I'm begging liberals to actually learn about the Hungarian uprising and how sending tanks was actually the correct move.
Come on. We're all leftists here. We know that the best way to start a workers revolution is to break nazis out of jail 🙄🙄🙄
Of all the things Kruschev would do after Stalins death that Stalin should’ve shot him for - running tanks into Hungary was absolutely correct
The Communists who sided with tanks going into Hungary was how Communists earned the moniker “Tankie”
Yet 50 years later it’s revealed that MI6 were training the rebels
“Tankie” should unironically be worn with pride. In the fact “tankies” were absolutely correct in characterising the uprising as a semi-fascist counter-revolution (doors of jews and Communists were marked for extermination) that needed to be put down
Some of the weapons used were American, and others almost certainly British. Mr Smith says MI6 and the CIA had buried arms caches in the woods around Prague and Budapest for use by “stay-behind” parties or fifth columnists in case of war. Additional: The Truth About Hungary is a brilliant and quite short book worth reading. Published in 1957 it basically set out the character of the protests as semi-fascist and supported by the imperialist powers. Basically everything that was dismissed as Communist propaganda but has now been confirmed by the Western press. People seem to forget that hungary only a 11 years previously was a fascist state allied with the Nazis and Left Anticommunists have continually tried to portray the uprising as a “socialist uprising but with a more human face”
https://espressostalinist.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/the-truth-about-hungary.pdf
Section from the book “The Truth about Hungary” by Herbert Aptheker; a prominent figure in U.S. scholarly discourse in the 1940’s, and Marxist Historian. Written in 1957 it outlined what later would be confirmed by the bourgeois Western press
"The special correspondent of the Yugoslav paper, Politika, (Nov. 13, 1956) describing the events of those days, said that the homes of Communists were marked with a white cross and those of Jews with a black cross, to serve as signs for the extermination squads. “There is no longer any room for doubt,” said the Yugoslav reporter, “it is an example of classic Hungarian fascism and of White Terror. The information,” continued this writer, "coming from the provinces tells how in certain places Communists were having their eyes put out, their ears cut off, and that they were being killed in the most terrible ways."
"But the forces of reaction were rapidly consolidating their power and pushing forward on the top levels, while in the streets the blood of scores of massacred Communists, Jews, and progressives was flowing."
"Some of the reports reaching Warsaw from Budapest today caused considerable concern. These reports told of massacres of Communists and Jews by what were described as 'Fascist elements' ...." (N.Y. Times, Nov. 1. 1956)
"The evidence is conclusive that the entry of Soviet troops into Budapest stopped the execution of scores, perhaps thousands of Jews, for by the end of October and early November, anti-Semtic pogroms - hallmark of unbridled fascistic terror - were making their appearance, after an absence of some ten years, within Hungary."
"A correspondent of the Israeli newspaper Maariv (Tel Aviv) reported:
During the uprising a number of former Nazis were released from prison and other former Nazis came to Hungary from Salzburg . . . I met them at the border . . . I saw anti-Semitic posters in Budapest . . . On the walls, street lights, streetcars, you saw inscriptions reading: “Down with Jew Gero!” “Down with Jew Rakosi!” or just simply “down with the Jews!”
Leading rabbinical circles in New York received a cable early in November from corresponding circles in Vienna that “Jewish blood is being shed by the rebels in Hungary.” Very much later-in February, 1957-the World Jewish Congress reported that “anti-Semitic excesses occurred in more than twenty villages and smaller provincial towns during the October-November revolt.” This occurred, according to this very conservative body, because “fascist and anti-Semitic groups had apparently seized the opportunity, presented by the absence of a central authority, to come to the surface.” Many among the Jewish refugees from Hungary, the report continued, had fled from this anti-Semitic pogrom-like atmosphere (N.Y. Times, Feb. 15, 1957). This confirmed the earlier report made by the British Rabbi, R. Pozner, who, after touring refugee camps, declared that “the majority of Jews who left Hungary did so for fear of the Hungarians and not the Russians.” The Paris Jewish newspaper, Naye Presse, asserted that Jewish refugees in France claimed quite generally that Soviet soldiers had saved their lives."
you oughta post this info in the comments over there
if you're a member of a different lemmy, you can get there like this:
https://[lemmy you are in]/c/196@lemmy.world
then scroll down to the post
I don't have a lemmy account other than whatever is associated with the hexbear instance, and I honestly don't fully grasp how all the federation stuff and cross-posting stuff works on lemmy. Somebody who is more comfortable navigating the lemmy cross-posting stuff can copy my comment though, I dunno.
Krushev did one objectively right thing in his whole tenure, and western leftists still can't handle it. Its like western leftists only like to watch real leftists lose. I think that yellow guy wrote a book about it
I mean he also helped the Cubans, the Chinese, the Africans, and continued some of the Stalin-era plans. I feel like I'm also forgetting something else I'd say that was nice about him, but I'll probably remember later.
