DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Questions & Debates
*****************************************************
#Post#: 8569--------------------------------------------------
Re: Questions Regarding Aryanism
By: guest30 Date: September 3, 2021, 5:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
@Dazhbog
[quote] Wikipedia - Indonesian invasion of East Timor
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_invasion_of_East_Timor[/quote]
From my research on [s]Indonesia[/s] Nusantara under Suharto
dictatorial leadership (from 1967 until 1998), he ordered
Indonesian military to ruthlessly invade East Timor because
their government's ideological view which tend to leftism and
socialism ideology, meanwhile Suharto was United States and
Britain (United Kingdom)-backed Indonesian leader which gain
power with their secret agents's assistance, CIA (United
States's secret agent) and MI6 (Britain's secret agent), through
overthrowing already anti-colonialist and pro-socialist leader
Sukarno, who is supported Communist China and Communist Russia,
which during that time are supported leftism ideology, so
Nusantara forcedly to be a nation who supported capitalist and
aligned with colonialist Western European nations.[sup][1][/sup]
And this pro-Western European leader Suharto also ordered his
government to wiped out many left wing people as many as
possible through silent murder, imprisonment, and fire the
suspect people from governmental position, made a fake
propaganda to discriminate Chinese people racially and portray
them as a "Communist rebel" people to Nusantara society,
repressed majority of muslim people, and also, repressed Papuan
people on East Nusantara with ruthless military rule which
resulting endless civil war and racism of majority native
non-Papua Indonesian people to them until now, because during
Suharto leadership, the construction of people's facility only
centered to majority people of Javanese racial background, and
the Papuanese people repressed and rarely to be given
development, so they seen by native non-Papua Indonesian people
as "backward" and "uncivilized".[sup][2][/sup]
And also, Suharto made more debt to my people, because he betray
our people by accepted the Western European debt-based economic
system which forcibly imposed by elite "white European"
conglomerates from United States and Britain during 1967 which
still implemented until now.[sup][3][/sup]
And it's hardly a leader to be considered as "anti-colonialist"
when his enemy was people who attracted to anti-colonial
movements, I consider East Timor independence and separatism is
because [s]Indonesia[/s] Nusantara was not supporting
goodhearted socialist goals anymore, and become decadent and pro
capitalist Western European nations degenerate. And also not
surprise if United States, and their allies strongly support my
nation under Suharto leadership.
Source :
1. How we destroyed Sukarno | The Independent
HTML https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/how-we-destroyed-sukarno-1188448.html
2. Menyaksikan 30 Tahun Pemerintahan Otoriter Soeharto
3. Western oppression which They Never Want to Pay Back -
Documentary Video
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wOFGvZeP2s
If you want to see the real Nusantara anti-colonial action,
Nusantara's attack and invasion to pro-Britain Malaysia,
Operation Trikora is the correct information for you
Source :
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesia%E2%80%93Malaysia_confrontation
"The Indonesia–Malaysia confrontation or Borneo confrontation
(also known by its Indonesian/Malay name, Konfrontasi) was a
violent conflict from 1963–66 that stemmed from Indonesia's
opposition to the creation of Malaysia. After Indonesian
president Sukarno lost power in October 1965, the dispute ended
peacefully and the nation of Malaysia was born.
The creation of Malaysia was a merger of the Federation of
Malaya (now Peninsular Malaysia), Singapore and the British
crown colonies of North Borneo and Sarawak (collectively known
as British Borneo, now East Malaysia) in September 1963.[23]
Vital precursors to the conflict included Indonesia's policy of
confrontation against Netherlands New Guinea from March-August
1962 and the Brunei Revolt in December 1962. Malaysia had direct
military support from Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand.
Indonesia had indirect support from the USSR and especially
China, thus making it an episode of the Cold War in Asia."
Source :
HTML https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Trikora
Operation Trikora was an Indonesian military operation which
aimed to seize and annex the Dutch overseas territory of
Netherlands New Guinea in 1961 and 1962. After negotiations, the
Netherlands signed the New York Agreement with Indonesia on 15
August 1962, relinquishing control of Western New Guinea to the
United Nations.
...
While the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia sided
with the Netherlands' claims to Western New Guinea and were
opposed to Indonesian expansionism, they were unwilling to
commit military support to the Dutch. The Netherlands was unable
to find sufficient international support for its New Guinea
policy. By contrast, Sukarno was able to muster the support of
the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies, and the Non-Aligned
Movement. In response to Indonesian claims, the Netherlands sped
up the process of implementing West Papuan self-rule from 1959
onward. These measures included the establishment of a
legislative New Guinea Council in 1960, establishing hospitals,
completion of a shipyard in Manokwari, development of
agricultural research sites and plantations; and the creation of
the Papuan Volunteer Corps to defend the territory.[9][10]
[quote]
HTML https://static.republika.co.id/uploads/images/inpicture_slide/indonesia-and-us-flags-illustration-_130117074152-441.jpg[/quote]
Western European nations never want us to be free, and they want
to oppress us every single day, and not Russia who oppress us
#Post#: 8584--------------------------------------------------
Re: Questions Regarding Aryanism
By: guest30 Date: September 4, 2021, 8:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Another facts of treatment of "black" people in [b]Nazi
Germany[/b]
"To be sure, Afro-Germans[sup]266[/sup] were considered
[color=red]second or third class citizens in the Third
Reich[/color] (Jews actually had their citizenship revoked), but
the Germans were always quick to point at American racism and
duplicity when it came to the treatment of its own black
population before the war. Jim Crow was the political linchpin
around which German anti-American propaganda centered in this
regard. The black population of Germany was no doubt quite small
in comparison to the black population of America. Only about
20,000 blacks lived in Germany during Hitler’s first year in
office.[sup]267[/sup] However, Ottley, Campt, and Horne, as well
as Germans themselves, did not see German society as comparable
to American society. Their respective racisms were different,
because they had different political cultures. Not surprisingly,
some “top German officers in Paris had maintained Negro
mistresses.”[sup]268[/sup]
Ottley named his chapter on Nazi Germany “No Schwarze Allergy,”
which may be interpreted to mean that Germans did not exhibit an
‘allergic reaction’ to blacks. He reported, “under the Nazis,
few Negroes were victims of day-to-day brutality, as meted out
to the Jews. The savage Nuremberg racial laws, which in theory
embraced blacks, were never widely applied to Negroes.” However,
while blacks living in Nazi Germany informed Ottley of this,
that “there was no racial discrimination” against them, Ottley
did not believe them.[sup]269[/sup] Some blacks had informed
Ottley that they were not allowed to marry freely, unlike white
Germans. Ottley was also told that some blacks were sterilized
by the Nazi government, because they were black."[sup]270[/sup]
Source : Kuzniar-Clark - Black Nazis II Ethnic Minorities and
Foreigners in Hitler's Armed Forces page 143 (PDF format's page)
