I’ve seen too much of this. No, the nazis and the Soviets were not equivalent.
Do. Better.
But though the camps that made up Auschwitz seemed silent and abandoned at first, soldiers soon realized they were filled with people—thousands of them, left to die by SS guards who evacuated the camps after trying to cover up their crimes. As they saw the soldiers, the emaciated prisoners hugged, kissed and cried.
“They rushed toward us shouting, fell on their knees, kissed the flaps of our overcoats, and threw their arms around our legs,” remembered Georgii Elisavetskii, one of the first Red Army soldiers to step into Auschwitz. After five years of hell, Auschwitz was liberated at last.
deleted by creator
Don’t worry about the gay people who were kept imprisoned in the camps by the allies though. It was a different time and they had been civics according to law and yadda yaddy yadda.
As if libs have ever cared about what scholars think. They’ll be drowning in a boiling ocean screaming about how we can still stop this with a few more carbon offsets
Libs absorb nazi propaganda like a sponge.
Strange how that is.
almost like they have absorbed the culture of the country they live in. a certain type of country.
Certainly not a country that directly inspired the holocaust though.
One man’s manifest destiny is another man’s lebensraum.
My favorite thing to say to piss off rightwingers and make libs go 😨 is “The only difference between lebensraum and manifest destiny is the latter was completed successfully”
It is wild to me that I was an adult when I finally found out that Hitler was actually inspired by the US’s attempted genocide of Native Americans. That’s something everyone should know.
I live in one of the deeply unserious European countries where double genocide is essentially our mainstream WW2 narrative. I was an adult when I found out that I’ve been literally taught a nazi distortion of the Holocaust in middle school and high school. I had to do my own research to realize the scope of my country’s participation in the Holocaust, which was relegated to footnotes in history textbooks and glossed over by my teachers. You can bet that the Ribbentop-Molotov pact was repeatedly hammered into us as this vile alliance between equally evil empires, though.
I beg any liberals who might be reading this thread in genuine good faith: read the article linked further up and do your best to at least consider the perspective it presents.
And Jim Crow laws! Don’t forget about those
deleted by creator
Lmao
The only thing Stalin did wrong was not go past Berlin
Source on Jewish scholars views on this? I’m collecting sources to debunk debunked talking points like this theory.
David Katz is one of the best, and most accessible, especially on how the Baltic states have deliberately curated and used it to whitewash their own Nazi pasts and current far-right - mostly because he spent about 25 years living and researching it there (he now lives and teaches in Lithuania).
This a the useful overview article that I posted the other day.
He also collaborated with a number of other academics and historians to create the DefendingHistory website. Here’s their archive on double genocide related stuff. There’s some background links at the top, then papers by different authors, then related news articles etc.
Thanks a lot
No worries comrade.
Ah, the “double genocide” theorists. What a delightful bunch of historical revisionists. It’s like they took a drunken joyride through the annals of history and crashed straight into the “Bad Takes” tree. Comparing the Soviet Union to the Nazis? Might as well compare a stubbed toe to a decapitation.
And you can bet your ass that most of these armchair historians haven’t even read a book on the topic. It’s all surface-level, cherry-picked facts with more holes than a block of Swiss cheese. It’s historical interpretation with the depth of a kiddie pool. Dive in, and you’re gonna crack your head open.
Honestly, it’s a disservice to the real complexities of history. But nuance, for these folks, seems to be a concept as elusive as a unicorn riding a Bigfoot. The actual victims, the real-life people affected by these events, deserve better than to be pawns in someone’s misguided, edgy take on history.
So, to those pushing the “double genocide” theory: Maybe spend less time trying to stir the pot with wild equivalences and more time, I dunno, actually understanding the depth and breadth of historical events. And for the love of God, please get some new reading glasses, because your perspective is blurrier than a foggy window smeared with bullshit.
I like the comparison of surgery with some fuck ups to being beaten to death with a baseball bat.
They love to cherry pick, yeah. And somehow their cherry picking makes the nazis look comparatively better. Curious
Sure they’ve read a book, Gulag Archipelago
Don’t even get me started on that capitalist propaganda piece known as The Gulag Archipelago…
So, Solzhenitsyn decides to pen this mammoth of a book, which is basically a relentless bitch-fest about the Soviet prison system. Look, buddy, I get it – gulags ain’t no five-star resorts. But what’s with the endless whining? It’s like listening to someone complain about a bad Tetris game when the blocks just won’t fit right. Only this time, the blocks are tales of sorrow and despair, and, boy, does Solzhenitsyn lay it on thick!
This dude’s blending memoir, history, and his personal gripes into a cocktail of anti-communist drivel. It’s like trying to make vodka out of moldy potatoes and rainwater. Sure, it might get you drunk, but you’ll wish you never took a sip!
