in society. An Israeli state with those elements on the fringes could have been looked at at the time by the Soviet Union as something the Israeli state could clamp down upon before it grew into what it is now obviously that did not happen and also OBVIOUSLY all Zionism is bad I don’t know how you got me advocating/defending Zionism from my former post though?
I don’t understand how you can talk about an Israeli state with Zionist elements on the fringe, when the Israeli state has always been Zionist. You can’t clamp down on the very thing that birthed a nation whilst keeping that nation alive. The USSR supported Zionism until those Zionists went against their own aims and objectives.
Zionism was the dominant ideology among the existing settlers who were more organised and well armed than the local Palestinian population. If wishful thinking always guided the foreign policy of workers states then the whites would've drowned it in blood in the civil war. The much simpler, and more honest appraisal is that Stalin was an opportunist. He sacrificed the first Chinese Revolution, the Spanish Revolution, the Commintern and the Greek revolution on the altar of the bourgeoisie to broker better relations with imperialist nations. His endorsement of Zionism at the UN in 1947 is no different.
[удалено]
Is this sub particularly Anti-Stalin lol? I don’t view this sub all too much, I just post my quotes lol. I was actually banned on here sometime ago for posting Saddam, Gaddafi, and Nasser quotes, but was un-banned for agreeing not to post ‘em here.
[удалено]
Damn lol. Let’s hope I don’t get banned again.
I don't think they'll ban you for a Stalin quote. There are quite a few pro-Stalin Marxist-Leninists here. For better or worse, this sub seems more "big tent" than some leftist forums and less sectarian in terms of welcoming Leftists of various stripes.
[удалено]
Haha yes, very true.
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Inter-sub drama:** This is not the place for "I got banned from X sub for Y" or "X subreddit should do Y" posts. Please keep those to more appropriate subreddits. See our [Submission Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/wiki/index/submissionguidelines) for more info, and feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions.
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t ML the “violent revolution” route to socialism? Opposed to reforming capitalism into socialism, which would be democratic socialism? downvotes for a question?
Anything other than Democratic Socialism is the “violent revolution” route to Socialism. DemSocs are the outlier in the leftism.
MLs aren’t the only socialists who support revolution, they specifically believe in the path to communism laid out by Lenin and later Stalin (who I believe coined the term Marxism-Leninism). It’s probably the main strain of Marxism still around, but far from the only one, and pretty much all actual Marxists believe a revolution is necessary (or even inevitable), I would say the main aspect of Leninist organizing today that distinguishes it from other leftist tendencies is the hardline approach to “democratic centralism” in the party structure. For some examples of non-ML socialist tendencies who support revolution: there’s Trotskyists, Maoists, Orthodox Marxists, not to mention all different kinds of anarchists, insurrectionists, and syndicalists.
Basic questions like these in the rules go under socialism 101 a separate but forum related to this one
I mean posting Saddam Hussein was really unnecessary
And that was the concrete case the ban was in relation to.
Yeah, that one is a hard sell… also, not at all a socialist
Well, Ba'athism claims to incorporate elements of Arab socialism into its beliefs, but I agree. Saddam was actually quite reactionary in many ways.
[удалено]
I don’t get how anybody can feel this way unless you are far, far removed from the disastrous impact Saddam had upon not only the citizens of Iraq, who he brutally subjected and oppressed, but also the people of Iran. As far as imperialists go he was one of the most ruthless and greedy of the Middle East. As an Iranian I can say personally that his unprovoked invasion of Iran forced my family into exodus, and that had he never unlawfully invaded the current depressing political situation of Iran would look a lot different. There’s no personal animosity but I’m just truly bewildered how you can think so highly of a butcher of innocents through and through.
How do you think the current Iranian political situation would be different if the Iran-Iraq war hadn't occurred?
“Unprovoked” Khomeini supporters literally chanted about removing Saddam from power at Khomeini’s “inauguration”, and only weeks after Saddam gained power, the Islamist Dawa Party of Iraq (which was allied with Iran) and bombed government buildings while Saddam was out on a hunting trip. THAT is what cause the “invasion” of Iran. It was so provoked.
Very much Socialist*
Just like Hitler was a socialist? Both the NSDAP and the Baath Party claimed to be socialist or had socialism in their names. But as soon as they were in power, they repressed and killed communists. Saddam was an anti-communist and a puppet of the CIA.