paragraph 1, 2
[sup]266[/sup]. Tina Campt and Clarence Lusane seem to agree
that African Americans and Africans from Africa were treated
better by Nazi society than were Afro-German citizens of the
Third Reich. However, Afro-Germans were not treated worse under
Hitler than they were in the postwar period, as evidenced by Ika
Hügel-Marshall’s horrific experiences growing up in postwar
Germany. Afro-Germans did not have their citizenship revoked
either, unlike Jews
Source : Kuzniar-Clark - Black Nazis II Ethnic Minorities and
Foreigners in Hitler's Armed Forces
267. Lusane, 98.
268. Horne, 127
269. Ottley, 153.
So, that is the regime which you all proud of that, a regime
which made racial hierarchy that resulting the "colored" people
gain lower status rather than the "white" people, but you, the
"Aryanist" people use that regime's ideology as source to oppose
racism, incredible!
As long as you all not regret using Hitler's action and World
War 2 revisionism's history as your sources of inspiration to
make your political ideas, I will debate you all tirelessly
regardless you care about that or not, you all must take
responsibility from what you all did with history
#Post#: 8590--------------------------------------------------
Re: Questions Regarding Aryanism
By: SirGalahad Date: September 4, 2021, 11:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
"To be sure, Afro-Germans were considered second or third class
citizens in the Third Reich"
At the time of WW2, they were considered second class citizens
in the US as well. That doesn't mean that everyone who supported
and/or fought for the US government agreed with such policies.
And that also doesn't stop genuine anti-racists from considering
the US to be the "good guy" in the war on account of the
assumption that Nazi Germany was more racist than the US. The
same applies to Nazi Germany if we flip the narrative and claim
that they were the good guys, or at the very least, the lesser
evil in comparison to the US and the rest of the Western world
that fought against the Nazis.
"Jim Crow was the political linchpin around which German
anti-American propaganda centered in this regard."
If Nazi Germany were equally as or more racist than the US, why
would they be referring to the Jim Crow era in order to insult
the US? And why would Jim Crow be their slander of choice (the
"linchpin"), if again, National Socialism were nothing more than
a manifestation of the same racism found in the US during the
Jim Crow era?
"Ottley named his chapter on Nazi Germany 'No Schwarze Allergy,'
which may be interpreted to mean that Germans did not exhibit an
‘allergic reaction’ to blacks. He reported, 'under the Nazis,
few Negroes were victims of day-to-day brutality, as meted out
to the Jews. The savage Nuremberg racial laws, which in theory
embraced blacks, were never widely applied to Negroes.'"
Doesn't this prove our point, if the response towards Germany's
black population was nowhere near as vicious as the response to
its Jewish population? That in itself already opened the door to
a less Eurocentric conception of National Socialism, had the
ideology been given more time to exist in practice. The last
part also goes against your earlier assertion that the Nuremberg
Laws were meant to be applied to blacks.
"Some blacks had informed Ottley that they were not allowed to
marry freely, unlike white Germans. Ottley was also told that
some blacks were sterilized by the Nazi government, because they
were black."
This is an unfortunate side-effect of promoting a racial
ideology in an inferior society, where citizens are bound to
misinterpret it. I doubt Hitler was aware of absolutely
everything going on in his borders during such a tense and
large-scale war. But consider the following, which is included
in the same book that you're quoting from:
"Germans cheered Owens and repeatedly chanted his name— 'Jess-ah
O-
vens, Jessah O-vens' —at the 1936 Olympic Games in Berlin.
Uniformed SS
men watched him race and eagerly applauded his victory. Owens
told the press
that he was not forced to sit at the back of German buses, nor
was he disallowed
to stay at the nicest hotels. This was not the case in Britain:
prominent black
visitors to Britain were barred from high end hotels. Mr. Berg’s
acquaintance
also mentioned that Owens could have walked into any bar in
Germany and been
treated as well as a German patron. Contrast this with the fact
that in Britain and
the US, even prominent blacks were forced to stand in buses and
were never
allowed to stay in classy areas designated for 'whites only'."
Considering all of this, and the fact that Jesse Owens spoke
well of his brief interaction with Hitler during the Olympics, I
suspect that Hitler would have disapproved of a good chunk of
the mistreatment of Germany's black population, and in
particular of the savage murders committed against them that
have been documented. Even the United States Holocaust Memorial
Museum, in their article about Afro-Germans, admits that "the
Nazis did not have an organized program to eliminate African
Germans". If they were able to prove that persecution of black
Germans was systemic and not merely committed by lone wolves
with their own racist tendencies, then they would have EASILY
found such evidence and included it in their article, because
they obviously benefit from gathering as much of that kind of
evidence as possible. The reality is that the population of Nazi
Germany varied widely in quality, hence why Germans living under
the regime had vastly different reactions to ethnic minorities,
and why we can point to both positive and negative interactions
with ethnic minorities. The same applies for other countries.
Not just Germany.
"I will debate you all tirelessly regardless you care about that
or not, you all must take responsibility from what you all did
with history"
What are we doing with history? If I'm going to be honest,
you're vastly overestimating our influence at this point. There
are only tens of us regularly active in this movement right now,
and billions of other people who have no clue that this movement
even exists. If anybody is influencing history, it's white
Westerners and Zionists. I WISH that we had as much influence as
you seem to be giving us credit for.
#Post#: 8592--------------------------------------------------
Re: Questions Regarding Aryanism
By: guest30 Date: September 5, 2021, 2:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
@SirGalahad, Emily's Best Friend, Fellow Nazi Comrade
[quote]At the time of WW2, they were considered second class
citizens in the US as well. That doesn't mean that everyone who
supported and/or fought for the US government agreed with such
policies. ...[/quote]
During that time, there was also movement in Europe which
already blatantly implemented anti-colonialism and opposition
racial discrimination, did by Stalin who led people from Eastern
Europe to Far East, and he even no need to reduce his power to
enforced policies which oppose racism and force it's view to
majority of people whom he led, which means that Stalin was more
acceptable to people who oppose racism than any leader of
nations in Europe, for example, Hitler, and your comparison of
Nazi Germany and United States on their racial policy is cannot
be used when we already see the nation who have more serious
opposition to racism and colonialism, that is Stalin Russia
And if Hitler's real view and policies was opposition to racism
and colonialism, then he more despise and wanted to destroy
Britain (United Kingdom) and Western Europe rather than Stalin
Russia, but the fact is otherwise, he not seriously attacked and
wanted peace with Britain numerous times, he also wanted her
(Britain) to preserve their colonial empire, and even mobilize
his army en masse on Eastern front of Europe, and wanted to
wiped out Russia which already used anti-colonial ideology
[quote]"the Nazis did not have an organized program to eliminate
African Germans". ...[/quote]
United States which you compare to Nazi Germany also not have an
organized program to eliminate their "black African" population,
they act same like Nazi people, only made discriminating
policies to any "colored" people who existed within their border
only because of their racial background, so make any excuse to
use World War 2 era Western European nations, not just Nazi
Germany as an inspiration to oppose racism is not a good way
[quote]Jesse Owens...
