• hitwright@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s Russias way to keep the soviet legacy intact and justify it’s war of aggression to “denazify” Ukraine. There is a huge cultural shift of breaking off any remnants of Soviet “glory” in the country. Sadly it’s hidden behind a lot of valid points, that would explain the abstain votes.

      1. Expresses deep concern about increased frequency of attempts and activities intended to desecrate or demolish monuments erected in remembrance of those who fought against Nazism during the Second World War, as well as to unlawfully exhume or remove the remains of such persons, and in this regard urges States to fully comply with their relevant obligations, inter alia, under article 34 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 194
      • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Refusing to condemn Nazis and insisting on destroying and desecrating the monuments and mortal remains of the people who defeated Nazism seems like it would only vindicate Russias accusations, particularly when you’re putting up statues to people like Bandera in their place

  • DMCMNFIBFFF@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    US, Canada, Australia, and most of Europe voted against censorship.

    It seems Iran was absent, but Israel voted for it.

    From 1939-1941 the UK fought Nazis while the USSR collaborated with them.

    South Korea abstained, but North Korea voted for it, as did Myanmar.

  • HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Equal shame for all the countries that abstained. There is not a damn chance any country is genuinely unsure how they want to vote so an abstain vote in this case is just “I want to vote against but am too embarrassed to.”

    Which happens to be the entire West. Surprise surprise

    • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      We had a shitstorm in Poland over this, it’s extremely shameful that a country that suffered so much from nazism did voted like that, but government just responded “EU decided this”

    • Manticore@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Tell me about it. NZ has the most right-wing neo-liberal pro-American-politicking cabinet we’ve had in a long long time. (The PM is also so incompetent he’s polling the lowest approval we’ve had for a long time, possibly ever). They got in power off the backs of post-Covid economic hardship, despite having no proposed solutions other than funding landlords and cutting environmental policy.

      If it had been put to the citizens, I believe we would’ve been for it. But the current cabinet doesn’t want to piss off American partners no doubt, hoping abstaining let’s them sit on the fence a little longer while pretending we’re ultimately n9t the bad guy. That will be the reason for most of those abstaining.

      I’m disgusted.

    • bob_lemon@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s not a surprise, really. The proposal was sponsored by the Russian Federation and includes several talking point that they have since actively used to justify their fucking invasion of Ukraine (I.e. Nazis working to disrupt democracies cross-border).

  • KazuchijouNo@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    UN General Assembly resolution on “combatting the glorificarion of Nazism, neo-Nazism […] Contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and memes made with mematic”

  • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Wasn’t that UN resolution’s one of the definitions of Nazism, that “the belief that the Ukrainian language and people are not a Leninist fabrication, to break the unity of the Russian empire”?

      • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        It is introduced by Russia and the main problem seems to be that any sort of collaborator with any sort of Nazi organization is considered to be jus the same. The problem with that is, that a number of anti Soviet groups did that as well, which now are seen as heros for their fight for independence of some formerly Soviet countries. That is particularily true for Ukraine, as Stalin did commit mass murder only a few years before the Nazis did invade Ukraine. Ukraine was also occupied by German forces in WW1 and although it was an occupation Stalin was seen as worse. So a lot of them were initially rather happy about it. That quickly changed though.

        https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2022/11/09/why-france-and-51-other-countries-voted-against-the-un-resolution-condemning-nazism_6003471_8.html

        • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          “The problem with the resolution is that it says Nazis are bad, even when they’re killing Russians!”

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          The fact that Nazi collaborators are seen as heroes is a problem. The Communists were in no way comparable in evil to the Nazis, the Communists were a massive force for progress as compared to their peers, while the Nazis invented industrialized mass murder. Further, the majority of Ukrainians actually believe the breakup of the USSR was a bad thing.