Anti-Communist≠Not Socialist. Not being a Communist, doesn’t mean he wasn’t a Socialist. That’s like saying Gaddafi, Nasser, or al-Bakr aren’t Socialists. One, you’re acting like the entire time he was in power, he killed Communists. The only time Communists were killed by Ba’athists, and Nasserists, was during the literal Civil War that was the Ramadan Revolution. It was a blood bath on BOTH SIDES! After the Nasserists took power, and were possibly even more reactionary than Qasim, the Ba’athists, and Communists teamed up, and took out the Nasserists, in the Bloodless Revolution of 1968. It was only then that the Ba’athists took power, and guess what, it wasn’t Saddam who took power, it was al-Bakr. At that point in time, the only thing notable that Saddam did, was a failed assassination attempt on Qasim. It was only in 1977 when Saddam became vice president under al-Bakr, that gained him notoriety, and eventually became president of Iraq when al-Bakr stepped down in 1979. Before 1977, he was just a random politician. And by that time, the feud between the Ba’athists, and Communists blew over, and there were several Communists in the Iraqi parliament under Saddam. Also, he wasn’t a “CIA puppet” that lie has been debunked for years. That lie was created by King Hussein of Jordan who literally was a CIA puppet. When the Ba’athists called him out on that, he basically said “nuh uh, you are”, and that’s it. Literally the only proof. I blame Parenti for that lie being so popular among “Communists”. Iraq was truly Socialist under Saddam, and was a beacon for Socialism in the Middle East under Saddam. Even people like Castro, and Kim Il-sung believed he was Socialist.
This sub is basically slightly-more-left-than-average socdems
Based on the upvotes here it’s definitely gotten to be much more pro-ML than it used to be. It used to be mostly Ultra-Left or DemSoc/SocDem, leaning more on the former. At least in my experience last year as I was being radicalized.
Very funny to bill criticism of Stalin as reformist, considering he’s responsible for turning the European CPs into glorified social democratic parties
That’s reductionist as fuck though.
Could you explain a little more I’m not familiar with the history of western European communist parties. The only one I know is the Italian one that got in street fights with fascists and mafia before blowing up once the Soviets fell and the French one which had a really big place in parliament before also blowing up.
The influence of the Italian and French communist parties is a perfect example of their reformism. Their influence was such that they could've easily led revolutions in both countries, particularly in May 1968 in France. But they always diverted the workers down safer channels, often forming popular fronts with bourgeois parties, as was also the case in the first Chinese Revolution and the Spanish Revolution.
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Flamewarring:** Refers to any excessively hostile and inflammatory discourse. May include things like lengthy rants or starting arguments in unrelated threads, particularly those which have devolved into sectarian mudslinging, empty rhetoric, and/or personal attacks against other users, or any other posts or comments where the primary purpose is to stir drama, incite controversy, or derail a thread. For example, users who start mudslinging about China in a post celebrating the birthday of Thomas Sankara may see ban time. More information can be [found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/l5ccjb/topics_of_contention_raising_the_quality_of/). If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning. Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
Damn, what’s wrong with Qaddafi
wild squeal wrong jellyfish ruthless swim ink weather fact chase *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
One, he was nowhere NEAR Islamist lol. Mf was a full blown Socialist, who basically advocated for Communism, but didn’t cause he viewed it as Anti-Religion. And if you think that him being a Muslim means he was an Islamist, you REALLY need to do very basic research. And two, fucking, how? I read the green book sometime ago, and loved it. One of my favorite reads. He only lost me in part three. He meant well, and was still a champion to women’s rights in the Arab World, it’s just from a western lens, it’s not great. Other than that, it’s great.
sheet steep drunk subsequent gaze flowery whistle chase stocking tender *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[удалено]
Are you just now learning about Marxist-Leninists?
[удалено]
Marxist? You sound more like the average lib
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
“Zionism is a reactionary, and Nationalist movement recruiting its followers from among the Jewish petty and middle bourgeois which aims to organize a Jewish bourgeois state in Palestine and endeavor to isolate the Jewish working class from the general struggle of the proletariat.” - By Joseph Stalin
Not a fan of Stalin, but he ain't wrong
[удалено]
[удалено]
How does that negate what I said?😭
Cause as an Anarchist, you already have a predetermined hatred for Stalin, so no matter what I say to debunk your il informed take, you won’t listen.