...that persecution of black Germans was systemic...[/quote]
I already inform to you all on previous conversation this thread
that "colored" people treated bad even by Nazi officials and
institution, the young "colored black" people cannot go to
school, and many adult "colored black" people cannot gain a
specific job which "white" people can gain that, only because of
their racial background, it means Nazi government let the
systemic persecution happened, see this conversation post :
Nazi Government Oppressed Black People
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/questions-regarding-aryanism/msg8303/#msg8303
[quote]What are we doing with history? If I'm going to be
honest, you're vastly overestimating our influence at this
point. There are only tens of us regularly active in this
movement right now, and billions of other people who have no
clue that this movement even exists. If anybody is influencing
history, it's white Westerners and Zionists. I WISH that we had
as much influence as you seem to be giving us credit
for.[/quote]
What make you all hardly to see Nazism as racist ideology? There
are many of sources of inspiration and ideology which oppose
racism other than Nazi, your movement already existed for 12
years and produced many good writings of worldview which almost
cannot be refuted, and it's unfortunate if your ideology are
influenced and inspired by an ideology which contain racist
worldview, it just make people hardly to trust that you are
people who oppose racism, and you all hardly to gain more
followers which make you have a way to gain power in society
#Post#: 8595--------------------------------------------------
Re: Questions Regarding Aryanism
By: Dazhbog Date: September 5, 2021, 7:36 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8569#msg8569
date=1630709416]Suharto dictatorial leadership[/quote]
Meanwhile, the Fretilin is a democratic party:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fretilin
[quote]Ideology
Social democracy[/quote]
Autocracy is preferable to democracy, therefore Suharto is
preferable to the Fretilin.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8569#msg8569
date=1630709416]he ordered Indonesian military to ruthlessly
invade East Timor because their government's ideological view
which tend to leftism and socialism ideology[/quote]
Ever cared to look up why East Timor had a separate government
from the rest of Timor in the first place?
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8569#msg8569
date=1630709416]And it's hardly a leader to be considered as
"anti-colonialist" when his enemy was people who attracted to
anti-colonial movements[/quote]
The Fretilin never resisted the Portuguese. How is it an
anti-colonial movement?
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8569#msg8569
date=1630709416]Operation Trikora was an Indonesian military
operation which aimed to seize and annex the Dutch overseas
territory of Netherlands New Guinea in 1961 and 1962.[/quote]
From your own post:
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8569#msg8569
date=1630709416]and also, repressed Papuan people on East
Nusantara with ruthless military rule[/quote]
In other words, Suharto continued Sukarno's policy on Papua.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8569#msg8569
date=1630709416]In response to Indonesian claims, the
Netherlands sped up the process of implementing West Papuan
self-rule from 1959 onward. These measures included the
establishment of a legislative New Guinea Council in 1960,
establishing hospitals, completion of a shipyard in Manokwari,
development of agricultural research sites and plantations; and
the creation of the Papuan Volunteer Corps to defend the
territory.[/quote]
From your own post:
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8569#msg8569
date=1630709416]and the Papuanese people repressed and rarely to
be given development[/quote]
In other words, Suharto's policy on Papua was the exact opposite
of the Dutch policy on Papua, once more proving that he was a
true anti-colonialist.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8569#msg8569
date=1630709416]While the United States, the United Kingdom and
Australia sided with the Netherlands' claims to Western New
Guinea and were opposed to Indonesian expansionism, they were
unwilling to commit military support to the Dutch.[/quote]
In other words, they didn't actually want the Dutch to win.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8592#msg8592
date=1630826693]we already see the nation who have more serious
opposition to racism and colonialism, that is Stalin
Russia[/quote]
The ideological basis of Stalin's Russia was Marxism. This is
what Marx had to say on racism and colonialism:
HTML https://www.nspirement.com/2020/07/10/communist-racist-how-marx-despised-blacks.html
[quote]After the U.S. annexed Mexico following the
Mexican-American War in the 1800s, Marx justified the treatment
meted out to the Mexicans. “Is it a misfortune that magnificent
California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know
what to do with it?” Marx asked sarcastically. Engels too shared
the same disdain for Mexicans in one of his writings: “In
America, we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have
rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own development
that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United
States,” [...]
...
Marx held great contempt for Indians. He stated that English
interference in India dissolved the semi-barbarian communities
and created the only social revolution known in Asia. He argued
that England had two duties to fulfill in India — the first is
to destroy the civilization of the country and the second is to
lay the foundations of Western society in Asia. He reasoned that
India was “predestined to be conquered,” thereby sanctioning the
more than two centuries of oppression and exploitation millions
of people in India suffered at the hands of the British.[/quote]
Supporting racism and colonialism is of course only consistent
with Marxism's progressive stance. After all, "white" societies
are more progressive than non-"white" societies. Therefore,
Marxists (and other progressives) cannot be trusted to be
sincere anti-racists and anti-colonialists.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8592#msg8592
date=1630826693]And if Hitler's real view and policies was
opposition to racism and colonialism, then he more despise and
wanted to destroy Britain (United Kingdom) and Western Europe
rather than Stalin Russia[/quote]
As has been outlined on the main page before, under capitalism
people are still more aware of their enslavement than under
communism. Therefore, capitalism is less likely to turn into a
system of sustainable evil than communism. Consequently, the
communist colonialism of the Soviet Union was even worse than
the capitalist colonialism of the other colonial powers.
#Post#: 8596--------------------------------------------------
Re: Questions Regarding Aryanism
By: guest30 Date: September 5, 2021, 11:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
@Mazda
[quote]Ever cared to look up why East Timor had a separate
government from the rest of Timor in the first place?
