>stalin and mao

>pretty cool

alright,ignore how they killed the most humans in history

I agree @Deleted User that they had some pretty bad authoritarianism, as an Anarchist I see that as pretty bad. But I think their achievenments were pretty cool, not necessarily themselves.

also @Shwiani, Stalin mainly killed Kulaks (which is good) and some anarchists (which is bad),but most humans in history? far from it. The statistic that says "Communism Killed 100 Million people" is an exaggeration from the Black Book of Communism, which concluded it was 94 million. The source itself was exaggerated too. In fact, the publishers of the Black Book of Communism went back and said that they greatly exagerrated their sources to drive up the numbers! For instance, they considered anybody arrested to be "a death under communism". Furthermore, the population of Russia actually INCREASED during stalin's reign from 1922-1952, from 120 million to 140 million. If 20 million were supposedly "killed under communism", then wouldn't that population increase in fact be a DECREASE? And on the topic of famines, the industrialization policies under Stalin and Mao actually ENDED famines in their respective countries-- famines which plagued the nations for hundreds of years.

So to say that "they killed the most humans in history" is a capitalist lie

Now do I agree with Stalin and Mao?

No, I think industrialization and re-militarization of thier nations could esaily be achieved under Anarchism, without resorting to Totalitarianism.

But that doesn't mean I should whine and say they were big meanies that killed a hundred quadrillion people

kulaks were assholes, but that doesn't justify killing them

eh, i dont mind that stalin gulaged the filthy grain horders

and the nazis deserved what they got in ww2

everything else however, stalin wasn't justified in doing

yeah

what do you think about "holodomor"? Genocide or simply bad weather conditions and incompetency?

anarchism

I think that holodomor was a combination of bad weather conditions and bueacratic incompetency.

For instance, the soviet regime sold a lot of their grain mostly to buy machine parts for industrialization, which eventually got the food situation under control but for the time being only increased the levels of starvation.

yeah

I also don't think it could've been a genocide, because it mostly effected peasants. There is no way in hell that I could believe that Joseph Stalin would lead a genocide to KILL PEASANTS.

The entire communist ideology is based around PROTECTING the peasants, and Stalin was and alwasy has been a die-hard communist

hell, he read up on communism very extently in his university days

yeah

and in an interview one of his bodygaurds said that he went out of his way to give people waiting for their late bus one day rides to their location

he's given plenty of lectures at universities too

he drove them himself

that too

so I don't agree with the very liberal view of history that says "Stalin was a big meanie that just wanted power and corrupted the soviet union with genocides and bad stuff"

also I like your pfp. BREAK THE CHAINS

sure he had some imperialistic aspects to him, and he had some questionable choices at times

but he's still my comreade

thanks bro

direct rule from london

cant use caps apparently

huh

it let me use caps

thats because half your sentence was lowercase, the entirety of my sentence was uppercase

ah

so "direct rule FROM LONDON" works

but not "DIRECT RULE FROM LONDON" I'm afraid

feelsbadman