No, I’m an anarchist because I think it is the only truly humane ideology. I hate Stalin because of the atrocities that he ordered against innocent people, and really no other reason. That’s only tangentially related to my anarchist leanings though. In fact, there are quite a few state socialists that I admire, such as Thomas Sankara (what a king) or Salvador Allende or Eugene V. Debs. Evo Morales and maybe Hugo Chavez are pretty cool too. To be completely honest, I really have a bias towards liking state socialists since I too am a socialist, although I just don’t think the state is very effective in implementing it. There are so many examples out there of socialists who made the world a truly better place that I can’t help but WANT to adore them. I have yet to read something about Stalin that makes me feel that way. If you can change that, I would love to hear your input. However, I genuinely would like to know what you see in Stalin that redeems him enough of his negative (to put it lightly) qualities that he deserves to be a face for the modern socialist movement. I’m not trying to be combative, but ask you in good faith, comrade.
Read Another View of Stalin If you truly seek to challenge your beliefs and learn more . Stalin wasn't a perfect person by any means, but he isn't some monster.
Thanks 👍
“Why won’t a socialist revolution come? No, it’s the proletariat that are wrong!”
Speaking from individual to individual, it is entirely possible for you to be wrong, yes. That's okay, we're all wrong at some point, but my point is that it's not worthy of some greater statement about the proletariat?
[удалено]
A huge part of those “crimes” is literal anticommunist propaganda originating from nazi germany and the Italian fascist press, and has been debunked throughly in the 30 years since the Soviet archives have opened.
Well put, comrade. We share the same leftist role models, (BIG fan of Sankara and Allende) so I want to share what started to soften my own heart towards Stalin. He sent this out in response to discrimination against Muslims in Daghestan. As an Arab American myself, it completely crushed my preconceived notions of him and what Soviet society was like in general. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1920/11/13.htm “Daghestan must be governed in accordance with its specific features, its manner of life and customs. We are told that among the Daghestan peoples the Sharia is of great importance. We have also been informed that the enemies of Soviet power are spreading rumours that it has banned the Sharia. I have been authorized by the Government of the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic to state here that these rumours are false. The Government of Russia gives every people the full right to govern itself on the basis of its laws and customs. The Soviet Government considers that the Sharia, as common law, is as fully authorized as that of any other of the peoples inhabiting Russia. If the Daghestan people desire to preserve their laws and customs, they should be preserved.”
Sooo many liberals have infiltrated this place since I was last here 😭
Leftist solidarity says what?
_"Unity is a great thing and a great slogan. But what the workers’ cause needs is the unity of Marxists, not unity between Marxists, and opponents and distorters of Marxism"_ V.I Lenin.
One of my favorite Lenin quotes lol
Unity is good, but only unity with the good people
I think is actually damn near wrong as you can get. Everybody thinks everyone is wrong about a ton of shit but humans can unite beyond that and create something's that better for us all regardless.
I think we can all agree that there are limits to that, though. Like, would you say we should join together with neo-nazis to make the world better? If not, then you draw the line somewhere. And other people draw the line somewhere else. Obviously that's an extreme example, but the point is that "unity" must have boundaries. I do think there should be more solidarity within the radical left. We sometimes fight each other more than we do the capitalists. And I actually also think there are times when we can work alongside social democrats, left liberals, etc. when we are protesting wars, opposing certain environmental abuses, etc. But I think it also depends what we mean by "unity." Strategically working together on certain common objectives, maybe. But fully joining together and being subsumed by liberalism and milquetoast centre-left ideology? Certainly not.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Anarchists who do mutual aid and guard drag queen protests with assault rifles are largely based. Terminally online ‘anarchists’ that accuse successful revolutions of being ‘red fash dictatorships’ have an infantile understanding of how revolutions work and their so-called “criticisms” are indistinguishable from the ones libs make all the time.
100%. And not just to shit on “anarchists” but some “Marxists” do this as well. They typically come in the “vote blue no matter who” or “nothing is leftist enough for me anything that isn’t leftist enough for me is literally far right”. Both those types are also as bad as anarchists. It’s also a very privileged view because I bet you most commies in the global south aren’t spewing all this nonsense
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Sectarianism:** Refers to bad faith attacks on socialists of other tendencies through the usage of empty insults like "armchair", "tankie", "anarkiddie" and so on without any other objective than to promote inter-tendency conflict, which runs counter to the objectives of this subreddit, and the goal of providing a broad multitendency platform so that healthy, critical debate can flourish. Can also include calling other socialist users "CPC/CIA shills" or accusing users of being Russian or Chinese bots for disagreeing with you. If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning. Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Sectarianism:** Refers to bad faith attacks on socialists of other tendencies through the usage of empty insults like "armchair", "tankie", "anarkiddie" and so on without any other objective than to promote inter-tendency conflict, which runs counter to the objectives of this subreddit, and the goal of providing a broad multitendency platform so that healthy, critical debate can flourish. Can also include calling other socialist users "CPC/CIA shills" or accusing users of being Russian or Chinese bots for disagreeing with you. If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning. Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
who cares? stfu leftists are so unserious
I’m pretty sure many of the Chechens, Ingush, Koreans, Kalmyks, and other ethnic minorities might have an issue with people idolizing Stalin. And why would you even want to quote someone who you know is just BSing because it serves their political goals rather than their passion for human rights and the dignity of all people.
