Even the book you posted acknowledges that the reasons for the revolutions were legit FFS.
If you've read literally anything I've posted in this thread you'll see my take on Colour Revolutions - that they're very problematic as there's usually a legitimate reason to protest.
Doesn't detract from the fact that the Hungarian COlour Revolution was quickly coopted by fascistic elements armed and supported by UK and US
Yes, SOME of them were, but not all of them, not nearly the most of them and there was active resistance in the movement against fascistic elements.
Thats literally what a colour revolution is - taking over of an original movement.
it was never an anticommunist movement in essence.
Except for all the fascists marking the homes of the doors Communists and Jews during the protests when they thought they were gaining momentum and would topple the government there
It didn’t matter however because the tanks came and murdered everyone indiscriminately.
Too fucking right. Oh boo hoo you ended up on the side of counter revolution cos you couldn't discern the class forces at work and just wanted to build 'rEaL sOcIaLiSm" without the class struggle or struggle against imperialism? Get fucked
Bonus: "Not of an anticommunist nature" lol my arse. They lynched jews and communists, dragged them through the streets, spit on their bodies and burned pictures of Lenin and Stalin because "actually they were true Communists" and also stopped to have their picture taken with an American (CIA)
This "true" socialism sounds really cool and good. Also TIME magazine had them on their front cover as "freedom fighters" the same way they did for the Muhjadeen. I didn't realise TIME magazine were interested in promoting anti-Revisionist Communists. That's really cool and good I'll get a subscription to the beautiful anti-revisionist Communist TIME magazine
Me: The Hungarian revolution was far more complex than you think, there was constant infighting between the right wing elements who tried, but couldn't coopt the movement, and the left wing elements, who had legitimate grievances and while there were atrocities, the main object of the mass movement was not to overthrow communism, they explicitly stated that, the right wingers weren't even allowed in the meetings of the protesters, it's all well documented in local sources.
You, an intellectual Marxist theory reader: They were in time so they're bad *barfs a thirdhand source calling the "leader" of the revolution (hint: there wasn't one) a fascist despite he was actively pushing for socialist policies like pardoning communists jailed by the previous fascist state his predecessor couldn't be assed to do that, a fascist.
If you've read literally anything I've posted in this thread you'll see my take on Colour Revolutions - that they're very problematic as there's usually a legitimate reason to protest.
Doesn't detract from the fact that the Hungarian COlour Revolution was quickly coopted by fascistic elements armed and supported by UK and US
Thats literally what a colour revolution is - taking over of an original movement.
Except for all the fascists marking the homes of the doors Communists and Jews during the protests when they thought they were gaining momentum and would topple the government there
Too fucking right. Oh boo hoo you ended up on the side of counter revolution cos you couldn't discern the class forces at work and just wanted to build 'rEaL sOcIaLiSm" without the class struggle or struggle against imperialism? Get fucked
Bonus: "Not of an anticommunist nature" lol my arse. They lynched jews and communists, dragged them through the streets, spit on their bodies and burned pictures of Lenin and Stalin because "actually they were true Communists" and also stopped to have their picture taken with an American (CIA)
This "true" socialism sounds really cool and good. Also TIME magazine had them on their front cover as "freedom fighters" the same way they did for the Muhjadeen. I didn't realise TIME magazine were interested in promoting anti-Revisionist Communists. That's really cool and good I'll get a subscription to the beautiful anti-revisionist Communist TIME magazine
https://imgur.com/a/1wda0
https://imgur.com/a/kXzat
Me: The Hungarian revolution was far more complex than you think, there was constant infighting between the right wing elements who tried, but couldn't coopt the movement, and the left wing elements, who had legitimate grievances and while there were atrocities, the main object of the mass movement was not to overthrow communism, they explicitly stated that, the right wingers weren't even allowed in the meetings of the protesters, it's all well documented in local sources.
You, an intellectual Marxist theory reader: They were in time so they're bad *barfs a thirdhand source calling the "leader" of the revolution (hint: there wasn't one) a fascist despite he was actively pushing for socialist policies like pardoning communists jailed by the previous fascist state his predecessor couldn't be assed to do that, a fascist.