The Fretilin never resisted the Portuguese. How is it an
anti-colonial movement?[/quote]
Yes, Fretilin left wing movements not resisted the Portuguese,
even his party members made an allegiance to Portuguese
governments, and the main reason of Suharto's invasion of East
Timor was this, explained in mainstream encyclopedia :
Source :
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_invasion_of_East_Timor#Indonesian_motivations
"Indonesian nationalist and military hardliners, particularly
leaders of the intelligence agency Kopkamtib and special
operations unit, Opsus, saw the Portuguese coup as an
opportunity for East Timor's annexation by Indonesia.[32] The
head of Opsus and close Indonesian President Suharto adviser,
Major General Ali Murtopo, and his protege Brigadier General
Benny Murdani headed military intelligence operations and
spearheaded the Indonesia pro-annexation push.[32] Indonesian
domestic political factors in the mid-1970s, were not conducive
to such expansionist intentions; the 1974–75 financial scandal
surrounding petroleum producer Pertamina meant that Indonesia
had to be cautious not to alarm critical foreign donors and
bankers. Thus, Suharto was originally not in support of an East
Timor invasion.[33]
Such considerations became overshadowed by Indonesian and
Western fears that victory for the left-wing Fretilin would lead
to the creation of a communist state on Indonesia's border that
could be used as a base for incursions by unfriendly powers into
Indonesia, and a potential threat to Western submarines. It was
also feared that an independent East Timor within the
archipelago could inspire secessionist sentiments within
Indonesian provinces. These concerns were successfully used to
garner support from Western countries keen to maintain good
relations with Indonesia, particularly the United States, which
at the time was completing its withdrawal from Indochina.[34]
The military intelligence organisations initially sought a
non-military annexation strategy, intending to use APODETI as
its integration vehicle.[32] Indonesia's ruling "New Order"
planned for the invasion of East Timor. There was no free
expression in "New Order" Indonesia and thus no need was seen
for consulting the East Timorese either.[35]"
The main reason of the invasion is because Suharto's pro-Western
European capitalist nation's policies which oppress us, I
already show to you how his rule is oppressed my people and
betrayed our founding father (Sukarno)'s ideological goal, I
already explain that on this conversation post :
Oppressive policy of Suharto regime
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/questions-regarding-aryanism/msg8569/#msg8569
[quote]Autocracy is preferable to democracy, therefore Suharto
is preferable to the Fretilin.
In other words, Suharto continued Sukarno's policy on
Papua.[/quote]
Suharto is an example of ignoble dictatorial government, he sell
my nation to Western European nations and implemented racist
policies towards Chinese people and Papua East Indonesian
people, I more prefer to Sukarno ([s]Indonesia[/s] Nusantara's
founding father) dictatorial government which inspired from
Islamism and Marxism which blatantly opposed racism, Sukarno
integrated Papua, and Suharto exploited Papua, this is fact, I
live in Nusantara, so I know more about the fate of Papua
people, he not continuing Sukarno's integrationist policy
[quote][quote]While the United States, the United Kingdom and
Australia sided with the Netherlands' claims to Western New
Guinea and were opposed to Indonesian expansionism, they were
unwilling to commit military support to the Dutch.[/quote]
In other words, they didn't actually want the Dutch to
win.[/quote]
And they still try to harm my nation which culminating with
overthrowing Sukarno left wing leadership with their secret
agents, they not really wanted Dutch to win, but they want
Nusantara to be their sources of exploitation like what the
Dutch people did in the past, I already explain that on previous
conversation post, and the link/URL to the post is same
[quote]The ideological basis of Stalin's Russia was Marxism.
This is what Marx had to say on racism and colonialism:
HTML https://www.nspirement.com/2020/07/10/communist-racist-how-marx-despised-blacks.html[/quote]
And Stalin even disagree with many of Karl Marx's views like
global socialism without nation for example, or so-called
"International Socialism", and Stalin keep implement anti-racist
and anti-colonialist policies even tough he use Marxism as
sources of ideology, many of today people who attracted to
Communism even hate Stalin because his "fascist" and dictatorial
leadership, so I prefer to Stalinism rather than Marxism, and I
prefer to combining Islamic worldview with Stalinism method to
govern and manage the nation's economy, for my nation
And also, interesting information, in 1920s even there are
Communist people who hate Stalin
Source :
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_fascism
Use of the term "red fascist" was first recorded in the early
1920s, in the aftermath of both the Russian Revolution and the
March on Rome, for instance by Italian anarchist Luigi Fabbri
who wrote in 1922 that "“Red fascists” is the name that has
recently been given to those Bolshevik communists who are most
inclined to espouse fascism’s methods for use against their
adversaries."[3]
In the following years, a number of socialists began to hold the
view that the Soviet government was becoming a red fascist
state. Bruno Rizzi, an Italian Marxist and a founder of the
Communist Party of Italy who became an anti-Stalinist, claimed
in 1938 that "Stalinism [took on] a regressive course,
generating a species of red fascism identical in its
superstructural and choreographic features [with its Fascist
model]".[4]
While primarily focused on critiquing Nazism, Wilhelm Reich
considered Stalin's Soviet Union to have developed into red
fascism.[5]
The term is often attributed to Franz Borkenau, a key proponent
of the theory of totalitarianism (which posits that there are
certain essential similarities between fascism and Stalinism).
Borkenau used the term in 1939.[6][7] Otto Rühle, a German left
communist, used the term in a similar way.[7] He wrote that "the
struggle against fascism must begin with the struggle against
bolshevism", adding that he believed the Soviets had influence
on fascist states by serving as a model. In 1939, Rühle further
professed:
Russia was the example for fascism. [...] Whether party
'communists' like it or not, the fact remains that the state
order and rule in Russia are indistinguishable from those in
Italy and Germany. Essentially they are alike. One may speak of
a red, black, or brown 'soviet state', as well as of red, black
or brown fascism.[8][9]
[quote]Supporting racism and colonialism is of course only
consistent with Marxism's progressive stance. After all, "white"
societies are more progressive than non-"white" societies.
Therefore, Marxists (and other progressives) cannot be trusted
to be sincere anti-racists and anti-colonialists.[/quote]
I prefer to some of Stalinist teachings, not all of Marxist
teachings
[quote]Marxists (and other progressives) cannot be trusted to be
sincere anti-racists and anti-colonialists.[/quote]
Hitler cannot be trusted to be sincere anti-racist and
anti-colonialist, seeing his racist worldview and pro-British
colonial empire's attitude, and even we can clearly conclude
that Hitler was White Nationalist and colonialist dictator
[quote]As has been outlined on the main page before, under
capitalism people are still more aware of their enslavement than
under communism. Therefore, capitalism is less likely to turn
into a system of sustainable evil than communism. Consequently,
the communist colonialism of the Soviet Union was even worse
than the capitalist colonialism of the other colonial
powers.[/quote]
If communism were ideology of enslavement, many people will
dislike Soviet Russia, and many colonized nations did not ask
help to communist states like Russia because they are afraid
that they will owe to Russia, and Russia will force them to
accept that "enslavement" ideology, and Sukarno, the founding
father of my nation Nusantara will not incorporating some of
communist teachings to his own ideology and not became strong
ally to Soviet Russia, China, and North Korea, instead he will
more pro-Western European colonialist nations, see this
information :
Source :
HTML https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/29/in-russia-nostalgia-for-soviet-union-and-positive-feelings-about-stalin/
"...most do view the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991 as “a
bad thing,” according to a Pew Research Center survey of Russia
and 17 other countries in Central and Eastern Europe conducted
between 2015 and 2016. And this view is not limited to Russia."
