• mrbigcheese [he/him]
    ·
    4 years ago

    Interesting enough the communist party also openly opposed us intervention into the war until Barbarossa happened because it thought it would only be done to follow imperialist interests. It was actually the Comintern that kept the party line as being against joining the war.

    • extraterrestrial5 [none/use name]
      ·
      4 years ago

      because it thought it would only be done to follow imperialist interests

      Haha yes, unlike what happened in reality

      • limette [she/her]
        ·
        4 years ago

        I don't think it really matters when there's, y'know, the Nazis to stop. Any amount of imperialism is better than that.

        • mrbigcheese [he/him]
          ·
          4 years ago

          Yeah its worth noting too that the communist party supported intervention before the war started.

    • skollontai [any]
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      Yeah, and the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact did a lot of damage to the credibility of the Party in the US. Don't know about this specific protest, but liberals were the biggest pro-war faction in the US until Pearl Harbor (opposed by isolationist conservatives, fascist sympathizers, and communists). The original post here is ahistorical and uses the word "liberal" with about the same level of finesse as Fox News... just "things I don't like."

      • Bread_In_Baltimore [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Yeah the party began to be seen as weak on fascism and just an arm of Moscow, which was obviously not popular among most American Communists. The extremely quick about face when Barbarossa happened just cemented the idea that working for the CPUSA was just being a pawn for Russian interests rather than working for liberation in the US. One of the many unfortunate consequences of the geopolitical realities at the time wrt Communism.