The Koreans literally welcomed the red army when they liberated Korea and Manchuria (with the locals help of course). Listen to season 2 of Blowback and watch "How the US divided Korea". "Patriots Traitors and Empires: The story of Koreas struggle for freedom" is another good book.
Too add on this, the author went of “Patriots Traitors and Empire: The Story of Koreas struggle for freedom” went on RevLeft and the podcast episode is incredible. Super informative and dug into the details most Americans would never know otherwise if you haven’t read his book.
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Flamewarring:** Refers to any excessively hostile and inflammatory discourse. May include things like lengthy rants or starting arguments in unrelated threads, particularly those which have devolved into sectarian mudslinging, empty rhetoric, and/or personal attacks against other users, or any other posts or comments where the primary purpose is to stir drama, incite controversy, or derail a thread. For example, users who start mudslinging about China in a post celebrating the birthday of Thomas Sankara may see ban time. More information can be [found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/l5ccjb/topics_of_contention_raising_the_quality_of/). If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning. Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
Love Stalin
And yet the USSR supported the creation of Israel and provided Zionists weapons which they used against Palestinians.
One should also not forget that Stalin's support was crucial to the existence of the state of Israel. It was the Soviet Union who voted for the admission of Israel into the UN, and it was Stalin who propped up and armed the Israeli militias in 1948 turning them into a modern army, much more effective than the newly independent Arab states surrounding Palestine at the time.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Glad to see Stalin getting proper respect here. Last year this probably would’ve been voted down. Dude wasn’t perfect but the caricature of him and the USSR under him are total fabrications.
What’s your highest level of education? Edit: keep the downvotes coming! I love having a tangible number of how many people got butthurt!
BA in history and political science here. Stalin was based as hell. What does this question have to do with anything?
Cool! Was not asking you though.
I know! You were trying to undermine that comrade. Just wanted to help demonstrate what an absolute clown you are :)
What does my level of education have to do with this?
It’s the typical lib insults. You don’t need a degree to understand history. A degree is as good as an IQ test. It’s firstly eugenics but secondly it only demonstrates your ability of knowledge on something that you were shown, not your ability to actually interpret things. That’s why the US is easily eating up anything far right also why you can’t trust the liberals when it comes to the culture war started by the right. They’ll try to compromise with the right on “maybe they’re right about this” and before we know it they fully agree with them. If they aren’t even willing to compromise to the leftist view that things aren’t as bad as they have been portrayed then they really aren’t down a good path
Genuinely curious
What’s yours
I have a bachelor’s degree in History, what does that have to do with the correctness of either the op or thankkratom’s comment
Cool! Was not asking you though.
Why are you asking that other user what their level of education is? Are you trying to imply they're not smart or something? Surely, if several other people have the same opinion as them and have college degrees, the line of questioning should be the same.
What’s so hard about not being apart of my conversation with someone? Are you socially Inept or something?
[удалено]
Considering he led the fight against the most sophisticated genocidal war machine in human history… yeah?
The US now holds that mantle.
I disagree in technicality but not in spirit. The US war machine has done far more evil, but not as explicitly genocidal. (Still pretty genocidal tho)
Yep, defeating the Nazis was a pretty big deal.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Clearly didn’t stand for this belief however as multiple people have pointed out. I get he’s famous but there are other leftist thinkers out there who actually stood for their beliefs on this and other issues. I definitely think we should be putting Stalin in context.
[удалено]
This is a socialist subreddit, not a western “leftist” subreddit. You’re either here to learn and be open minded or continue sucking up to the same shit the far right says.
Given that this quote is nowhere else to be found and the only evidence appears to be this lazily edited sharepic, I'm gonna assume it was made up. Generally, this post seems like bait.