HTML https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/FT_17.06.28_sovietStalin.png
Communist colonialism of the Soviet Union? Even guest named
@v3456 explain without got tired how Soviet Union integrated
people of all racial background, you pretend to not remember
that? See this previous conversation post again :
People in Soviet Russia
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/questions-regarding-aryanism/msg8341/#msg8341
#Post#: 8621--------------------------------------------------
Re: Questions Regarding Aryanism
By: Dazhbog Date: September 7, 2021, 8:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]Yes, Fretilin left wing movements not resisted
the Portuguese, even his party members made an allegiance to
Portuguese governments[/quote]
In other words, the Fretilin is a leftover of Portuguese
colonial rule, proving my point that the Nusantaran "invasion"
of East Timor (actually reunification of Timor!) was an
anti-colonialist operation.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]The main reason of the invasion is because
Suharto's pro-Western European capitalist nation's
policies[/quote]
From your own post:
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]Such considerations became overshadowed by
Indonesian and Western fears that victory for the left-wing
Fretilin would lead to the creation of a communist state on
Indonesia's border that could be used as a base for incursions
by unfriendly powers into Indonesia[/quote]
In other words, Suharto feared that Fretilin-led East Timor
would become a base for the recolonization of Nusantara.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]It was also feared that an independent East
Timor within the archipelago could inspire secessionist
sentiments within Indonesian provinces[/quote]
In other words, Suharto feared that Fretilin-led East Timor
could inspire similar projects which would become bases for the
recolonization of Nusantara.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]These concerns were successfully used to garner
support from Western countries[/quote]
In other words, it was Suharto who took the initiative to enlist
the support of Nusantara's anglosphere allies for the
"invasion", not the latter encouraging the former to "invade"
East Timor.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]I already show to you how his rule is oppressed
my people[/quote]
Please point me to the specific policies in question.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]and betrayed our founding father (Sukarno)'s
ideological goal[/quote]
Please point me to the specific policies in question and then
point me to Sukarno's specific ideological goals so I have the
opportunity to compare the two and assess whether they
contradict each other, how they contradict each other and which
of the two is superior.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]he sell my nation to Western European
nations[/quote]
Please point me to the specific policies in question.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]and implemented racist policies towards Chinese
people and Papua East Indonesian people[/quote]
Please point me to the specific policies in question.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]Suharto exploited Papua[/quote]
Please point me to the specific policies in question.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]And they still try to harm my nation which
culminating with overthrowing Sukarno left wing leadership with
their secret agents, they not really wanted Dutch to win, but
they want Nusantara to be their sources of exploitation[/quote]
In which specific ways did they initiate/perpetuate more
colonial violence against Nusantara than the Fretilin (and
similar pro-colonialist secessionist movements)
initiated/perpetuated?
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]And Stalin even disagree with many of Karl
Marx's views like global socialism without nation for example,
or so-called "International Socialism"[/quote]
Please point me to an instance where Stalin specifically
repudiated his racist and colonialist views.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]and Stalin keep implement anti-racist and
anti-colonialist policies[/quote]
Stalin played a crucial role in establishing the settler
colonialist state of Israel. Furthermore, he encouraged Jewish
settler colonialism in yet a second Jewish ethnostate within the
borders of the Soviet Union, founded on ancient Chinese land
from which the Chinese were violently expelled:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Autonomous_Oblast
These facts alone invalidate every claim of Stalin seriously
opposing racism and colonialism.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]Use of the term "red fascist" was first recorded
in the early 1920s [...].[/quote]
It's a generic insult rival communist factions haul at each
other every now and then. It doesn't actually imply any fascist
sympathies or similarities. Stalin himself referred to his
rivals Trotsky and Bukharin as agents of fascism, specifically
of the Third Reich (note the swastika in the snake's eye):
HTML https://www.sovietposters.com/public/media/posters/popup_chocking_snake.jpg
(The subtitle translates to "let's eradicate spies and
saboteurs, the Trotskyite-Bukharinite agents of fascism!")
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]Hitler was White Nationalist and colonialist
dictator[/quote]
Can you point me to any policies of Hitler specifically aimed at
creating a "white" (including Jewish) ethnostate? Can you point
me to any policies of Hitler specifically aimed at "white"
(including Jewish) population growth? Can you point me to any
policies of Hitler specifically aimed at substituting the
nationalisms of his day with pan-"white" identitarianism?
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]Source :
HTML https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/29/in-russia-nostalgia-for-soviet-union-and-positive-feelings-about-stalin/
"...most do view the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991 as “a
bad thing,” according to a Pew Research Center survey of Russia
and 17 other countries in Central and Eastern Europe conducted
between 2015 and 2016. And this view is not limited to
Russia."[/quote]
That was exactly my point: communist enslavement is less obvious
than capitalist enslavement, therefore communist enslavement can
potentially become more popular than capitalist enslavement,
making it much more difficult to eradicate than capitalist
enslavement.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919][color=blue][b]Communist colonialism of the
Soviet Union?[/quote]
Please explain to me why else the Soviet Union encouraged the
voluntary settlement of ethnic Russians across all non-Russian
Soviet republics, but never encouraged the populations of the
latter to voluntarily settle in the Russian Soviet republic.
#Post#: 8623--------------------------------------------------
Re: Questions Regarding Aryanism
By: guest30 Date: September 7, 2021, 11:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
@Dazhbog
[quote][quote]I already show to you how his rule is oppressed my
people[/quote]
Please point me to the specific policies in question.[/quote]
I already show to you, but seems you are ignoring me and pretend
not consider the information which I give to you about how
Suharto oppress my people is an information to you, now, watch
this documentary :
HTML https://youtu.be/3wOFGvZeP2s
[quote][quote]and betrayed our founding father (Sukarno)'s
ideological goal[/quote]
Please point me to the specific policies in question and then
point me to Sukarno's specific ideological goals so I have the
opportunity to compare the two and assess whether they
contradict each other, how they contradict each other and which
of the two is superior.[/quote]
"Sukarno also began pushing his ideology uniting Nationalism,
Religion and Communism, which would become known as Nasakom. It
is an acronym based on the Indonesian words NASionalisme
('nationalism'), Agama ('religion'), and KOMunisme
('communism')."