          The reason is simple, transitioning from Socialism to Capitalism resulted in an estimated 7 million excess deaths globally, a huge spike in poverty and wealth inequality, destruction of safety nets, and a rise in far-right nationalists directly funded and supported by the West. This is why Nazi collaborators like Stepan Bandera are seeing resurging popularity in Ukraine, and this is a bad thing.

          Further, the 1930s famine in Ukraine was by no means an intentional mass murder, such claims originate with the Nazis trying to discredit the Soviet Union. Even the Wikipedia page on Holodomor recognizes that claims of intentional murder are dubious at the most generous:

          While most scholars are in consensus that the main cause of the famine was largely man-made, it remains in dispute whether the Holodomor was intentional, whether it was directed at Ukrainians, and whether it constitutes a genocide, the point of contention being the absence of attested documents explicitly ordering the starvation of any area in the Soviet Union.

          The truth of the matter is that it was a horrible tragedy that got spun by the Nazis as evidence of the evils of the Soviet Union, as it was free propaganda to paint it as such by the Nazis, and useful for the anti-communist west to spread the Nazi narrative as from a Realpolitik perspective any means of discrediting Socialism was a good means. This is further affirmed by the openining of the Soviet Archives and the wealth of information confirmed and denied by them.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              The famine in the 1930s was the last major famine outside of wartime in Russia and the surrounding areas until the collapse of the USSR, in a country where under the Tsar famine was regular and common. As a consequence of providing free and high quality healthcare, lowering working hours, improving labor conditions, and achieving food security, life expectancy doubled from the 30s to the 70s. The famine was a tragedy, but the Soviets were also responsible for ending famine and dramatically improving the lives of the working class.

              As for the Great Purge, that wasn’t something targeting Ukrainians specifically, but all manner of criminals. The purges themselves usually just meant expulsion from the party, but often criminal charges were levied against former members of the White Army, Nazi collaborators, rapists, corrupt officials, and other serious crimes. 700,000 were condemned to death, with many of those condemned being aquitted and not actually executed, though it is true that there was unfortunately excess.

              You’ll want to read this excerpt from the book The Triumph of Evil, specifically page 74:

              The claim that Stalin and other Soviet leaders killed millions (Conquest, 1990) also appears to be wildly exaggerated. More recent evidence from the Soviet archives opened up by the anticommunist Yeltsin government indicate that the total number of death sentences (including of both existing prisoners and those outside captivity) over the 1921-1953 interval (covering the period of Stalin’s partial and complete rule) was between 775,866 and 786,098 (Getty, Rittersporn, and Zemskov, 1993). Given that the archive data originates from anti-Stalin (and even anticommunist) sources, it is extremely unlikely that they underestimate the true number (Thurston, 1996). In addition, the Soviet Union has long admitted to executing at least 12,733 people between 1917 and 1921, mostly during the Foreign Interventionist Civil War of 1918-22, although it is possible that as many as 40,000 more may have been executed unofficially (Andics, 1969).

              These data would seem to imply about 800,000 executions. The figure of 800,000 may greatly overestimate the number of actual executions, as it includes many who were sentenced to death but who were not actually caught or who had their sentences reduced (Getty, Rittersporn, and Zemskov, 1993). In fact, Vinton (1993) has provided evidence indicating that the number of executions was significantly below the number of civilian prisoners sentenced to death in the Soviet Union, with only 7,305 executions in a sample of 11,000 prisoners authorized to be executed in 1940 (or scarcely 600/o ). In addition, most (681,692) of the 780,000 or so death sentences passed under Stalin were issued during the 1937-38 period (Getty, Ritterspom, and Zemskov, 1993), when Soviet paranoia about foreign subversion reached its zenith due to a 1936 alliance between Nazi Germany and fascist Japan that was specifically directed against the Soviet Union (Manning, 1993) and due to a public 1936 resolution by a group of influential anti-Stalin foreigners (the Fourth International which was allied with the popular but exiled Russian dissident Leon Trotsky) advocating the overthrow of the Soviet government by illegal means (Glotzer, 1968).

