Look at these subhuman faggots
(twitter.com)
Comments (55)
sorted by:
communists are worse than nazis in every. possible. way.
Ask any remaining polish fossil and they will tell you they preferred the nazi occupation.
Ukrainians literally welcomed the Nazis when they invaded the USSR because they hated life under Stalin run communism so much.
Well, those types would still welcome the Nazis, and not because Putin is such a villain...
And most fought for the USSR, despite Stalin's depredations, many fewer for the Nazis - though this is mostly because the Nazis acted even worse than the Bolshies had.
Well sure, when the commissar points his Tokarev at you and tell you that you will fight for the motherland, you choose the probability of dying in the red army over the certainty of dying at the regime's hands. Mind you these people remembered the Holodomor that was subjected to them just 10 years earlier. The Ukrainians didn't fight for their love of Stalin or communism despite the bullshit revisionist history from Russophiles.
The Nazis did mistreat the Ukrainians because they wanted the Ukrainian land as part of their lebensraum policy. But if you think the commies were in any way good, then you're fucking insane. Between the soviet genocide against the Ukrainians, Stalin's Reign of Terror, and the general shittiness of living in the communist USSR, Ukrainians fucking hated Moscow and thought that Germany would be better. Which is saying a lot and is my point.
Except that the Ukraine was occupied by the Germans for most of the war, and the early Soviet armies were destroyed or captured.
Well duh. Almost no one 'fought for communism', not Great Russians, let alone Little Russians. Nationalism, religion, and surprisingly, support for Stalin (people rally around their leads in war even if they're rather bad).
Russophiles? Mike Johnson, is that you?
I'm not sure where you got the idea that I'm throwing a party for "STALIN WAS FANTASTIC! THREE CHEERS!" Of course they were bad. Which makes it noteworthy what people decided to do when they were confronted with two extraordinarily bad regimes.
As you say, the people who were the targets of starvation and elimination sided with Stalin rather than Hitler, because as bad as Stalin was, he would only kill some of you and not all of you.
It was farmers who were targeted, not 'Ukrainians' - which is not a real people to begin with. Of course, that had a disparate impact on the 'Ukrainian' bread basket.
I think in the beginning, a significant portion did regard Germany as possible liberators. And if the Germans had played their hands better, they could have recruited them and used them against Stalin rather than what they did.
Well because you were making the same arguments that Russian revisionist historians and tankies have made.
OK, so you have no more arguments left, except 'RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA". The end point of any American echoing regime talking points.
Also, let's be real here. You have no idea what arguments 'historians' make, let alone 'Russia Russia Russia revisionist historians'. You don't even know any names of either, except any that you would feverishly look up. I'm not sure why you're pretending that arguments you can't refute are the product of works you don't know by people you've never heard of.
They must have forgotten about how the Nazi occupation eliminated millions of the Polish population...
Nazis were literally just recolor variant commies. They all belong in the same woodchipper with the rest of the grubbling faggots who would be dictators. Sociopathy drives leftism, which is the great disease of the human mind.
Nac Soc had a cult mentality where everything was devoted to the Fuhrer and the state. (Fascism obviously.) You see this in how Hannah Reitsch spoke about Hitler, for instance. This totalizes everything, including religious belief, which I couldn't accept.
It might be better and have a lower kill count, but you're wrong on many points.
It is still fundamentally a form of socialism and it comes right up the the line on private ownership. It's still your factory, in theory, but here's a party member to dictate how 90% of it gets run, and who you can employ. It's partially yours, on paper. Better? Sure, but not by that much.
No, it sought to eliminate class hierarchies (it is, after all, a socialism) and it wasn't exactly trad in regards to sex and the workplace (sex is more complex, because they also highly promoted and paid for motherhood due to their other concerns). It's not all hierarchies, sure, but it is not as free of proto DEI stuff as you might think.
A significant part of the nazi belief was a socialist and sort of Malthusian understanding of the world's economics. They needed lebensraum. Not for any particular resource, or just space for hypothetical larger future generations, but because their economic theories said the world and economy was doomed and they needed more if the German people were to not starve.
It was all for the benefit of one nation yes, but it needed the space of all others.
They were both command economies though. Just because one believed that the upper class was to be dismantled, and the other believed that the state should be unified with its people was different, both governments exercised complete control over their economy in the same way.
Communism is about power, and manipulating masses to gain that power with oppressor / oppressed dogmatic propaganda. DEI is a modern contrivance that communism predates. Your understanding of the trappings of a modern form of the ideology misses the forest for the trees.