Source : Guided Democracy in Indonesia - Wikipedia
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guided_Democracy_in_Indonesia#:~:text=Sukarno%20also%20began%20pushing%20his,and%20KOMunisme%20(%27communism%27).
Guided Democracy is actually Sukarno's soft word of dictatorial
government, he implemented it in 1955 after he saw the fail of
implementation of democracy in Nusantara which led to rise of
many separatist groups, even he bravely declared that he wanted
to be a ruler of Nusantara for entire of his live to my people,
that is autocratic.
And if you want to know what policies which Suharto are
implemented, see again the documentary video which I give to
you, you will know who are good dictator of Nusantara, and who
are bad
[quote][quote]and implemented racist policies towards Chinese
people and Papua East Indonesian people[/quote]
Please point me to the specific policies in question.[/quote]
[quote][quote]Suharto exploited Papua[/quote]
Please point me to the specific policies in question.[/quote]
Source : Intrik Politik Soeharto yang Melarang dan Membelokkan
Makna Imlek
HTML https://tirto.id/intrik-politik-soeharto-yang-melarang-dan-membelokkan-makna-imlek-cENG
"Not yet officially serving as president, Suharto had issued a
repressive policy—especially for the people of Chinese
descent—at the beginning of his reign. That happened in 1967
when Suharto was still a presidential official. Through
Presidential Instruction No. 14 signed on December 6, 1967,
Suharto ordered the Minister of Religion, the Minister of Home
Affairs, and all government agencies and institutions, from the
center to the regions, to implement basic policies regarding
Chinese religion, beliefs and customs.
One of the points contained in the policy is related to the
rules for celebrating the Chinese New Year or Chinese New Year
in Indonesia.
New Order's Chinese Phobia
...
For reasons that seemed sinister, official rules were made. As
revealed by Siew-Min Sai and Chang-Yau Hoon in Chinese
Indonesians Reassessed (2013), Suharto said that the
manifestations of Chinese religion, beliefs, and customs
centered on their ancestral lands can cause unnatural
psychological, mental, and moral influences on citizens.
Indonesia (p. 212)."
Suharto was led Indonesia and increased their economic power
with uncontrolled foreign investment from Western European
nations and repression of Papuan people, important to know that
Freeport was result from when Indonesian government under
Suharto allowing United States and Western European capitalist
nations to placed their big corporation on his land, and don't
forget to remember what the important information from the
documentary which I give to you, Nusantara was actually got more
debt when they became capitalist, because it's economic system
was using Western European's economic system which just made
more debt to Nusantara people
Source : Beda Sukarno dan Soeharto Dalam Memperlakukan Papua
HTML https://tirto.id/beda-sukarno-dan-soeharto-dalam-memperlakukan-papua-dbcl
"Freeport has opened up foreign investment in Indonesia which to
some extent has helped restore the Indonesian economy. However,
it is not without its advantages. Papuans who come into direct
contact with Freeport's mines are often disadvantaged.
Martin Sitompul on his Historia page said that the Amungme
tribe, which has been living in the mined area for generations,
has been disturbed. For the Amungme tribe, Mount Grasberg which
is mined by Freeport is sacred land. They symbolize the peak of
Mount Grasberg as the head of the mother.
“When operating, Freeport's mining activities have turned the
landscape of Mount Grasberg into a giant 700-meter-deep pit.
Lake Wanagon as the sacred lake of the Amungme was also
destroyed because it was used as a waste rock disposal which was
very acidic and toxic. Freeport also pollutes three main river
bodies in the Mimika region: Aghawagon, Otomona and Ajkwa. The
three rivers are used as a dumping ground for the remaining
production waste called tailings,” wrote Martin.
This situation clearly triggers conflict between Freeport and
the Papuan community around the mine. An open conflict, for
example, was recorded in 1977. At that time, the Amungme and six
other tribes protested against Freeport. They cut the copper ore
supply pipe, set fire to the warehouse, and removed the faucet
of Freeport's fuel supply tank.
“This incident was heard as far as Jakarta. Suharto then
implemented a tough policy through a security approach. ABRI
(Armed Forces of the Republic of Indonesia) was also deployed,"
wrote Martin Sitompul.
Most of the Amungme residents were arrested, while others fled
to the forest around the Tsinga Valley. The Suharto regime then
labeled them as troublemakers associated with the Free Papua
Organization (OPM).
A year later Irian Jaya was designated as a Military Operations
Area (DOM). This status lasted until Suharto stepped down. While
the Papuan population is experiencing repression, Freeport's
mines continue to operate.[]"
[quote][quote]he sell my nation to Western European
nations[/quote]
Please point me to the specific policies in question.[/quote]
[quote][quote]and betrayed our founding father (Sukarno)'s
ideological goal[/quote]
Please point me to the specific policies in question and then
point me to Sukarno's specific ideological goals so I have the
opportunity to compare the two and assess whether they
contradict each other, how they contradict each other and which
of the two is superior.[/quote]
This is how Suharto changed our nation's economic policy to a
bad one
"To stabilize the economy and to ensure long-term support for
the New Order, Suharto's administration enlisted a group of
mostly US-educated Indonesian economists, dubbed the "Berkeley
Mafia", to formulate significant changes in economic policy.
...
Suharto travelled to Western Europe and Japan to promote
investment in Indonesia. The first foreign investors to re-enter
Indonesia included mining companies Freeport Sulphur Company /
International Nickel Company.
Source : Suharto - Wikipedia
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suharto#Economy
Suharto was totally change our fundamental economic policy from
socialism to liberal capitalism, and hardly to him to be
considered as a leader who devout to my nation's ideological
worldview, and see the documentary which I give to you, again...
And they still try to harm my nation which culminating with
overthrowing Sukarno left wing leadership with their secret
agents, they not really wanted Dutch to win, but they want
Nusantara to be their sources of exploitation
[quote]In which specific ways did they initiate/perpetuate more
colonial violence against Nusantara than the Fretilin (and
similar pro-colonialist secessionist movements)
initiated/perpetuated?[/quote]
See this recently declassified historical news :
Source : How we Destroyed Sukarno | The Independent
HTML https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/how-we-destroyed-sukarno-1188448.html
"In autumn 1965, Norman Reddaway, a lean and erudite rising star
of the Foreign Office, was briefed for a special mission. The
British Ambassador to Indonesia, Sir Andrew Gilchrist, had just
visited London for discussions with the head of the Foreign
Office, Joe Garner. Covert operations to undermine Sukarno, the
troublesome and independently minded President of Indonesia,
were not going well. Garner was persuaded to send Reddaway, the
FO's propaganda expert, to Indonesia. His task: to take on
anti-Sukarno propaganda operations run by the Foreign Office and
M16. Garner gave Reddaway pounds 100,000 in cash "to do anything
I could do to get rid of Sukarno", he says.
