ThereRisesARedStar

Ah, nice try, but I already told you I'm not going to debate you on the Spanish Civil War.

I asked you if you've even read anything about it, not if you want to debate me about it.

You implied that not crushing anarchists would have directly led to a successful genocide. Ye it's pretty manipulative.

It isnt manipulative to point out that my family would have been killed if the anarchists won, it is giving you an explanation for why I have little sympathy for complaints by anarchists repeating the "stabbed in the back" myth instead of actually digging into the history of their project and learning from its failures to do better next time.

Have you read anything about the failures of coordination among the anarchist militias in Catalonia? Or their failures of economic coordination beyond the local level?

Have you even absorbed the critiques enough that you are in a place to argue against them?

Because this is serious stuff that you should be educated about before you make judgements about it.

I'm very sympathetic to anarcho syndicalism, but it showed its weaknesses in Spain and sectarian anarchists blame it on the USSR instead of learning from it.

PS: I like how you sneaked in that call to emotion at the end. Very manipulative. Love it!

It is not socially well adapted to declare "appeal to emotion" when someone is communicating why something is personally important to them. What I'm doing is expressing myself in a normal human way, and you consider that manipulative?

If the anarchists in the soviet union were allowed power, general plan Ost would have come to fruition. Anarchists have historically not been able to lead mass industrialization in a coordinated way, and have not been able to lead successful military campaigns across territories as large as the USSR. If the soviet leadership didn't protect the revolution from anarchists, part of my family would have died in a death camp instead of being liberated from one by red army soldiers.

But the tankies stabbed the pure hearted anarchists in the back! Okay, maybe the anarchists shouldn't have been idealists who cared more about coops than actually prosecuting a successful socialist transition. Literally read Lenin's interaction with the anarchist prince.

It isnt first past the post. It is bourgeois democracy. Things would be the same if there was one party or twenty so long as the bourgeoisie own the state.

I think mao said something about this

I work in software development. Almost all modern architecture would collapse without the open source ecosystem.

How is saying Stalin wasn't a great guy either denying the holocaust?

You aren't saying that though, you are saying that they killed an equivalent amount of people. You're morally equating them. Also even the CIA didn't consider stalin a dictator in their since declassified internal documents, treating him as one is another way you were taught to equate the USSR with nazi Germany.

Yes ofc, but a big percentage of the deportated people were Jewish. They killed two thirds of the European Jewish population.

I know, that isn't the only group they targeted though. I was simply correcting an inaccuracy in what you said.

No:

Sorry, I thought it was high hundreds of thousands but it was actually a million. My mistake. Still, that is in no way similar to killing upwards of 35 million people in the name of bigotry.

Life expectancy https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41294-021-00169-w

Oh yea, like if you are religious you are a threat to the state and therefore you are unfit for basically any leading role, or your property might be confiscated and you might be sent of to Siberia ?

Anti religion is needlessly antagonistic but also wasn't enforced like you are suggesting: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1920/11/13.htm

Lines for food namely bread and if the stars aligned meat.

According to the anti-communist cia their nutrition was in many ways better

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85M00363R000601440024-5.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwijl7ChsciBAxXug4kEHS2ZCCAQFnoECBgQAQ&usg=AOvVaw06QRMVGCOurHDUtg96SRq0

Also breadlines are common under capitalism.

Big amount of corruption ?

Yes, theft from the public has definitely decreased since the the collapse. /s

Mandatory conscription to the military (and the corruption there too) ?

There are plenty of countries that do that after they lose around 20 percent of their population in a brutal war. Like Vietnam, for example.

Iron curtain ?

You mean the one the west put up? https://news.stanford.edu/2019/12/26/stalin-not-want-iron-curtain-descend/

Free speech and freedom of expression ?

Western countries have more sophisticated censorship and media apparatuses I give you that. Speak out in a real way though and look what happens to people like Fred Hampton.

They literally say that the intentional killing was around 1 million. Wikipedia is a notably right wing anticommunist source, and they say a million intentional deaths.

So you were lying?

Transphobic too? How surprising.

Who would have thunk the anticommunist was racist.

Hey, whoever told you those numbers is lying to you. The nazis killed 11 million people in the holocaust and 26-27 million soviet citizens. High estimates for people killed by the USSR outside of defeating nazism, failures, and sabotage is in the 100,000s, which is noticeably lower than capitalist oligarchies like the US and Britain. Also killing people based on them wanting to bring back old caste systems through violence is morally distinct from racism based mass killings.

The difference is that Hitler was after one specific group of people and wanted to eradicate them.

Also this isnt true, Jewish people, Roma, nuerodivergent people, disabled people, trade unionists socialists, communists, gay people, trans people, the list goes on.

Also you're still equating the two after being told doing so is holocaust denial. You're saying "well they killed equivalent amounts of people!"