Anyways point is, is that he did good things and bad things through out his life and that we shouldn't wholesale throw out his experience as one of the leaders of the Communist movement - unlike how he threw Stalin under the bus - and ultimately try to be objective in judging his professional career. By my judgement being that he was lightyears and galaxies ahead of any president we've had or will ever have under this government and in the sino-soviet split I would side with the Soviet as being on the right side of history. That said I would still have him and several other rightists as face trial as opportunists of the highest order and be liquidated.
To give him credit for "helping the Chinese" when he destroyed sino-soviet relations is, uh, not reasonable. He destroyed hundreds of arrangements made under Stalin for the cooperation between the two nations and the purchase of technology by China because China didn't want to host Soviet military basis (or denounce Stalin). China went on to pursue dreadful foreign policy, but Khrushchev is absolutely at fault for the initial split.
He did help Cuba though and gets full credit for that.
He followed through with the majority of the deal set by the Stalin-era presidium of significantly pouring Soviet resources, technology, expertise, etc. into China to help them get the first step towards modernization, in addition to trying to temper Mao's, almost Trotskyite, desire to assertively spread the Revolution in a post-nuke world.
And Khrushchev may be at fault for causing the split, but it's Mao's fault for exacerbating it to the point that the PRC - even after the ultra-left gang of four and well into the period of time the CPC is in the grasp of Rightists - conducts objective harm to the international communist movement by siding with America against the Soviet Union several times over the decades.
why is that goth chick punching a wholesome ukrainian "nationalist"? i thought this was about tankies :thinking-about-it:
The original is kick Nazis out of punk, so yeah. The anti-communists can't even make original art.
Im pretty sure ive seen a version where they actually changed it to look like a tanky. I guess these people where too lazy to even find that one lol.
@cryball@sopuli.xyz I view nazi germany and china quite a bit different from real capitalist societies. Simply having a stock market doesn’t mean the markets are free to function as they please.
I also tend to disagree with canada and usa being genocidial at this point in time. For sure they did horrific things, but comparing usa to nazi germany or current day china is delusional, as the US country’s government is not actively killing a part of their own population.
What rubs me the wrong way in these conversations is mentioning capitalism as a system that commits the genocide. Both germany and china are/were state driven, and as such the markets didn’t really have anything to do with the actions. Instead the genocide is driven by the government that is/was authoritarian, and as such the markets aren’t driving the killing.
Brains made of spun sugar.
By refusing to properly quarantine, the U.S. suffered 2 million excess deaths.
Excess deaths are usually the way these 'massacres' and 'famines' are counted.
No, because then they would also count any decline in the birthrate as also being part of it.
Then again, calling it a genocide isn't the worst thing when you consider who died the most under US covid policy
as the US country’s government is not actively killing a part of their own population
it's actually still wrong to kill people who aren't citizens
Sure yea Canada is not genocidal within what...the last 15 seconds? Since the residential school system closed less than 30 years ago, starlight tours are not "officially" a thing anymore, and no indigenous women have been sterilised, murdered, or gone missing in the last 15 seconds
Remember that time about twenty-twenty five years ago when KKKlanada deployed actual literal tanks to crush a Mohawk uprising?
And how people still talk about how "brave" those soldiers were who went in to force people off their ancestral land in order to build a golf course
Atilla the Hun was brave even if someone is brave that doesn't make them not a piece of shit
Nah, this ain't it. They had machine guns and tanks, air support, and outnumbered the defender. Brave would have been saying fuck this and going to jail. You're not getting any awards for valor for standing around in the woods for two months pointing guns at kids and old people defended by a few hundred warriors.
you missunderstand me I don't care how brave they are as I don't consider bravery to be worthy of respect. I don't care if they were brave in the same way I don't care if they were allergic to shrimp
Come tell us how you slew
Them old Arabs two by two
Like the Zulus they had spears and bows and arrows
How bravely you faced one
With your sixteen pounder gun
And you frightened them damn natives to their marrow
I mean sure, but I wouldn't call soldiers going in with armour and armed with assault rifles brave when they're facing literal children and indigenous land defenders.
As much as I wanna give the land defenders credit and this photo is badass, I think there's a clear power imbalance that eliminates bravery. Like we wouldn't call the American soldiers at My Lai brave for attacking civilians
Instead the genocide is driven by the government that is/was authoritarian, and as such the markets aren’t driving the killing.
"They did a genocide because they're authoritarian, no further motives" is the most liberal-brained thing I've ever seen.
Oh my god how do repel bloody minded ignorance and ideology of this magnitude?
This is like someone showing up in an astronomy forum talking about crystal spheres or something, but when it comes to geopolitics and history they get away with it.
reddit libs read Engels "On Authority" challenge (impossible)
Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?
I've seen people say that Engels is larping with this quote. Engels fought in the 1848 revolution, serving as an Aide-De-Camp to August Willich.
