I feel like you should have just said ‘screw it’ and vulgarly defined imperialism as a parasitic relationship.

To keep it as mindnumbingly simple as possible, imperialism looks (more or less) like this:

Not this:

Reminder that the NATO is complicit in the Portuguese anticommunists’ extermination of thousands of Africans.

The Soviets landed a probe on the moon in 1966.

The NATO is complicit in the Portuguese anticommunists’ extermination of thousands of Africans.

I’d rather not get involved in another anarchism vs. state socialism debate, but I find @[email protected]’s attitude obnoxious. While I do question if a people’s republic is the best possible way to go, dismissing the people’s republics as ‘bourgeois’ and ‘failures’ is a crappy, oversimplified conclusion that wilfully disregards the enormous gains that the working masses made in them.

Not to mention that this paskudnyak is being needlessly hostile: I trust that you despise capitalism as much as I do, so there’d be no need for me to behave smugly or condescendingly to you just because of your anarchism scepticism and preference for the people’s republics.

Anyway, like I said I’d rather not get into an argument. I just want to tell you that I sympathize with your frustrations and we don’t have to be enemies simply because we’re socialists who have different perspectives on state machinery. We can handle our disagreements respectfully.

a fascist monarchist country

The Kingdom of Romania?

⇧ literal Holodomor denial. Denying that Stalin exterminated 70 million White capitalist men is the same thing as Holocaust denial (except it’s actually way worse; the Holocaust wasn’t THAT bad)

tl;dr

Stalin massacred at least 50 million White cishet capitalist men… and even that estimate is probably too low.

I am aware.

Mount Rushmore’s sculptor admired Benito Mussolini.

@nytimes can’t manage to photograph Ukrainian soldiers without platforming Nazi wear

Why do you want Putin to genocide millions of European people with blond hair and blue eyes?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fascist_fasces.svg

Just because liberals voted for the Fascists in 1924, repeatedly praised Fascism in the press, applauded the Fascists for suppressing worker demonstrations, trained dozens of Fascist cadets, elected politicians sympathetic to Fascism, repeatedly overlooked or trivialized Fascist oppression, chanted “Deutschland, Deutschland über alles!” alongside Fascists in German government chambers, suppressed militant antifascists regularly, signed a naval pact with Fascists, extended credit to Fascists, signed military alliances with the Fascists, partitioned Czechoslovakia for the Fascists, tolerated businesses that marketed products (including oil and nickel) to Fascists, became economically critical to the Axis war machine, provided bank accounts for Fascists, bailed out Axis businessmen, held more Axis POWs than Jewish refugees, collaborated with self‐identified fascists, directly incorporated former Axis intelligence into the state, started Operation Paperclip and kept the employés, started Operation Bloodstone, appointed former Axis leaders to high ranks within the NATO, accepted surviving Axis collaborators as party members, endorsed an underground network of neofascists, allow monuments to Axis collaborators, martyrize Axis collaborators, and contribute to neofascism in Ukraine, doesn’t mean that liberalism enables fascism or fascists.

Name one time that liberalism enabled fascism.

Operation Paperclip was far more consequential than Operation Osoaviakhim. Not to mention that Operation Osoaviakhim was much more of a reparation than Operation Paperclip was. Contrary to what @[email protected] thinks, the differences between these two programmes are not trivia worth overlooking.

This is true, actually. If the hammer and sickle hadn’t massacred those 150 million straight White capitalist men, 175 billion would be alive today. So in reality the symbol killed 200 billion.

This symbol killed one hundred million straight White capitalist men.

Come on, you already know what they are going to say to that.

Hitler was only appointed as Chancellor because Hindenburg and his camarilla urgently needed a broad popular basis for their […] politics. In this respect, the popular support which the [Fascists] enjoyed made the appointment of Hitler as head of government possible. Even though a majority of Germans had voted against Hitler in the Reichstag elections of 6 November 1932, he was still the leader of the strongest political party.

(Source.)