Oh, and the size of this thing! It’s like Solzhenitsyn’s trying to outdo Tolstoy in the “lengthy Russian novels that no one actually finishes” competition. It’s the literary equivalent of a speedrunner trying to complete a glitchy game with no save points.
And, let’s talk ideology. This guy’s so hell-bent on painting communism as the devil’s own ideology that he basically ignores any nuanced discussion. It’s like playing a game where the only strategy is to spam the attack button and hope for the best. Bro, maybe take a step back and see the bigger picture. Not everything’s black and white, you know?
So, while “The Gulag Archipelago” might serve as a wet dream for anti-communist folks, it’s like a broken cartridge to me – full of glitches, bias, and a one-sided perspective. If you’re looking for a balanced take on history, maybe look elsewhere. If you’re just here for the dramatic horror stories and want to bash communism, then, by all means, dive into this ocean of capitalist tears. But don’t say I didn’t warn ya.
My hottest take: The Gulag Archipelago (which I read in its entirety back in my lib days) is pretty good as a piece of fiction
Lolol
The way I’ve heard that book described is not fact, but urban legends, or fairy tales, from the gulags that people have related. Like, it isn’t accurate factually, but it encompasses the feelings of a few people (including the author) had about being there.
His ex wife called it “folklore”
https://www.nytimes.com/1974/02/06/archives/solzhenitsyns-exwife-says-gulag-is-folklore.html
Yes this is the word I couldn’t think of.
the subtitle is unironically An Experiment in Literary Investigation
“Surely this must be a serious scholastic work!”
– arbitrary liberal, probably
this book is ASS
that’s all I’ve got
bunch of historical revisionists
double genocide specifically is nazi ideology but revisionist history isn’t in general necessarily a bad thing unless you support the status quo
I’m a bit confused, would a revisionist history be non-materialistic in nature?
it’s basically just when you challenge previous mainstream history, i.e. history as determined by all of the entrenched institutional gatekeeping mechanisms of academia for whatever era. that’s a good thing for people who think that e.g. cold war historiography is distorted
a lot of the time you’ll hear wrt ancient or medieval history revisionist scholars starting to consider things more from the perspective of average working people of the time instead of taking at face value the received wisdom (i.e. spin) from the wealthy who wrote the old histories. or a lot of the time liberal society moves forward or information comes to light etc and the universities can be a site for revisionism of their own old histories. the 1619 project is a good example of mainstream historical revisionism.
Just so long as the depth and breadth doesn’t obscure the basic facts:
- The Nazi government consciously decided to exterminate about 12 million people, in an attempt at ethnic cleansing
- The Soviet Union’s government consciously decided to exterminate about 1.6 million people, in an attempt at political cleansing
- The Soviet Union also, through gross ineptitude, starved an additional 3.5 - 5.0 million people
Do you agree that these things happened?
Mods we got holocaust denial over here!
It’s technically not holocaust denial, they got their ethnic cleansing death toll pretty reasonable. Double genocide works by dragging down the Holocaust and dragging up the USSR’s deaths, they’re only doing the latter. Obviously none of us agree with their take on the USSR’s situatuon but I wanna give them a minute to say their piece so we can talk about it
Genocide and ethnic cleansing are not interchangeable. Genocide is destruction of a group of people, ethnic cleansing is physical expulsion or exclusion of a group of people from an area.
Trying to downplay genocide as ethnic cleansing is arguably a type of Holocaust denial, but most people don’t understand the nuances.
I’ve spoken with that user before and they’re a piece of shit, but you can do as you please
They’re unironically an objectivist
lmao looked at their post history and they literally cite Ayn Rand
When the Bolsheviks took away a faildaughter’s estate and made her have to mingle with the poors until she ragequit to the United States
Writing extremely bloated masturbatory fanfic about how the rich are rapacious living gods that ragequit to a magical gulch powered by science fantasy until the poors beg for the living gods to return
deleted by creator
“Holocaust trivialization” is a term I learned today after researching what the double genocide theory is, that I think applies here.
Alright, comrades, put on your thinking caps, because we’re diving into the cesspool of historical oversimplification, and it smells like capitalist pig slop! Let’s break down this capitalist propaganda down piece by piece:
-
Nazi Extermination: No bones about it – the Nazis were grade-A shitheads. Their systematic and conscious decision to wipe out around 12 million people in the name of ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity. Period. It’s the darkest level in the game of human history, and they played it with sadistic glee.
-
Soviet Extermination for Political Reasons: 1.6 million? That’s a hefty (and grossly inaccurate) number, comrade, but let’s add a little context, shall we? No one’s saying the Soviet regime was always all rainbows and kittens. But you’ve got to understand the political climate and the paranoia of the times. I ain’t condoning it, but I sure as hell am not going to let you oversimplify it into a neat little bullet point for your anti-communist agenda. Many of those deaths were during the Civil War and the turbulent times that followed.
