• VILenin [he/him]M
      ·
      11 days ago

      My grandma told me that when she was 2 years old, Stalin broke into her family's home and ate all the food for the dog, and the dog starved to death, and then he ate the dog

    • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      They always follow the same pattern, first they make a smug ass statement that shows their ignorance, then they demand civility while giving none in return, then they say Hexbear is a horrible bad place full of trolls, then they claim that they were just trolling themselves the whole time when they are forced to admit to themselves that they have no idea what they are talking about.

      • Bureaucrat
        ·
        11 days ago

        Civility

        Unironically calling themselves civil here https://lemm.ee/comment/16703290

        • Bureaucrat
          ·
          11 days ago

          Which black book are you pulling your numbers from and how high will they be this time?

            • Kuori [she/her]
              ·
              11 days ago

              you may not be old enough to have heard this in school, so let me do it now:

              wikipedia is NOT a reliable source.

              • Sundial@lemm.ee
                ·
                11 days ago

                That was the most underwhelming ending to that gif. And you missed the opportunity to make it a 5 second countdown with that username.

            • Spike [none/use name]
              ·
              11 days ago

              This needs to be a tag line. Lmao Wikipedia, fucking hell at least read a book first before embarrassing yourself

                • Barx [none/use name]
                  ·
                  11 days ago

                  Wikipedia is where liberal nerds go to slapfight, inconsistently using various rules to push their agendas. There is, for example, someone that spends a ton of her time fighting Nazi apologetics on Wikipedia that would otherwise still be there and she receives a lot of pushback. While her task is just, ask yourself why she needa to do it in the first place. Why is Wikipedia so friendly to Nazi apologetics? Why is it so hostile to corrections of it? Do you think the reasons might apply to other articles?

                  Wikipedia will mislead you on topics with more room for politics. It is fine if you want to use it to learn some math or something, but on anything social or political you should assume it has been written by someone sympathetic to Nazis and instead read books before forming any opinions.

                  Wheatcroft (who you have already cited) and Davies have some good overviews based on thr archives. Instead of using selected quotes provided by Wiki editors, I would recommend reading the source material. And then compare it, critically, to the intended message from Wikipedia.

                • Tomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 days ago

                  No sort of serious review. Known to keep outright bad and highly (and intentionally) misleading material even after it is conclusively proven to be wrong. Have stuff like 'Radio Free [something]' listed as good sources.

                  The only stuff that you can trust Wikipedia on is math, basically, and even then only because they provide the proofs, and even then they also keep errors found in their sources with no notes on the matter.

              • slartibartfast@lemm.ee
                ·
                11 days ago

                And a lot of others. He wasn't very discriminatory in that regard.

                Clearly in relation to killing others, but you’re too dishonest to follow the comment chain.

                • quarrk [he/him]
                  ·
                  11 days ago

                  If we’re being intellectually honest, we actually do have to hand it to Stalin that he did many good things. You’re proving the meme correct because I guarantee you don’t hold any other world-historical figure to the same standard.

                • Bureaucrat
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 days ago

                  Intellectual honesty is when you make vague unfounded claims and broad statements about moral values that are immediately contradictory to what you're doing in the very same moment. If you then get pissy when people aren't taking things seriously then you're being very intellectual

            • TC_209 [he/him, comrade/them]
              ·
              11 days ago

              You heard it here: the Bolsheviks stopping the distribution of anti-Semitic literature and the mass-killings of Jews is indefensible.

            • Lyudmila [she/her, comrade/them]A
              ·
              11 days ago

              Unfortunately, because Stalin didn't go to medical school as a small child and perform open heart surgery on a grandmother in Tashkent in 1912, he was required to stand down and let Hitler take over the world.

              Stalin's greatest crimes were his failures to discover and implement penicillin and the polio vaccine, directly making him at fault for everyone who died of any disease or old age in the Soviet Union.

            • Rod_Blagojevic [none/use name]
              ·
              edit-2
              11 days ago

              stalin-approval

              Local Georgian man discovers weird trick to fight anti-semites and the social structures that are the root cause of antisemitism.

              Liberals hate him!

            • Bureaucrat
              ·
              11 days ago

              Because this is your 2nd comment, I'm assuming you hopped over to .ee from .world. I hope you don't get banned so you can actually learn something. In the meantime, please send us your pacifist manifesto.

            • hello_hello [comrade/them]
              ·
              11 days ago

              Wait so who's the one person you can kill before you become indefensible?

              Everyone gets their one guy they can beat to death with hammers before it stops being cool.

            • Bureaucrat
              ·
              11 days ago

              If you truly believed that then you'd be a vegan hermit living in the mountains, and you'd be doing all you could to strike those who crossed your indefensible number

              In other words, this you? a-guy

          • Sundial@lemm.ee
            ·
            11 days ago

            Political opponents, military figures. A lot of people that would have threatened his rule.

