The fuck did i just read?
I’m genuinely stunned after reading that. Like, I actually don’t understand
do you have a link?
Abbreviates you to u and your to ur, but does not abbreviate for to 4 or counter-revolution to ctr-rev or government to gov. This is a sign of someone who’s very inconsistent.
“HITLER NEVER WOULD HAVE TAKEN POWER WITHOUT THOSE DASTARDLY BOLSHEVIKS”Yeah, sure, it had nothing to do with the whole continent being populated by tiny Hitlers in the making. It was actually the opposition to fascism that made the fascists do it. Return Europe to the stone age, no more internet access for the racism continent.
This isn’t even Molotov-Ribbentrop brainrot, BTW, Hitler took power years before the war. I don’t see how this can be anything but blaming Hitlerism on the corrupting influence of the Bolsheviks, which is advanced-level European racism (we’re bringing back “Judeo-Bolshevism”, but now to excuse the nazis lmao).
That implication isn’t certain. An alternate (charitable?) reading of it is that they’re saying that a revolutionary state dominated by anarchists (or by a broad united front) would have been strong enough to never allow the monarchies to invade, and pre-empt the fascists from taking power at least in Germany.
This begs the question, though. Historically, we don’t see united fronts being all that stable and we don’t see anarchists becoming regional geopolitical heavy hitters. If the recipe for these clearly existed in 1917, why has it not been employed since then?
Anyway, this is why I so firmly take the stance of “history doesn’t prove very much definitively; there simply isn’t the sample size required to be scientific”. There are lots of possible outcomes from any scenario, and no one has the special knowledge to make history proceed only in their preferred way.
Yes. Like…literally what the genuine fuck? I uses to be an anarchist but I never thought anything close to this. This is coconuts
I actually think there’s some validity to this.
Hitler wouldn’t have gotten nearly as much support from the German and international bourgeoisie and aristocracy if they weren’t terrified by the prospect of the successful proletarian revolution happening across the Baltic. Fascism is the immune response of Capitalism and if there was no red plague there may not have been a brown fever.
Does that make Hitler and WWII Lenin or the Bolshevik’s fault?
Obviously not, that’s a ridiculous line to draw, and the Soviet revolution was ultimately successful in crushing the Nazi reaction and saving the world from fascism. But I don’t think it’s incorrect to say that without Lenin there may not have been a Hitler.
Well yes, it’s true in that sense, but that’s definitely not what the redditor meant.
It was also inevitable that the bourgeois would need fascism to defend their interests, I think, European capitalism was falling apart and if it hadn’t been the USSR it might have been something else. I think it would be more correct to say that both communism and fascism grew out of European capitalism.
Frankly it’s just a weird hypothetical to indulge in.
Socialism (in various forms) was popular across the European continent at the time and tiny revolutions were popping off everywhere. Yeah if the October Revolution hadn’t happened maybe the Nazis would have never come to be. But, ANY socialist revolution being successful would spark a reactionary backlash. So if the Bolsheviks had lost maybe the Nazis would have never come to be, but what then? Another socialist revolution was going to happen somewhere, which would likely spark it’s own reactionary response.
I feel like these people want to wait for some mythical opportune moment when the revolution can happen in a cleaner way. Where maybe we need to execute some billionaires and maybe some of their more ardent reactionary hounds, but no actual complicated, long, bloody revolution proper has to happen.
Is this “anarchist” coming out in support of Kerensky’s government???
Literally all these people care about is preserving bourgeois electoral “democracy”, isn’t it?
Uh, they’ve read History.
I know we like to say these people aren’t anarchists, almost to the point it’s starting to sound like well-meaning cope
But, in this case it’s as true as can be, that pro-Kerensky line about Lenin being “counterrevolutionary” is the most common refrain from liberal historians and propagandists, particularly those invested in the whitewashing of fascist movements, real cold warrior mentality
No serious historian would ever assert Kerensky had anything approaching a pro-anarchist position, and the deliberate attempt to erase agency from fascist powers points to a very ugly kind of personal liberalism that is about to mutate and turn this person into an outright fascist
That’s all reddit does these days since the covid purges, spread fascist narratives
To be fair to anarchists, Russian anarchists in 1917 hated Kerensky almost as much as preceding governments.
Exactly, that Redditor is an historical illiterate
TBH, almost all takes on anarchists in Russian Civil War has a fairy tale take on history limited to Makhno. The actual history was complex and a complete chaotic mess.
In most cases it’s just anti-bolshevism rather and pro anything. I think we were thought it in school as a second example of the revolution eating it’s children after the fr*nch revolution.
Being pro revolution but anti Lenin just seems like such an incredibly strange position.
The load-bearing parts are them saying Lenin did a counter-revolution. Also, basically saying the USSR only got invaded due to the Soviets and not fascist expansionism.
Also, basically saying the USSR only got invaded due to the Soviets and not fascist expansionism.
Much worse than this. Saying Hitler only took power because of the Soviets, which was long before the war. This is literally blaming European fascism on the opposition to European fascism. “Look what you made me do!”
STOP RESISTING
How one cancels change by changing things more remains a mystery
If this is how you view the world then what could you ever be happy about? Like how can a historical moment that is so positive for everyone else who believes in the emancipation of all working and oppressed people become a tragedy in your eyes? Do they also rage at the Wright brothers and the Spartacus rebellion?
Or is this someone even more pathetic, who holds revolutionaries up to a completely impossible standard yet actually gets hyped for liberal politicians like Kamala Harris and Kier Starmer?
Or is this someone even more pathetic, who holds revolutionaries up to a completely impossible standard yet actually gets hyped for liberal politicians like Kamala Harris and Kier Starmer?
It’s got to be this. I think the support of the provisional government gives it away.
Can I reply using this?
sorry was sleeping but sure
I mean, the Wright Brothers weren’t villains or anything but at the time there was a lot of rightful concern about how this would lead to air-to-ground bombardment with slaughter at an incredible scale, which proved true in a few decades.
they don’t got internet
Something tells me this is one of those “anarchy is when no laws” chuds.
Kind of reminds me of when the guitarist(?) from black metal band Mayhem joined a communist party because he was a legitimately bad person who wanted to hurt others, then became disappointed and left when he realised that the propaganda wasn’t true and the communist party actually wanted to help people.
Someone’s getting their history from that movie, The King’s Man
Fun movie but that Hitler and Lenin set the end was one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever seen, even in a movie as ridiculous as that one. Like, ever lol.
If there’s one thing I know about anarchism, it’s that it can be counted upon to support the government.
Yeah, it’s really a good move for the “caretaker government” to split into two factions, one supporting the deadly quagmire of a war they came to office opposing, and then support a soft military coup to suppress the anti-war movement. Really taking care there!
Uh, this is the kind of stuf western intelligentsia teaches you. I know people like make fun of em, but all it takes is one of these people infiltrating your organizing efforts and they will stir shit up.
i’d be a little more taken aback if it was heavily upvoted. There are many strange people on the internet and this is definitely one of them.