              Stalin initially set a cap of 186,500 imprisonments and 72,950 death penalties for a 1937 special operation to combat this threat that was to be carried out by local 3-man tribunals called ''troikas" (Getty, Ritterspom, and Zemskov, 1993). As the tribunals passed death sentences before the accused had even been arrested, local authorities requested increases in their own quotas (Knight, 1993), and there was an official request in 1938 for a doubling of the amount of prisoner transport that had been initially requisitioned to carry out the original campaign “quotas” of the tribunals (Getty, Ritterspom, and Zemskov, 1993). However, even if there had been twice as many actual • executions as originally planned, the number would still be less than 150,000. Many of those sentenced by the tribunals may have escaped capture, and many more may have had their death sentence refused or revoked by higher authorities before arrest/execution could take place, especially since Stalin later realized that excesses had been committed in the 1937-38 period, had a number of convictions overturned, and had many of the responsible local leaders punished (Thurston, 1996)."

              This is why relying exclusively on Wikipedia is silly, do some actual reading. A solid rule of thumb with respect to any Wikipedia article on enemies of the US is to look at where the figures and sources come from and analyze them yourself, as you can see Wikipedia made the error of conflating condemnations with executions.

              Your entire point, though, relies on painting the Communists as comparable evils to the Nazis, which is quantitatively and qualitatively divorced from reality. Again, the Nazis industrialized mass murder deliberately, and figures like Bandera sided with them deliberately against the Soviets, who were a force for good. Upholding Nazi sympathizers is a bad thing.

              • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                Your entire point, though, relies on painting the Communists as comparable evils to the Nazis, which is quantitatively and qualitatively divorced from reality. Again, the Nazis industrialized mass murder deliberately, and figures like Bandera sided with them deliberately against the Soviets, who were a force for good. Upholding Nazi sympathizers is a bad thing.

                Just to be clear, as in my initial post:

                So a lot of them were initially rather happy about it. That quickly changed though.

                I pretty much said that Stalin was mass murderer and did not run Ukraine very well. I do not think any of what you wrote really disproves that. You do not need to be on Nazi level evil, to be evil.

                We are also talking about modern day Russia introducing the resolution for a reason. Basically it would be Bandera wanted an independent Ukraine, so everybody who wants an independent Ukraine is a Nazi. If the West agrees with that resolution, then that would be used. This way they choose to be absent, as to not be in that vote.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  The “lot of Ukrainians” that saw the USSR as worse than the Nazis were the far-right nationalists in Ukraine spearheaded by Bandera. A “lot of USians” were certainly upset at ending slavery, to the point of armed struggle, but that doesn’t make them correct, either. Bandera was a far-right nationalist that is supported by the modern far-right nationalists in Ukraine, which is why there’s a problem with Nazi brigades like Azov increasing in relevance in Ukrainian politics post-Maidan.

                  Further, again, the Soviets were unquestionably the most progressive force throughout the 20th century, from supporting revolutionary movements in Cuba, Algeria, South Africa, Vietnam, Korea, China, and more, to supporting Palestinians against genocide at the hands of Israel, to being responsible for 90% of the total Nazis killed in World War II and saving the world from fascism, to doubling life expectancies, over tripling literacy rates, democratizing the economy, and dramatically lowering wealth inequality.

                  Yes, there absolutely were problems faced internally and externally, and there were mistakes and excesses. These pale in comparison to the deliberate acts of mass genocide perpetrated by Western Europe and the US throughout the 20th century and today, all while the USSR was under constant siege and the Western world reaped the spoils of Imperialism.

                  Bandera and neo-Nazism are tied to Ukrainian politics. Nationalists are in control of politics, and the Banderites make up the majority of Nationalists in Ukraine. This is a sad reality that must be confronted, no matter what your stance on the modern Russo-Ukrainian war is, and it ties directly to Ukraine and the US being the only countries to vote against this resolution.