Reddaway thus joined the loose amalgam of groups from the
Foreign Office, M16, the State Department and the CIA in the Far
East, all striving to depose Sukarno in diffuse and devious
ways. For the next six months he and his colleagues chipped away
at Sukarno's regime, undermining his reputation and assisting
his enemies in the army. By March 1966 Sukarno's power base was
in tatters and he was forced to hand over his presidential
authority to General Suharto, the head of the army, who was
already running a campaign of mass murder against alleged
communists.
According to Reddaway, the overthrow of Sukarno was one of the
Foreign Office's "most successful" coups, which they have kept a
secret until now. The British intervention in Indonesia,
alongside complimentary CIA operations, shows how far the
Foreign Office was prepared to go in intervening in other
countries' affairs during the Cold War. Indonesia was important
both economically and strategically. In 1952 the US noted that
if Indonesia fell out of Western influence, neighbours such as
Malaya might follow, resulting in the loss of the "principal
world source of natural rubber and tin and a producer of
petroleum and other strategically important commodities"."
Nation with capitalistic colonialist Anglophilic worldview
ALWAYS prevent us from freedom, they just want us to suffer and
exploit our natural resources only for their benefit
#Post#: 8624--------------------------------------------------
Re: Questions Regarding Aryanism
By: guest30 Date: September 7, 2021, 11:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Reply to @Dazhbog part 2
[quote][quote]And Stalin even disagree with many of Karl Marx's
views like global socialism without nation for example, or
so-called "International Socialism"[/quote]
Please point me to an instance where Stalin specifically
repudiated his racist and colonialist views.[/quote]
See again this documentary which I give to this forum...
HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZqR2KEd_hk
"And also this sources of information on this site, recommended
to read the whole writings of article, but I will give you the
most important things from that article, and I already explain
this without bored to repeat again on previous conversation post
on thread about "Aryanism's hostility towards Russia and Eastern
European people" :
Source : An African-American Worker in Stalin's Soviet Union:
Race and the Soviet Experiment in International Perspective†
HTML https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1540-6563.2008.00230.x
"Americans' faith in their country's superiority was not easy to
defend when it came to Soviet condemnation of racial
discrimination, for in the eyes of much of the world, the
Soviets enjoyed considerable success in gaining the moral high
ground on racial matters. Indeed, by the 1950s and 1960s,
international opinion would provide an important rationale for
the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations' support for civil
rights initiatives.14
Source : 14 Mary L. Dudziak, Cold War Civil Rights: Race and the
Image of American Democracy (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 2000).
...
Soviet propaganda, both at home and abroad, depicted racism as
an integral part of the American system: racism was described as
“a fundamental feature of the social, industrial and political
organization of the United States.”23 Soviet propaganda also
emphasized the eradication of racial prejudice as one of the
achievements of Communism. In the 1930s in particular, the
Soviets spent a great deal of energy trying to convince black
visitors to the Soviet Union and their compatriots at home that
the Soviet Union represented not simply a “workers' paradise”
but a paradise for all races.
Source : Mark Solomon, The Cry Was Unity: Communists and African
Americans, 1917–1936 (Jackson: University Press of Mississippi,
1998).
...
The claim to be free from Western-style race discrimination was
partly true. The Soviet constitutions of 1918 and 1936 declared
equality of rights of all citizens.24 Soviet ethnic and national
categorizations did not align with the racialized thinking that
prevailed in the United States and Western Europe.25
Source : 25 On Soviet concepts of race, nationality, and
ethnicity, see the provocative article, Weitz, Eric D., “ Racial
Politics without the Concept of Race: Reevaluating Soviet Ethnic
and National Purges,” Slavic Review 61.1 (2002): 1– 29, and the
responses by Francine Hirsch, Amir Weiner, and Alaina Lemon.
...
Historian Maxim Matusevich concludes that for the most part, the
anti-racist rhetoric of the government “did, in fact, penetrate
the fabric of Soviet society.”44 It was foreign whites,
especially Americans, Canadians, and Britons, who committed the
most serious incidents of racism, leveling verbal insults and
physical attacks on their darker-skinned compatriots.45
Source : 45 McClellan, “Africans and Black Americans,” 371–85.
...
The predominant theme in the press coverage was the supposed
lack of national and racial differences among workers in the
Soviet Union, contrasted with the racism and injustice of
American society. “This is not bourgeois America,” declared the
headline in Rabochaia Gazeta.66 Komsomol'skaia Pravda proclaimed
that “all workers are brothers, regardless of the color of their
skin.”67 Trud likewise declared that “the U.S.S.R. is the
fatherland of black, yellow, and white races,” and went so far
as to claim that the incident at Stalingrad was “the only
example” of a racially motivated attack “throughout the entire
existence of the U.S.S.R.”—and that “it must be the last.”68"
Source :
66 Rabochaia Gazeta, 11 August 1930, 1.
67 Komsomol'skaia Pravda, 19 August 1930, 1.
68 Trud, 14 August 1930, 1.
[quote]Stalin played a crucial role in establishing the settler
colonialist state of Israel. Furthermore, he encouraged Jewish
settler colonialism in yet a second Jewish ethnostate within the
borders of the Soviet Union, founded on ancient Chinese land
from which the Chinese were violently expelled:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Autonomous_Oblast
These facts alone invalidate every claim of Stalin seriously
opposing racism and colonialism.[/quote]
That is the flaw of Stalin's work during his leadership, he see
that Jewish people as fellow socialists and he hope with the
creation of Jewish land for them, they became socialist too and
work together with Soviet Russia, but of course Jewish people
believe in racial superiority and capitalism, not socialist and
opposition to racism, Stalin was totally duped, see this
information below :
"Despite Stalin's willingness to support Israel early on,
various historians suppose that antisemitism in the late 1940s
and early 1950s was motivated by Stalin's possible perception of
Jews as a potential "fifth column" in light of a pro-Western
Israel in the Middle East. Orlando Figes suggests that
After the foundation of Israel in May 1948, and its alignment
with the USA in the Cold War, the 2 million Soviet Jews, who had
always remained loyal to the Soviet system, were portrayed by
the Stalinist regime as a potential fifth column. Despite his
personal dislike of Jews, Stalin had been an early supporter of
a Jewish state in Palestine, which he had hoped to turn into a
Soviet satellite in the Middle East. But as the leadership of
the emerging state proved hostile to approaches from the Soviet
Union, Stalin became increasingly afraid of pro-Israeli feeling
among Soviet Jews. His fears intensified as a result of Golda
Meir's arrival in Moscow in the autumn of 1948 as the first
Israeli ambassador to the USSR. On her visit to a Moscow
synagogue on Yom Kippur (13 October), thousands of people lined
the streets, many of them shouting Am Yisroel Chai! (The People
of Israel Live!)—a traditional affirmation of national renewal
to Jews throughout the world but to Stalin a dangerous sign of
'bourgeois Jewish nationalism' that subverted the authority of
the Soviet state.[32]"
Source : Stalin and antisemitism - Wikipedia
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin_and_antisemitism#After_World_War_II
And, Hitler's discriminative policies towards "colored" people
and pro-British colonialism invalidate every claim of Hitler
seriously opposing racism and colonialism.
