My gut instinct only tells me to roll my eyes.

They could move somewhere safer, like Europe, yet they’re still choosing not to do so.

@AYJANIBRAHIMOV@lemmygrad.ml and I want you to be safe.

To quote the Ketef Hinnom scrolls

‘Adonai bless thee, and keep thee; Adonai make His face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee; Adonai lift up His countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.’

invading poland side by side with the nazis

This would actually be a more accurate description of the Slovak Republic’s contribution to the Fascist invasion of Poland, though it is very rare to see anticommunists mention that even in passing. I wonder why. (Presumably they’d say that it is unimportant or uninteresting, of which—as I showed in my thread—it is neither.)

Yes, but I stopped updating the megathread because of the character limit. Seriously, I added so much content to the thread that our software couldn’t take it anymore. I’ve been thinking about using Github as an alternative, though I am inexperienced with that platform and I am unsure if others would want me to continue my compilation there.

Something tells me that if I invited anticommunists to check out a source with the self‐heroizing title of ‘RFvsMisinfo’, featuring a blood‐splattered photograph from the Munich conference and various sentences presupposing that any counterevidence is ‘Western propaganda’, they would feel more than a wee discouraged, too… just saying.

Sloppy propaganda aside, it is genuinely interesting to compare and contrast the Fascists’ dealings with other dictatorships of the bourgeoisie to their dealings with the people’s republics. It isn’t useful just for dunking on anticommies. For example:

the [Fascists] knew from experience that Soviet demands were “much harder to meet than Finnish demands.”

And since somebody mentioned deportations of Jews:

between 1941 and 1944 the Finnish military [deported] at least 2,829 POWs to [the Third Reich] on 49 occasions; among the military [deportations] were over 500 individuals who were defined as “Jewish” or “political” (Communist), or both.

Admittedly, I feel like a sicko for saying that these subjects ‘interest’ me… but hey, somebody has to get their hands dirty when studying these tragedies. It’s only fitting that the one doing the job most often would also be the one who can tolerate it the best.

An organization that bombastically calls itself ‘EUvsDisinfo’, splatters a diplomatic photograph with fake blood, and preemptively dismisses counterevidence as ‘pro‐Kremlin disinformation’ does not sound like something that has an interest in exploring this matter in good faith, but I can play along (for now). Simply put, your source leaves too much counterevidence unaddressed. This, for example:

The discussion in London took place on 24 April. Halifax also backed unilateral declarations. ‘A tri-partite pact on the lines proposed, would make war inevitable. On the other hand, he thought that it was only fair to assume that if we rejected Russia’s proposals, Russia would sulk.’ And then Halifax made this comment, almost as an afterthought: ‘There was… always the bare possibility that a refusal of Russia’s offer might even throw her into Germany’s arms.’⁸⁰ Was anyone listening? If you asked the British and French everyman’s opinion, war was already inevitable.

[…]

The failures of the previous five years to obtain agreements on collective security led Molotov to want to pin the French and British to the wall to make sure they would not leave the Soviet Union in the lurch against the Wehrmacht. This was not Soviet paranoia, it was Soviet experience. Would not any prudent diplomat in the same position, after years of being spurned, mistrust interlocutors like Chamberlain and Bonnet? Maiskii’s reports appear to have encouraged the Soviet government to invest in continued negotiations. The obduracy in Moscow derived from doubts about British and French intentions which Maiskii and Surits could not overcome, and that for good reason.

(Source and more here.)

I know that I did not address everything in your link, but frankly I really doubt that you have the time, patience, or interest in reading a thoroughly sourced and exhaustive commentary on it. For simplicity’s sake I chose to focus on the denial that the liberal capitalists wanted a reinvasion of Soviet Eurasia.

You can prevent the lacrymose effects by wearing goggles while you cut the onions. Swimming goggles should work well.

🎵 GIOVINEZZA! GIOVINEZZA! PRIMAVERA DI BELLEZZA! DELLA VITA, NELL’ASPREZZA, IL TUO CANTO SQUILLA E VA! 🎵

A sports star puts in a lot of good work before becoming famous, though. That is what makes his signature valuable.

I want to see an op‐ed titled

If You Don’t Love Us, Fuck You.

black NAZI!

https://wikiless.northboot.xyz/wiki/Jackie_Arklöv

https://wikiless.northboot.xyz/wiki/Leo_Felton

Agreed. I know that the original poster isn’t siding with the Herzlians, but this is still in questionable taste.

The acceptance of gun violence in Imperial America reminds me of how mob violence became normalized in the Russian Federation. That sort of activity would have been inconceivable in the Soviet Union, but then the counterrevolutionaries laid waste to the Eastern Bloc and organized crime suddenly looked like reasonable means of survival.

Once, in the middle of a phone conversation, I heard some muffled bangs, and the phone went quiet. When I asked him what the noise was, he replied, “Oh, it was just the Russian mob firing their guns in the street.” I thought he was joking — he wasn’t.

I was too little to understand the controversy surrounding the Columbine High massacre, but I later did some research on it and it was almost astounding how everybody went apeshit finding somebody to blame, to the point where the capitalist media got in touch with Marilyn Manson and Doom nerds to confirm that they have no itch to either commit or endorse atrocities. Now? It’s hard to imagine the Columbine High massacre making anywhere near the same impact that it made decades ago.

Guess how many people I’ve converted.

Hint: the number is identical to my annual salary.

Many adults cling to Christianity because it can function as a crude coping mechanism in an uncaring society: the appeal of a higher power caring for someone is easy to see, and religious institutions in general can be convenient sources of community, especially for somebody trapped in an antisocial culture like the United States of America. I am irreligious yet I feel more comfortable revisiting a Presbertyrian church than approaching my own neighbors.

Liberation theology is not a desperate attempt to fit a square peg in a round hole. For some Abrahamists, it simply feels natural or logical to them. I am willing to agree that theology of any sort is unnecessary for emacipating oneself, but it is—at best—a waste of time trying to convince somebody to discard it since they are already on our side and their spiritual beliefs are harmless. If their beliefs remain a big deal to you, though, then you need to understand that they are symptomatic and that addressing them directly would be the wrong approach to take.

Yes, the Church has frequently been complicit in colonialism. Yes, aggressive proselytization is always wrong. Nevertheless, we also need to acknowledge that many lower‐class Christians have rebelled against their oppressors despite mainstream Church teachings, and that they are reluctant to let go of their beliefs since they are convenient sources of comfort, not necessarily because they are worried about retaliation. Religion is a double‐edged sword. The ruling class has used it as an instrument of oppression, but that does not mean that it has never backfired either.

I work as a Jewish missionary and the funny thing is that my job would handle the exact same way in a people’s republic as it would elsewhere.

Name a single time that a school shooting happened in the United States.

There has never been a mass shooting in the United States of America.