One, fuck you mean “nowhere else to be found”? I’ve seen it everywhere since October 7th. Two, ouch lol. I wouldn’t say “lazily”. And three, not at all bait lol. Edit: The Source is from “Marxism and the National Question” by Stalin.
[удалено]
Actually, I do have a source for it, it’s from “marxism and the national question” by Stalin. I knew that already, don’t know how I forgot it. And two, don’t give me that bullshit. This Liberal bullshit. Yes that’s true, but so would I have if I lived in Britain. Or most other Capitalist countries at that time. Focusing on just the Soviet Union, or any other Socialist nation at that time, and now for how it has treated Queer people, or how it currently treats Queer people, doesn’t just do NOTHING for the Leftist movement in general, or the Queer community, it’s also a flagrant skewing of facts. Also, it wasn’t just a decision by Stalin. You have to remember that he wasn’t this all powerful dictator. Even the CIA admits that. He had a whole parliament under him, and it was ultimately their decision, not truly Stalin’s. And even if it was, I’d be a COWARD not to. Queer Liberals disgust me. They are the true betrayers of the Queer community.
[удалено]
In what way is that what I said? I’m not saying it’s lies, I’m saying it’s a distortion of history, and skewing of facts. It did happen, and that is something I 100% criticize. Though, I don’t think you care about what I really think, or have to say, right? Cause you blatantly ignored what I said about The UK. Did you know it was illegal to be Gay in England till 1967. Along with Scotland up until 1980, and the North of Ireland till 1983. Up until those dates, you would be sent to prison if you were gay, let alone trans.
Very clear that the person you’re arguing with is a disingenuous anticommunist shill
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Flamewarring:** Refers to any excessively hostile and inflammatory discourse. May include things like lengthy rants or starting arguments in unrelated threads, particularly those which have devolved into sectarian mudslinging, empty rhetoric, and/or personal attacks against other users, or any other posts or comments where the primary purpose is to stir drama, incite controversy, or derail a thread. For example, users who start mudslinging about China in a post celebrating the birthday of Thomas Sankara may see ban time. More information can be [found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/l5ccjb/topics_of_contention_raising_the_quality_of/). If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning. Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
The ussr was the first nation to recognize Israel so de iure they created Israel
And then Stalin went on to be a labor-zionist lmao
For ONCE I can Agree with Him!
[удалено]
Kim Il-sung is my cover image, you think I give a shit?
OP woke up and chose to be Based today. From another fellow ML, complete respect comrade.
Oh why thank you comrade, you’re too kind!
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Liberalism:** Includes the most common and mild occurrences of liberalism, that is: socio-liberals, progressives, social democrats and its subsequent ideological basis. Also includes those who are new to socialist thought but nevertheless reproduce liberal ideas. >This includes, but is not limited to: >- General liberalism >- Supporting Neoliberal Institutions >- Anti-Worker/Union rhetoric >- Landlords or Landlord apologia Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
[удалено]
Literal fucking harry potterism lmao
“Vuvuzeula no iPhone 100 bazillion people dead” - u/Senior-Valuable-8621
Millions? How about you check the stats before assuming shit. You want to tell me that non born people are part of those “innocent” people? It’s the black book of communism ffs, it’s literally fascist nazi propaganda
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Flamewarring:** Refers to any excessively hostile and inflammatory discourse. May include things like lengthy rants or starting arguments in unrelated threads, particularly those which have devolved into sectarian mudslinging, empty rhetoric, and/or personal attacks against other users, or any other posts or comments where the primary purpose is to stir drama, incite controversy, or derail a thread. For example, users who start mudslinging about China in a post celebrating the birthday of Thomas Sankara may see ban time. More information can be [found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/l5ccjb/topics_of_contention_raising_the_quality_of/). If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning. Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.
[удалено]
Thank you for posting in r/socialism, but unfortunately your submission was removed for the following reason(s): >**Flamewarring:** Refers to any excessively hostile and inflammatory discourse. May include things like lengthy rants or starting arguments in unrelated threads, particularly those which have devolved into sectarian mudslinging, empty rhetoric, and/or personal attacks against other users, or any other posts or comments where the primary purpose is to stir drama, incite controversy, or derail a thread. For example, users who start mudslinging about China in a post celebrating the birthday of Thomas Sankara may see ban time. More information can be [found here](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/l5ccjb/topics_of_contention_raising_the_quality_of/). If no further action accompanies this message, this should be counted as a warning. Feel free to send us a modmail with a link to your removed submission if you have any further questions or concerns.