Tankies finding one problematic aspect in any movement they oppose and blowing it all out of proportion to justify repression. Also see Kronstadt rebellion, Hungarian revolution etc.
However any problematic aspect in camps they support is just an “unfortunate mistake” nevertheless worth “critical support” to oppose
Western imperialism.
Just a tiny, insignificant problematic aspect like widespread support for fascism. No biggie. Btw, why are all our governments turning towards fascism? Where could this be coming from?
Moreover, present day Russia is a creation by the West itself. It was your governments that wanted the USSR to collapse, your goverments that elevated individuals like Putin post-collapse. Now you get a brutal, capitalist, Anti-LGBT hellpit, that the people of the West somehow pretend just materialized out of nothing, and wasn’t a result of their own negligence, their own unwillingness to prevent mass suffering in Eastern Europe and Asia after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
You are constantly in conflict with your own self-made monsters.
Just a tiny, insignificant problematic aspect like widespread support for fascism
“widespread”
Moreover, present day Russia is a creation by the West itself. It was your governments that wanted the USSR to collapse, your goverments that elevated individuals like Putin post-collapse. Now you get a brutal, capitalist, Anti-LGBT hellpit, that the people of the West somehow pretend just materialized out of nothing, and wasn’t a result of their own negligence, their own unwillingness to prevent mass suffering in Eastern Europe and Asia after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Sounds to me USSR revolution wasn’t that “successful” afer all
Sounds to me USSR revolution wasn’t that “successful” afer all
Reducing the USSR to a “failure” because it collapsed is ahistorical idealism and the height of liberal nonsense. We should judge a formation by the contradictions it resolved, not by whether it achieved eternity. Tsarist Russia was a feudal wreck where peasants starved and most couldn’t read. Within decades, the Soviet project doubled life expectancy, wiped out illiteracy, and industrialized a continent-sized country, dragging millions out of poverty.
Women gained full legal equality in 1918: abortion rights, divorce, workplace access, while Western women were still fighting for the vote. Socialized childcare and mass employment pulled women into public life on a scale capitalism wouldn’t match for generations.
And let’s not forget who actually broke fascism: the Red Army fought four-fifths of the Wehrmacht, lost 27 million people, and took Berlin while the West sat on the sidelines and even continued to trade with the nazi beast for years into the war (see the history of ford factories and IBM).
Collapse doesn’t retroactively erase what was built. “Anarchists” like you who dismiss seventy years of concrete progress because the state eventually fractured aren’t radical they’re reactionary. Material gains for millions don’t vanish because the system that produced them later unraveled.
The aftermath of the collapse proved the stakes that people like you refuse to grapple with. The 1990s were catastrophic. Life expectancy cratered, millions plunged into homelessness and destitution, women and children were trafficked by the tens of thousands, and the entire country was looted by oligarchs with IMF blessing. The chaos bred Yeltsin’s drunken comprador regime, which paved the way for Putin’s rise as his right-hand man a direct product of the Soviet collapse. When you cheer the unraveling of a workers’ state even a deeply flawed one, you’re not celebrating freedom. You’re celebrating the road that led straight to oligarchs, fascists, and some of the worst reaction imaginable. But you don’t really care about anyone but yourself.
Reducing the USSR to a “failure” because it collapsed is ahistorical idealism and the height of liberal nonsense
'Tis what MLs perpetually do for every Anarchist revolution.
Collapse doesn’t retroactively erase what was built. “Anarchists” like you who dismiss seventy years of concrete progress because the state eventually fractured aren’t radical they’re reactionary. It achieved the same great improvements for living standards all other such capitalist revolutions did throughout history. Material gains for millions don’t vanish because the system that produced them later unraveled.
I’m not erasing anything. I consider the USSR revolution a great success for capitalism, as it turned an agrarian society into an industrialized capitalist nation. It also imporoved the people’s living standard like any society becoming industrialized through capitalism. It’s the only thing all such ML revolutions every achieved and the only thing they can achieve.
It’s an abject failure at achieving communism (and anarchist argue, even socialism) though.
We have streets and buildinga named after a known fascist dictator in Greece who privately complained that Hitler didn’t ask him to join the axis. This proves nothing except that time and war fog glorifies figures that don’t always deserve it. This is exactly the kind of thing I was talking about. Purposefully disregard all nuance to paint a narrative.
We have streets and buildinga named after a known fascist dictator in Greece […] This proves nothing except that time and war fog glorifies figures that don’t always deserve it.
It proves there is a sizeable contingent in Greece that idolizes fascists and has enough institutional power to express that idolatry, and that there is not enough pushback in the rest of the culture to oppose that openly fascist expression. All of which is deeply worrisome and none of which negates the fact that there is likewise rampant Neo-naziism in Ukraine and that it has tremendous institutional and military power.
streets re-named after a fascist mass murderer, yes. so if the germans suddenly started renaming streets after adolf hitler, you’d dismiss that too. nothing to see here.
Bandera was also a national liberation actor. One person who understands nuance could usually understand that national liberation actors tend to be lionized and their misdeeds trivialized. It happens constantly. Campists don’t have a problem with mass murderers like Bandera, or Assad, or, Putin, they only have a problem when they’re not in their camp.