Relative cultural trappings do not define an ideology. Structures and effects do.
You should be able to distinguish between slogans and reality.
That's why they invited Albert Einstein to come back to Germany?
And then invade very other country...
If that is the case, why did it take 251,933 years of human history before the first national socialist showed up? No doubt you might make analogies between national socialism and things that came before. But I bet there will be pretty major differences between the NSs of the 1930s and those your retrospectively baptize as such.
Don't some conservatives say that they are communists within their own family, but that this is exactly why it does not work on a larger scale?
You can think that but tactically you need to stop countersignaling "nazis". Because commies are the ones who are currently winning and in power. By attacking the enemies of commies you are de-facto supporting the commies, even when you say "both are bad".
This is the guy that argues that True Anarchism has never been tried, don't bother. He is just another shill.
No, faggot. I will not start simping for authoritarian ideologies that only superficially oppose the current regime. Both belong in the fire.
Your goblinoid faction works at the behest of the globalists. Pushing leftist faggotry as "alt" right" is a fed psyop. Globalists do not care which of your retarded dogmas they have to pretend to care about to seize power. The concentration of power is the goal, because subverting power structures is what they do best.
You illiterate maggots infesting and destroying actual right wing organization attempts are the ones who must stop. You are no different. Your solution to government crimes is more government. That is THEIR GOAL. You are NO DIFFERENT. You have fallen for the trap and you serve the same masters as the commie useful idiots. You serve "them". No matter what label you want to use, the idiotic ((())) da joos or the correct label of globalists, the enemy you CLAIM to oppose is the one you are actually SERVING when you simp for leftist bullshit and try to derail or subvert actual right wing efforts.
What is "actual right wing" to you? Is the civil rights act a part of it? Do women still get to vote? Do women get the final say in when and whom they will marry? Is "domestic violence" and "marital rape" a category of crime? Are neighborhoods allowed to keep blacks from moving in? Are stores and restaurants allowed to keep blacks out? Is miscegenation legal? Does the US still maintain a massive standing army? Are faggots allowed to buy babies?
Explain it to me, I'm listening and willing to be convinced.
And thirty minutes later I came up with a simpler analogy for you. The difference between the left and right is perfectly exemplified by the difference between catholics and protestants. Catholics serve one centralized power. Protestants are free of that kind of structure.
While theoretically a throne like the pope's can be held by a moral man, human nature makes that highly unlikely and history has borne out proof in that the papacy has virtually always been used as a tool for the manipulaion of power, not for the good of the people. It is easily corruptible with very few points of failure. Meanwhile protestants can simply form their own churches at will, unbeholden to the corruptions of others. One corrupt protestant church can be rejected easily and ignored. One corrupt pope is catastrophic.
The catholic structure is a perfect example of the inherent failures of leftist ideology.
"Actual right wing" is NOT APING LEFTIST POWER STRUCTURES. It is ACTUALLY OPPOSING THEM IDEOLOGICALLY. It is being for minimal government at the lowest possible level, maximum control in the hands of people, then local government. Decentralized power where government is even necessary, as government is a necessary evil for functional society.
All of your cultural elements and opinions on crime are up to locals to decide, not federals to dictate. Your faggotry is no different than the commies except which groups you target. When it is inevitably subverted, it is then immediately turned back against you - and everyone else. Actual right wing ideology recognizes that government is a necessary evil and is to be limited in power as much as possible.
You want your moral standards to be prevalent, build a community around them and enforce them within that community. But where you want power on the scale to dictate your will upon the world, functional adults recognize that this power will always, inevitably be corrupted, and the best way to manage that is to minimize the damage it can cause through decentralization. That is the right wing.
A perfect benevolent monarchy with an immortal king is the ideal form of government but that is a mythological fantasy or religion. Absolute power in the hands of government is societal suicide, because sociopaths will always subvert / corrupt power structures.
The left-right scale of political ideologies is not the reddit political compass retarded thing. It is a measure of government power. The extreme left is totalitarian. The extreme right is anarchist. That is the objective measure of political ideologies and understanding of human nature. Leftists are petulant, ignorant children who want to rule the world. The right is in opposition to this - nobody should rule the world. You may think your idea of how to best rule would work better than everyone else's, but so does every other power hungry fool. History has proven that sociopaths will ALWAYS manipulate that kind of foolishness to seize power.
