So, over the past year I have learnt so much about the amazing achievements these men (and the party they were the leaders of) did that I was never taught. I’ve ‘semi-intentionally’ deprogrammed myself of so much anti-communism bullshit while having to live with that most still in the West, based upon misinformation, view them as ‘evil, 100 quintillion deaths, dictator, psychopath where muh freedoms’.
The reason I am focusing on Stalin and Mao in particular in this post is, to be very open, due to a truth-seeking hyperfixation that I must satisfy so I can move on to the next topic of intense, dopamine chasing, obsession. Yeah I love being me. Anyway, propaganda, mythologising, exaggerating and misattributed blame brushed aside, what is left?
I am quite knowledgeable of, thanks to some high quality M-L documentaries, educational videos and podcast episodes, the more obvious wrongdoings such as the Great Leap Forward killing of pests worsening the famine, purges of comrades who were legitimately innocent, re-criminalising homosexuality, support of Khmer Rouge and ethnic deportations to name a few.
I wouldn’t mind hearing more obscure examples, or a deeper analysis of the mistakes and unjustifiable actions I am already aware of. And as much as a few good book recommendations probably would give me the answers I crave, I am lowkey illiterate with long-form reading thanks to my ADHD (still waiting on meds after being diagnosed 8 months ago).
hiiiiiii, comrade!! u’re listing things u see as unjustifiable. can i ask why?
‘unjustifiable regardless of context’ is a moral claim, not a historical one. lack of examination surrounding WHY these decisions were made will leave us in the dark. if we can’t understand them, we can’t learn from them.
on each point u raised — the recriminalization of homosexuality, forced migrations, Stalin and Israel, Mao and the Khmer Rouge - I’m happy to discuss the details. but i’m not going to start from a position of moralizationand. That’s not analysis.
if u want to have a materialist convo, i am hereeee
The only one who mentioned morality is you.
Good job, you noticed!! I’m describing you, moralizing in a marxist space.
No, you aren’t, because that’s not what I was doing. That was the point of my reply: you are the only one bringing up morality. I did no such thing. I didn’t say any of my objections were based in morality; that was an assumption you made.
moralizing isn’t about the word, it’s about the framing. ‘unjustifiable,’ ‘indisputably bad,’ ‘no excuse,’ and ‘should’ve known better.’ is all moralization.
i want to learn shit here, not argue about definitions or semantics, or good vs. evil, or anything to do with moralization.
do you want to have a historical conversation?
None of that is inherently moralizing language.
A justification is a rationalization; a reasoning for doing something.
“Bad” can be a description of quality. A bad policy can be an ineffectual or counter-productive one, not simply one which is morally wrong.
An excuse is just a flimsy justification for something that failed. No moral quantifying is necessary when using this word.
“Know better”, like bad, does not automatically infer morality.
To repeat myself: I did not make any moral assessments. You assumed I did and are doubling down because you don’t seem to understand how these words are used.
Is English your first language?
u’re playin a semantic game. You used moral language: ‘unjustifiable,’ ‘indisputably bad,’ ‘no excuse.’ now you’re pretending those words don’t carry moral weight. stop deflecting.
if you want to have a materialist conversation about stalin’s policies, i’m here for it.
No, I made an observation due to a 1-year pattern of your comments using a bunch of synonyms for “evil” and “bad”. This isn’t a church. We’re materialists, not priests.
Nice ad hominem. Stop deflecting.