3 ms·
I will not respond to everything because that would require a whole book but please let me highlight some historical facts that I feel you might have confused.
by cardanome 2y ago
I will not respond to everything because that would require a whole book but please let me highlight some historical facts that I feel you might have confused. You imply that famines were a regular occurrence under communism, this is wrong.
The was never a single famine in the Soviet Union after World War 2. In fact the CIA concluded that the Soviet citizens ate a similar amount of calories with slightly more nutritious food. [0]
Furthermore the idea of famines being typical for communism is contradicted by the basic historical fact that famines were a regular occurrence BEFORE the Soviets took power. The communist regime stopped famines from happening.
Comparing a famine that happened after the country was ravaged by the first world war AND a horrible civil war AND huge societal changes to planned industrial murder is insane.
> Nations plunged into poverty for generations.
Considering that Czarist Russia happened in one of the most backwards places on earth where people still used the wooden plow I would say the Soviet Union becoming a serious competitor to the US is very impressive. And current day Russia is doing rather well all things considered, surviving against at Western sanctions much longer than many predicted. I wouldn't want to live there but it is certainly doing better than many other countries in this world. China has seen a meteoric rise to power under a "communist" leadership. Cuba provide a vastly higher standard of living than comparable countries like Haiti.
It was mostly impoverished countries that have seen communist revolutions. You are confusing cause and effect.
Yes, Western Germany has done very well but is mostly due to the huge investment of the US in it as it was needed as a bulwark against communism.
We have an example on what the communists would do with Germany in Eastern Germany and well it is not very spectacular. No famines. No mass murder. The main issue where of course the wall between Eastern and Western Germany which separated families.
I will not deny the atrocities done during the Chinese Cultural Revolution, they are stomach turning. To say they are typical for communism is a bit dishonest considering the Soviets denounced Mao to the point that diplomatic ties broke. If we played the game like that, we would have to say that the Irish famine or rather genocide is to be considered typical for capitalism.
I don't really like comparing atrocities. Every single one is bad enough on their own.
The main point is that anyone with a shed of humanity has a duty to be anti-fascist first, after that we can battle out whatever system is better or worse.
[0] https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000498133.pdf https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000498133.pdf
- roenxi 2y ago> The was never a single famine in the Soviet Union after World War 2. That is technically wrong [0]. But more importantly is the fact that you're arguing that most of the deaths were before WWII - ie, the USSR (single handily!) was comparable to the Nazis even before the Nazis went full Nazi. And then throw China in to the mix. This history is why it is a higher priority to root out powerful domestic Communists than to neutralise the Fascists. Even though both were terrible, the Communists managed to be the scarier of the two, even at the time. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1946%E2%80%931947 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1946%E2%80%93... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_mortality_in_the_Soviet_Union_under_Joseph_Stalin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_mortality_in_the_Soviet...
- me_me_me 2y agoFrom polish perspective, a nazis told you you are subhuman and treat you like it. Soviets told you they are your best friend while torturing your brother and using you cousin to snitch on you. You pick which oppression is worse - overt or covert. Objectively soviets did way more damage and set Eastern Europe decades back. Under nazis you knew who was the enemy, under soviet everyone was paranoid who the enemy is. Its still debating which one of your limbs to cut off.
- lazide 2y agoEh, I’d argue the only reason Eastern Europe might consider the impact of communism worse than Nazi’ism is because Nazi’ism flamed out quickly. So ‘stabbed with a knife once’ instead of ‘punched in the face daily for decades’. Can you imagine how shitty it would have been if Germany had won WW2? My guess is 1/4 of the existing population would have survived. The only reason it wasn’t (quite) that bad is because they didn’t have the time to settle in and only murdered people they could easily find while on their way to the front.
- me_me_me 2y agoI am not trying to make a case who was worse. But that under nazis it would be nazis punching, under soviets it would be your neighbor under command of soviets. Soviets insidiousness had additional layer that was actively destroying national trust/cohesion and instilling culture of fear and snitching. Stazi vs Gestapo approaches.