            • Bureaucrat
              ·
              11 days ago

              Political opponents

              Yeah we already mentioned the nazis

              Military figures

              yeah, the nazis, we mentioned them

              • Sundial@lemm.ee
                ·
                11 days ago

                I'm pretty sure there were more than just Nazis in his kill list. The Old Bolsheviks for example.

                • Bureaucrat
                  ·
                  11 days ago

                  Well seeing as how your "pretty sure" is from wikipedia, I don't really give a shit what you think

            • Rom [he/him]
              ·
              edit-2
              11 days ago

              That's extremely vague and could easily describe Nazis, who, as others have stated, absolutely deserved to be killed. Do you have any names? Events? Places? Timespans? Anything beyond unnamed "political opponents" and "military figures"?

              • Sundial@lemm.ee
                ·
                11 days ago

                According to declassified Intel from the soviet union after it's fall there was a recorded amount of deaths of 3.3 million with approximately 1 million of them being on purpose and the rest due to neglect. You telling me they were all Nazis?

                • Rom [he/him]
                  ·
                  11 days ago

                  Which declassified intel? Again with the vagueness. Got a link to this intel so we can all read it and decide for ourselves what it says instead of just taking your word for it?

                • Bureaucrat
                  ·
                  11 days ago

                  Well according to declassified intel they were all concentration camps guards each and every one of them

                • frauddogg [null/void, undecided]
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 days ago

                  Show

                  Where's your outrage at capitalists then, cac? The magnitude of capitalism's four fucking times your bullshit settler's-encyclopedia-sourced figure; but you can only fix your face to talk about the spooky scary (extinct) soviets.

        • Bureaucrat
          ·
          edit-2
          11 days ago

          Placeholder: I made a comment about who was killed in gulags, it was removed.

          wojak-nooo noooo I can't make unsubstantiated claims that perpetuate nazi talking points about double holocaust noooooo

          Also yeah, nazis got killed in gulags.

          Here's some reading material for you

          This Soviet World - https://archive.org/details/this-soviet-world
          Blackshirts and reds - https://welshundergroundnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/blackshirts-and-reds-by-michael-parenti.pdf

          Notice how I don't make vague notions towards "wikipedia" but instead direct you to the basis of my understanding of the world. Also notice how this basis isn't a faulty online service with direct ties to the US state department and a long history of right-wing infiltration and power-user squabbles. I would put in the effort of adding the links I usually add if I thought you'd actually read them.

          Edit: or just go here https://hexbear.net/comment/168034

        • frauddogg [null/void, undecided]
          ·
          11 days ago

          You techbros always have all the energy for 'gulags' but then sit on your hands about the SLAVE PENS the Department of Corrections call prisons. This is a bad-faith position from origin just based off that.

            • frauddogg [null/void, undecided]
              ·
              edit-2
              10 days ago

              Yes it is; and it's frankly kinda weird as fuck to me that you know more about a western-mythologized concept than you do actual existent 21st century slave pens masquerading as prisons. You talk so much unverified shit about gulags, but don't have the time to even research one of the last bastions of slavery in your actual time period?

              I know you intended to use this question as that smug redditor nerd gotcha like "hah, I'm not even Amerikan" but that one question implies that you know more unverified, most-primary-sources-were-bullshit cruft about your conception of gulags than one of the largest examples of chattel slavery masquerading as 'rehabilitation' in your actual fucking lifetime; and honestly, it only disgusts me that much fuckin more

              Maybe stop digging yourself deeper if you're already up to your ears in it

            • Bureaucrat
              ·
              edit-2
              10 days ago

              Slavery being legal is also a us thing. The 13th amendment didn't outlaw slavery

              Show

              Several US prisons are just old cotton plantations, like the farm

              Soviet gulags had a higher survival rate in 1956 than the US prison system has today.

        • Bureaucrat
          ·
          edit-2
          10 days ago

          people who dared think criticism thought

          Unironically Stalin did more to ensure freedom of expression than any western "democracy" ever has.

    • frauddogg [null/void, undecided]
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      Show

      You can eat my whole ass off this take, Mr. Sundial; with a side of raspberry jam and a dusting of confectioner's sugar if you so please.

    • Bureaucrat
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      You dislike how he killed millions of nazis? Weird.

        • Bureaucrat
          ·
          10 days ago

          I'm not gonna go through all this once again, just read the thread and comment on one of the many effortposts people have made already

  • uis@lemm.ee
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    He deposited lots of human resources too. Sadly, now there is no Stalin on them.

    Context: "there is no Stalin on them" means lack of authority, complaint to which will result in positive change. It does not mean person saying it wants Stalin-era repressions.