Federal enforcement of tolerance for faggotry is, again, a massive overreach of government power. My preferred structures would be to for the vote to be earned through dangerous service like Heinlein outlined, as a refined return to the intended design of the US as a limited republic. But voting rights, racial issues and such are not inherently left or right wing elements. Those are culturally relative elements, not core structures of political ideology. If you want to use government force to make the world comply with your preferences, that is left wing. If you want the government to be forced to fuck off and let your community self-regulate, that is right wing. Your community could be a rainbow faggot parade or entirely reject faggotry, neither is inherently left or right. The difference between the left and the right is how you use government, not the details. Right wing structures tend towards stronger moral development because right wing ideologies come from stronger mental development. That doesn't make an anarchist gay vilage of a hundred people with basically no government left wing, nor does it make the national socialists of WW2 Germany right wing.
You are fighting the wrong fight.
The bad people will always try to amass power for themselves, and the only thing that can stop them is good people with power. The question isn't about whether or not power is bad, but how can we sort the good people from the bad people. The "principled" side forgoing pursuing power just lets the other side win by default.
Someone will always have power. Someone will always rule. Throwing a tantrum and giving up because reality doesn't work the way you want just makes you irrelevant.
Faggotry makes the nation worse. The tolerance of faggotry in neighboring community degrades yours no matter what your local controls say. Some behaviors and ideologies are like cancer, "tolerance" for them only works when they are small, hidden, and insignificant.
The lolbert philosophy is a placeholder for men who haven't found the courage to make value judgements.
You dimwit, you didn't read a single thing I posted did you. You are either incapable of comprehension or intellectually dishonest.
Leftism is the mindset of undeveloped children. All you want is power. Surely everything would be solved if YOU had power. No foresight, no thought beyond the immediate. You create total power and when things shift that total power is now in the hands of evil (if somehow a good person came to total power to begin with).
A developed adult human understands that people that seek power are inevitably the people that shouldn't have it. The solution isn't finding the one in a million uncorrupt dictator and banking on being lucky forever, because that ignores the reality of human nature. This is why the right wing knows that the real solution is decentralizing and minimizing power so that good people can live free of tyranny, and powerseeking sociopaths can't do significant damage before being caught out and stopped.
The right isn't about forgoing power and letting leftists have it. It's about DESTROYING centralized power so nobody can have it. Nothing I said is in favor of tolerating faggotry, nice attempt at sliding away from the actual discussion of ideology.
"You are fighting the wrong fight. Give total power to OUR guy, which absolutely won't end the same way EVERY DICTATORSHIP IN HISTORY HAS".
No. Fuck you, you fedboy goon. Do you actually not understand how concentrating power in one place just makes it much harder to fix when it is inevitably corrupted? Are you even capable of pattern recognition, have you ever actually studied history? No, this shit is obvious to people who actually pay attention.
Post Reported for:
Nothing is sufficiently insulting to be considered a slur.
National Socialists are not an identity group.
What constitutes a slur? Why don’t you make that list for transparency’s sake?
Uh, no Dev, commies are several tiers worse than nazis by basically every objective metric and I'm tired of pretending they aren't. I'm not even "a stormfag." The fact that I still have to worry about communism in my daily life attests to this.
You're not worried about communism, you just label the things you worry about as 'communist' like some sort of Bircher.
Thanks WEF bot, I'm sure I'll give a single fuck about what scum like you has to say.
Excuse me Sir, I'm a RUSSIAN bot, not a WEF bot.
Respect my programmers.
people who are open about their communism are the ones pushing everything i'm worried about though.
I have no clue of the context here, but it amuses me regardless.
Despite "TERFs" being shit people, the people who whine about them are (generally) worse, and I love to see them squirm.
Yes, yes, retards. If you're against trannies, you're exactly the same as a Big Bad Nazi. Boy, anyone who criticizes the the current gender insanity sure is just The Literal Worst.
Good for Dev - whoever the fuck that is - for standing his ground.
Judging by the profile picture, that's gotta be ShortFatOtaku, who does some reasonable youtube videos discussing political things in fairly extensive detail. Someone who has actually read books about the things he studies, for instance. I find him to be painfully 'enlightened centrist' too often to enjoy listening to him, but he makes the Lefty-types rage and scream like it's his job so I must give him that much credit.
Lefties once again prove their entire world view is black and white, they do not believe in defending anyone but themselves. Were the Nazis ever as strict on their "if you're not with us, you're a Communist" rhetoric as all the Leftists calling everyone Nazi have been?
It tells you all you need to know about evan if he's calling milquetoast dev a nazi.