-
Starvation Numbers: Ah, the classic “Stalin starved millions” narrative. While there’s truth to the great famine, pinning it all on “gross ineptitude” is like blaming a game’s poor graphics entirely on one pixel. Factors like weather conditions, and yes, mismanagement, played a role. But to toss out numbers like 3.5 - 5.0 million as if it’s just another score on a leaderboard? Classy.
Alright, now let’s delve into the issue of “intentionality” even deeper. While you’re busy playing the “Evil Olympics”, let’s not forget some important nuances:
The big ol’ narrative floating around is that both the Nazis and the Soviets had these grand plans to exterminate people like it’s some fucked up DLC they both decided to download. But here’s where you’re more twisted than a pretzel in a tornado: while the Nazis clearly and explicitly had extermination policies (hello, Final Solution), the Soviets were a different beast. The Soviet government never launched a campaign with the explicit aim of exterminating entire ethnic or political groups. Sure, there were purges, relocations, and episodes of repression. The likes of the Holodomor, where millions died due to a famine in Ukraine in the early 1930s, is a tragic event in Soviet history. But labeling it as a deliberate attempt at extermination? That’s like trying to speedrun a game without knowing the controls.
Now, did the Soviet regime have policies that inadvertently or through neglect may have led to death? Yes. Did they, like the Nazis, have a master plan for the systematic extermination of entire groups? No. The two are not the same, no matter how much some armchair historians want to mash them together. See, history ain’t a black and white pixel art game. It’s a complex, 4K, multi-layered RPG. And trying to simplify it with broad brushstrokes does a disservice to everyone who lived, suffered, and died during those times. So, next time you want to drop “facts”, make sure you’ve got the full game manual, not just the cheat codes.
-
lmao hey look it’s that 1.6 million number that includes German POW deaths
I see someone stumbled across Applebaum
The Soviets lost over 26 million people to the nazis, why aren’t you counting those?
Also politically cleansing monarchists and fascists isn’t equivalent to murdering Jewish and gay people.
How are these comparable?
-
Mass genocide
-
A civil war
-
Famine in a region prone to regular famines for centuries (the last famine the region ever had I might add)
If we’re comparing large numbers of deaths here we should throw the British Empire’s record and the US Empire’s record alongside them. The British Empire probably has both beat with the India famine alone, the US genocide of native americans is estimated at over 100million. We’re accepting those as products of their time though? Why? Why are we comparing only the soviets to the nazis and not them?
Nobody is going to disagree that those happened here. But the framing you’re doing is fucked.
(Just a clarification comrade - and I could be wrong, I’m doing this from memory - but I think the 100 million number is genocide across all of the western hemisphere from 1492. The figure I’ve seen for just what was contained the present USA is around 10 million. Doesn’t make it any less evil of course, death to America, but just wanted to clarify that for posterity)
100 million is the number including diseases brought over and spreading mostly on their own.
-
you’re one dumb motherfucker
ethnic cleansing
Ethnic cleansing is the explosion of an ethnic group from a geographical area. The Nazis did not attempt to ethnically cleanse Europe of Jewish, Romani, Slavic, etc people.
Genocide is the act of destroying an ethnic group via destruction of individuals of that group. The Nazis did attempt to commit genocide against Jewish, Romani, Slavic, etc people.
They didn’t attempt, they just did.
Yes, bad phrasing on my part. The Nazis attempted to carry out the complete annihilation of those groups, but only succeeded in partially annihilating those groups.
However, the definition of genocide covers attempted destruction in part of a group. For example, killing all the X people in Y city is still genocide.
beep beep beepwho’s the 1.6 million? And does the 3.5 - 5.0 million figure account for naturally occurring drought, needless deaths brought on by embargo, and farm owners intentionally and preemptively destroying their grain and slaughtering their livestock (cited by Wikipedia, see [17]) to prevent peasants from getting any of it?
I’d love to engage in good faith with you on this, what are your thoughts?
To be clear, I do believe that central mismanagement played a role in the death toll, but I also believe (and precedent suggests) that a capitalist state in charge of the same situation would see far, far more deaths and suffering
Even if we accepted those numbers at face value, which we obviously shouldn’t, you’re still admitting the Nazis were far worse even by your own made up standards.
Your statistics, using the very same standards you used to cook the books to make them happen, would easily qualify the million-plus that were killed by covid in the United States alone as a conscious decision to exterminate those who died from it.
You are not nearly as clever as you think you are, bootlicker.
That’s less than a full step away from the truth though
I know that, but that liberal isn’t ready to hear that yet.
