This guy "used to be" alt-right (i.e. a Hungarian Fascist), then it turns out he's still shit. :surprised-pika:
Original video instead of Hasan clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94_5mXsQTpA
Editing to say I really do hope that all the dunking he's getting on his YouTube posts convinces this guy to read a bit and finally understand why his fascist beliefs were bad in the first place, and why he's wrong.
So, the soviets being worse than nazis I think, usually focuses on the time around Stalin and around WWII, because the Red Army werent any better than the Nazis arguably. Neither were of course the Allies. We are talking about a brutal world war, where human rights werent exactly respected.
In addition to this, as I mentioned in my other post, we should examine these positive experiences of pre-collapse USSR, and seek to understand them better. Because, sure one big part was social security, healthcare, education and the like. But other parts are absolutely fueled by reactionary conservatism about the time when the eurogays werent spreading their gender ideology. On a side note, an interesting Ive noticed among some people talking about the times back then is that things that are relatively normal now are stated as a downside of socialism back then, without them realizing that this same bad thing is even worse now, or things that if you think a little deeper are actually kinda good are stated as bad.
Actually, only one of those three factions engaged in an industrial-scale genocide. The war crimes committed by the allies (including the USSR) are not arguably the same as what the Nazis did. The people who liberated the concentration camps are very different from the ones who built them.
Big oof on my side in that regard. Completely agree, that the Nazis were bent on extermination and genocide. What I was trying to say is that the red army did engage in war crimes, as did every other army. Of course it's not on the scale of what the Nazis did, but it still is warcrimes. Which is inevitable when there is such a war, but still should be condemned regardless.
Of course they were are you fucking serious right now ?
Did the red army burn tens of thousands of villages many times with the people in it alive? Did it engage in rounding up millions of jews, Roma's and undesirables for industrial genocide? Did the red army engage in an aggressive genocidal war killing and starving tens of millions of civillians AS A POLICY ?
Of course the Red Army and the Allies engaged in civilian violence and rapes and war crimes through WW2. But saying "they arent any better" than the Nazi's is disgusting. Even the worst thing the red army did, the mass rapes in Germany and Berlin, are eclipsed by orders and orders of maginitude and scale by the equivalent the Nazi army did marching though eastern Europe and which it self doesnt register in the top of their attrocities.Its even disgusting to the millions of Jews the red army went out of its way and too hundreds of thousands of additional losses in order to evacuate from eastern Europe
Its not in the same stratosphere and its a logic that would lump any army ever as no better than the Nazi's .Everyone in WW1 ? As bad as Nazi army. The Vietcong and PLA in China .As bad as Nazis .
I dont care that its the "opinion of a lot that from that era" considering a lot of polland ,Hungary and countries that these views are primarily found had civilian populations filled to the brim with collaborators that cared little about the millions Nazi's burned and killed in their own country as long it was jews, romas or other eastern Europeans .
Engaging with it an adopting it as an "arguable" truth is in itself ahistorical and nazi apologia and honestly you should delete it or reword it cause there is a danger you get a justfiable for that opinion banned tho i dont believe you really mean it that way
Actualy we do have data. Massive research for reasons behind the positive opinions. Nothing about "the gays and lgbts" as an important reason . The most reactionary big reason is usualy the one based on "we had a grand global standing and power" which is bad and nationalistic at face value but also can be interpreted in different ways for different people. Economic reasons, stability reasons, positive outlook for the future and optimism, people being more kinda and community spirit being stronger are the other massive ones. The only non fringe "socialy conservative" reason is usualy regarding the rise of drugs ,alcoholism and prostitution which seeing the form that surge took after the collapse is quite justifiable to see a reaction against those things from their POV
Agreed with your point about the armies. Still it sits wrong with me comparing war crimes with war crimes. Yes, Nazis are absolutely horrible, but that doesn't make the war crimes on the other side any good in any way.
As for the social part - I know it sounds stupid to say it on the internet, and to a person I've never met irl, but believe me, the social conservatism is absolutely a factor. It is what lies behind stuff like people lamenting community spirit, positive outlook on the future and the like. The gays and the LGBT is just the most visible part on a general outlook of tolerance towards minorities, women's rights and so on seen as western influence, as part of capitalism that ruined this great power, and as something to be rolled back and reversed And these countries were and are very socially conservative. And likely will be, unfortunately.
Honestly, my experience growing up in one of these countries, talking to people, reading textbooks from the Soviet era, etc. is the major source of my belief that when we fight for socialism we have to absolutely fight for ending racism, discrimination and so on in addition to fixing the economic base. You can absolutely have reactionary and conservative communism and that is something we should strive to prevent.