(reminder that evan is an admitted communist living the good life in Japan and doing his best to subvert their culture)
Nah, dev actually seems like a decent guy even if I wholeheartedly agree that his enlightened centrism is a huge turnoff.
Dev is one of those guys who it's alright having on your side as he'll never betray you. Put it this way, he's one of the original GGers and despite some of the bullshit he sometimes says, he's still friends with Sargon and Arch compared to MANY from the old days that went off the deep end..
One thing I'll give him credit fir is he thinks in a way different from us so brings up things we'd have never thought of. Him sharing these points means we are less likely to get blindsided because we can't understand their thought process.
https://nitter.poast.org/sleepy_devo/status/1794787570058248472#m
I'd rather not give any more attention to this literal nobody who painfully obviously spends thousands of dollars a month buying likes for his blistering hot NPC takes.
Or somebody else pays for his likes and influence.
I agree, Dev is a subhuman faggot.
Lotta people sucking CCP cock in there for some reason.
not Americans, didn't happen in America, barely give a single fuck.
we got involved, which we shouldn't have, and if we did, it should have been on Germany's side not that fat pig-faced retard in debt to jew bankers.
It can be argued that Stalin and Mao were worse than Hitler, but would anyone who is not pro-Hitler seriously argue that the USSR in the 1970s and 1980s was 'more evil' than the Nazi regime?
No idea where you got that random point of contention from, or why all your comments here make dev sound practically "far-right", but yes you could argue that, for some definition of evil. Just on both time and space scales they lasted longer and had more territory, so they had more opportunity to do evil. Beyond that you would need to do a point by point comparison of notable acts perpetrated by each regime or enabled by them, and determine if each act was binary good or evil (or how evil graded on an Evillness Scale) and what the impact of the act was, which you could determine by a proxy like number of people affected.
I don't think it's minor. We only saw the Nazis at their worst - starting needless wars and committing genocide. Communism managed to evolve into something less repellent, at least in the USSR. And what's more, communism managed to be dismantled with barely any bloodshed. One of the 20th century's totalitarianisms took a massive war to end, the other one ended because Yeltsin climbed on a tank and spouted drunken nonsense.
Because people don't make judgments based on accurate history, but based on their politics. That's why you say 'far-right'. There should be nothing preventing someone who is far-left from concluding that communism is worse than Nazism, if the historical record warrants it.
Let's be real though. The reason people think Nazism is worse is not because of history, but because (1) they lost and (2) the countries inhabited by those countries fought a war against Nazis. If you visit other countries, like the Middle East, they may use 'fascist' and 'Hitler' as insults, but they don't have a similar sense of Nazi evil (and not just because they hate Jews), no more than you think Genghis Khan was 'evil' - but people in the ME do.
And like I said, they got the opportunity to change into a less repellent form. In theory, Nazism could have evolved similarly into a less malignant form. Or it could have gotten worse. If Hitler had died in 1938, he would have been regarded as the greatest German leader - and perhaps leader of any country - in human history. He lived long enough to start wars that he lost and commit genocide, so he soiled whatever achievements he did have.
I agree. But no one actually does that, because no one actually cares about Nazis or communists beyond their use as instruments of polemic.
Nobody else here is trying to argue that the USSR in the 1970s and 1980s was more evil than the short-lived Nazi regime. (but you could easily argue that) They're saying communism is worse than the national socialists were, which it is. I will say that as someone not pro-Hitler who would not wish to live under either totalitarian state.
I'm interested in that 'easy argument'. It seems very hard to me. Of course, picking an arbitrary period is a bit unfair - you might as well take Germany from 1933 through July 1938, but even then it was preparing for a war of aggression with the USSR wasn't.
Would that not imply that the USSR in the 1970s and 80s is worse than the Nazi regime?
Good! That's the kind of person I'm interested in hearing from. Not a gotcha, I'm really curious as to how you view this matter.
Communists were the first ideologues to specifically try to create a subsapient slave race.
I'm sure you could find a few Tuesdays out of the decades that the USSR existed in which they were not as bad as the Nazis, but I'm not sure why you'd do such a thing, unless you were trying to elevate the evil of the Nazis and downplay that of the Soviets.
If a killer murders their entire family, you don't praise them for stopping just because they ran out of people to kill. "Sure, Bob killed his entire family, but has he killed anybody lately?"
Heck for all we know the Nazis might've chilled out with their own detente period if people stopped buying New Beetles or whatever.
Well, I pointed out two decades rather than a few Tuesdays. How do you explain that?
They didn't kill their entire family... like the 'better' Nazis wanted to do. Ever heard of General Plan Ost?