  • dryfter@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    As someone from the U.S., given the history we know about the Trail of Tears and trying to erase Native Americans from existence, this isn’t surprising in the least. Sad, yes, but not surprising.

    • Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Just like all the colonial powers voting “I don’t know about this one dawg” because they know their history

      • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I hate to tell you this, but basically every country has the same story, except the very young. They don’t need to learn from our history; they should learn from their own.

        • djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Lots of countries committed colonialism, not many countries committed genocide on the native population and stole their land to create and expand their nation. The U.S. and Israel are members of a short list.

            • Grapho@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              It’s horrifyingly common among European countries. That’s not “every country” unless you think only westerners are civilized.

              • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                Somali, Chile, Argentina, south Africa, Japan, Korea, China. It’s horrifyingly common no matter what area.

                • Grapho@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  South African apartheid was a Dutch colonial project. There’s been no genocide in China and the one in Korea was perpetrated by the US.

                  Also, what part of genocide do you think is about being civilized…?

                  Either you have the shittiest reading comprehension or you’re deliberately misrepresenting the argument to twist it into such a comical interpretation. You’re the one that said “every country” and proceeded to link to a NATOpedia page that fails to list a whole bunch of European/US genocides and even then is short, oh, about 96% of countries on earth.

                  Despite numerous instances of racial discrimination in many Latin American countries (most often at the hands of CIA backed organizations like Pinochet’s government or the Brazilian junta) the fact is that none of these countries were founded on a war in favor of maintaining slavery and expanding into indigenous lands. In fact, most were founded by the descendants of indigenous peoples casting off the their colonial masters.

                  To say that every country has been founded via genocide is to imply this is just a normal, unavoidable thing, which is genocide apologia. I wish westerners would stop whitewashing their Nazi ass societies like smearing the rest of us is a good alternative to doing something about the legacy of violence you were raised by.

        • djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Lots of countries committed colonialism, not many countries committed genocide on the native population and stole their land to create and expand their nation. The U.S. and Israel are members of a short list.

            • Grapho@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Ok? Those are the ones we were talking about on this map, youre moving the goalposts from “every” to “yeah the whole international community” which was the point to begin with. These countries get on their high horse when they have an exceptionally genocidal history.

              • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                These countries get on their high horse when they have an exceptionally genocidal history.

                My point was meant to point out how countries with genocidal histories like to point out others as the ones to avoid repeating examples of rather than their own history.

                You’re being straight up racist assuming it’s only white western countries commit genocides.

  • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It’s funny because it’s the same map as all the “Free world vs unfree world” maps

    • 7oo7@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Having a metropolis is not exempt from being under oppression.

      Would you show pictures of skyscrapers in the middle east to compare its human rights?

      • SexMachineStalin [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Because the people living in the many apartment towers in the top image aren’t being targeted in a literal Final Solution supported by the exact same powers that cry crocodile tears over made-up claims of “genocide in Xinjiang”.

        Also the Uyghurs living in Xinjiang are Chinese citizens.

        Death to ameriKKKa, Death to piSSrael

      • TankieTanuki [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Most Marxist-Leninists are skeptical of the Uyghur genocide narrative because the scant evidence we’re given comes from spurious sources like Adrian Zenz and an Australian weapons makers think tank called the ASPI. We’re also well-versed in the American empire’s history of hurling manufactured atrocity propaganda at its geopolitical rivals.

        Ignore the photographs of Xinjiang and Gaza. Just look at the maps to the left. They show that the only countries against China on the Uyghur issue are the exact same colonizing countries which are trying to subjugate the Global South on every other issue. We think this isn’t a coincidence.

      • MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        The accusation wasn’t human rights abuses, the accusation was genocide.

        The propaganda trick here is to throw out a henious story, completely fail to back it up with evidence, then gradually retreat to a far less damning accusation that’s essentially impossible to disprove. The smear sticks with most people and you then see how much of the lie you can get away with depending on the crowd.