What is everyone's thoughts on this? I think this kind of self-criticism and nuance is valuable, and a worthwhile exercise.

But I think it suffers from a framing problem. After presenting the nuances of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, re: Poland. Bad-mouse says "If you're hearing this and thinking 'anti-communism' you're missing the point".

But I don't get that impression from the facts, I get that impression from the way the facts are being framed. The facts are the facts, and we can, and should, have a fruitful, nuanced, discussion as to how the Soviet Union handled the national question in this period, whether the taking of certain parts of Poland after WW2 was just, relations with the Baltic states, etc.

But this isn't framed in that way. It's framed in an almost ultra-left, social-imperialism way, which is what leads me to react to this as anti-communist.

The Soviets anexxing a chunk of eastern Poland that roughly corresponded to what Imperial Russia took in the Third Partition should raise some eyebrows. For instance, it might lead us to ask how a socialist state, formed from a formerly feudal land empire might unwittingly inherit some forms of that old logic.

But that act, in and of itself, is not imperialism. It doesn't match Lenin's definition. Which, if we're doing leftist criticism, we should be using as some kind of standard. Calling it imperialism feels disingenuous.