And for a national liberation actor, Bandera is receiving comparatively little praise, especially from the current government.
This line of reasoning is therefore purposefully simplistic to paint a narrative, while of course ignoring the rampart fascism in the Russian aggressor who would of course impose a much worse form of fascism over Ukraine
Tankies finding one problematic aspect in any movement they oppose and blowing it all out of proportion to justify repression. Also see Kronstadt rebellion, Hungarian revolution etc.
However any problematic aspect in camps they support is just an “unfortunate mistake” nevertheless worth “critical support” to oppose Western imperialism.
Just a tiny, insignificant problematic aspect like widespread support for fascism. No biggie. Btw, why are all our governments turning towards fascism? Where could this be coming from?
Moreover, present day Russia is a creation by the West itself. It was your governments that wanted the USSR to collapse, your goverments that elevated individuals like Putin post-collapse. Now you get a brutal, capitalist, Anti-LGBT hellpit, that the people of the West somehow pretend just materialized out of nothing, and wasn’t a result of their own negligence, their own unwillingness to prevent mass suffering in Eastern Europe and Asia after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
You are constantly in conflict with your own self-made monsters.
“widespread”
Sounds to me USSR revolution wasn’t that “successful” afer all
Reducing the USSR to a “failure” because it collapsed is ahistorical idealism and the height of liberal nonsense. We should judge a formation by the contradictions it resolved, not by whether it achieved eternity. Tsarist Russia was a feudal wreck where peasants starved and most couldn’t read. Within decades, the Soviet project doubled life expectancy, wiped out illiteracy, and industrialized a continent-sized country, dragging millions out of poverty.
Women gained full legal equality in 1918: abortion rights, divorce, workplace access, while Western women were still fighting for the vote. Socialized childcare and mass employment pulled women into public life on a scale capitalism wouldn’t match for generations.
And let’s not forget who actually broke fascism: the Red Army fought four-fifths of the Wehrmacht, lost 27 million people, and took Berlin while the West sat on the sidelines and even continued to trade with the nazi beast for years into the war (see the history of ford factories and IBM).
Collapse doesn’t retroactively erase what was built. “Anarchists” like you who dismiss seventy years of concrete progress because the state eventually fractured aren’t radical they’re reactionary. Material gains for millions don’t vanish because the system that produced them later unraveled.
The aftermath of the collapse proved the stakes that people like you refuse to grapple with. The 1990s were catastrophic. Life expectancy cratered, millions plunged into homelessness and destitution, women and children were trafficked by the tens of thousands, and the entire country was looted by oligarchs with IMF blessing. The chaos bred Yeltsin’s drunken comprador regime, which paved the way for Putin’s rise as his right-hand man a direct product of the Soviet collapse. When you cheer the unraveling of a workers’ state even a deeply flawed one, you’re not celebrating freedom. You’re celebrating the road that led straight to oligarchs, fascists, and some of the worst reaction imaginable. But you don’t really care about anyone but yourself.
'Tis what MLs perpetually do for every Anarchist revolution.
I’m not erasing anything. I consider the USSR revolution a great success for capitalism, as it turned an agrarian society into an industrialized capitalist nation. It also imporoved the people’s living standard like any society becoming industrialized through capitalism. It’s the only thing all such ML revolutions every achieved and the only thing they can achieve.
It’s an abject failure at achieving communism (and anarchist argue, even socialism) though.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Streets_named_after_Stepan_Bandera_in_Ukraine
mmhmm
We have streets and buildinga named after a known fascist dictator in Greece who privately complained that Hitler didn’t ask him to join the axis. This proves nothing except that time and war fog glorifies figures that don’t always deserve it. This is exactly the kind of thing I was talking about. Purposefully disregard all nuance to paint a narrative.
It proves there is a sizeable contingent in Greece that idolizes fascists and has enough institutional power to express that idolatry, and that there is not enough pushback in the rest of the culture to oppose that openly fascist expression. All of which is deeply worrisome and none of which negates the fact that there is likewise rampant Neo-naziism in Ukraine and that it has tremendous institutional and military power.
Before we continue; do you know anything about Greece, or even which dictator I’m talking about?
a lot of these were renamed after bandera recently, which shows that banderite ideology has full state backing, but sure, it’s just a few bad apples.
Yes the amazing proof of rampart fascism that is, <check notes>, street names…
streets re-named after a fascist mass murderer, yes. so if the germans suddenly started renaming streets after adolf hitler, you’d dismiss that too. nothing to see here.
Sure That’s totally the same thing /s
what’s the difference then? that bandera was less successful? that’s it?
Bandera was also a national liberation actor. One person who understands nuance could usually understand that national liberation actors tend to be lionized and their misdeeds trivialized. It happens constantly. Campists don’t have a problem with mass murderers like Bandera, or Assad, or, Putin, they only have a problem when they’re not in their camp.
And for a national liberation actor, Bandera is receiving comparatively little praise, especially from the current government.
This line of reasoning is therefore purposefully simplistic to paint a narrative, while of course ignoring the rampart fascism in the Russian aggressor who would of course impose a much worse form of fascism over Ukraine
This chain of argument perfectly proves my point