[quote]It's a generic insult rival communist factions haul at
each other every now and then. It doesn't actually imply any
fascist sympathies or similarities. Stalin himself referred to
his rivals Trotsky and Bukharin as agents of fascism,
specifically of the Third Reich (note the swastika in the
snake's eye):
HTML https://www.sovietposters.com/public/media/posters/popup_chocking_snake.jpg
(The subtitle translates to "let's eradicate spies and
saboteurs, the Trotskyite-Bukharinite agents of
fascism!")[/quote]
If you read almost all information from the Wikipedia which I
provide to you, you will find this interesting information :
"Despite ideological differences, Adolf Hitler admired Stalin
and his politics and believed that Stalin was in effect
transforming Soviet Bolshevism into a form of Nazism.[21]"
Source : Red Fascism
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_fascism
And if you see how Stalin led Russia, you will conclude that
Stalin was a fascist but using socialist ideology
[quote]Can you point me to any policies of Hitler specifically
aimed at creating a "white" (including Jewish) ethnostate? Can
you point me to any policies of Hitler specifically aimed at
"white" (including Jewish) population growth? Can you point me
to any policies of Hitler specifically aimed at substituting the
nationalisms of his day with pan-"white"
identitarianism?[/quote]
"Can you point me to any policies of Hitler specifically aimed
at creating a "white" (including Jewish) ethnostate? Can you
point me to any policies of Hitler specifically aimed at "white"
(including Jewish) population growth? Can you point me to any
policies of Hitler specifically aimed at substituting the
nationalisms of his day with pan-"white" identitarianism?"
See his Lebensraum policy, he wanted Lebensraum to solve the
Germany's shortage of land and wanted more land to tackle
"white German" people's population growth, and see his private
conversation on how he wanted to colonize Eastern European
people with German and other "white" people from Western
European nations, I already provide this historical information
on previous conversation post on this thread, see through open
this link/URL below :
On his ambition to colonize Russia and Eastern European people :
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/aryanism's-hostility-towards-russia-and-eastern-european-people/msg8015/#msg8015
His ambition to recolonize some parts of territory in Africa
continent
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/questions-regarding-aryanism/msg8462/#msg8462
[quote]That was exactly my point: communist enslavement is less
obvious than capitalist enslavement, therefore communist
enslavement can potentially become more popular than capitalist
enslavement, making it much more difficult to eradicate than
capitalist enslavement.[/quote]
If you see that state control of people's property and disarming
people from having gun as an enslavement, not see that thing as
a effective method of the state to lead people and manage
people's well-being, then I don't know anymore what I must say
to you
[quote][quote]Communist colonialism of the Soviet Union?[/quote]
Please explain to me why else the Soviet Union encouraged the
voluntary settlement of ethnic Russians across all non-Russian
Soviet republics, but never encouraged the populations of the
latter to voluntarily settle in the Russian Soviet
republic.[/quote]
Because overpopulation happen in region which inhabited by
"white" Russian people, and "non-white" Russian people's
population was not many during that time, so "white" Russian
people was forced to be transferred from one region to another,
and Soviet Russia was not prohibit "non-White" Russian people
from migrating from one city to another to find a new place of
life, because of it's clear official anti-racism policy,
remember, I already explain this Soviet Russia's anti-racism
policy on previous conversation post
#Post#: 8640--------------------------------------------------
Re: Questions Regarding Aryanism
By: Dazhbog Date: September 8, 2021, 6:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8623#msg8623
date=1631033090]I already show to you, but seems you are
ignoring me and pretend not consider the information which I
give to you[/quote]
Because your information isn't actually the information I'm
looking for. Let me rephrase my questions to give you a clearer
idea of what I want to know:
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]I already show to you how his rule is oppressed
my people[/quote]
Was anyone oppressed with the specific goal of allowing Dutch
(it has already been established that Suharto was
anti-Portuguese) colonial rule to reassert itself?
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]and betrayed our founding father (Sukarno)'s
ideological goal[/quote]
Did Suharto diverge from Sukarno's line with the specific goal
of allowing Dutch colonial rule to reassert itself?
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]he sell my nation to Western European
nations[/quote]
Did Suharto's policies specifically aim at allowing Dutch
colonial rule to reassert itself?
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8596#msg8596
date=1630860919]and implemented racist policies towards Chinese
people and Papua East Indonesian people[/quote]
Were the categories "Chinese" and "Papuan" assigned to
individuals without them choosing to be categorized as such?
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8623#msg8623
date=1631033090]Papuans who come into direct contact with
Freeport's mines are often disadvantaged.[/quote]
Were these disadvantages a consequence of the fact that the
individuals affected had been categorized as "Papuans" without
them choosing to be categorized as such?
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8623#msg8623
date=1631033090]His task: to take on anti-Sukarno propaganda
operations run by the Foreign Office and M16.[/quote]
Did this result in Dutch colonial rule reasserting itself?
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8624#msg8624
date=1631033424]That is the flaw of Stalin's work during his
leadership, he see that Jewish people as fellow socialists and
he hope with the creation of Jewish land for them, they became
socialist too and work together with Soviet Russia[/quote]
In other words, Stalin was perfectly willing to support racism
and colonialism if it fit his agenda, just like Marx.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8624#msg8624
date=1631033424]"Despite ideological differences, Adolf Hitler
admired Stalin and his politics and believed that Stalin was in
effect transforming Soviet Bolshevism into a form of
Nazism.[21]"[/quote]
Why did he attempt to destroy Stalinism then (as you yourself
have repeatedly pointed out)?
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8624#msg8624
date=1631033424]And if you see how Stalin led Russia, you will
conclude that Stalin was a fascist but using socialist
ideology[/quote]
Fascism seeks to unite the citizenry, hence its name and
symbolism:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasces#Origin_and_symbolism
[quote]By the time of the Roman Republic, the fasces had
developed into a thicker bundle of birch rods, sometimes
surrounding a single-headed axe and tied together with a red
leather ribbon into a cylinder.
...
The symbolism of the fasces suggests strength through unity (see
Unity makes strength); a single rod is easily broken, while the
bundle is very difficult to break.[/quote]
Stalin in turn famously carved up the Soviet citizenry into a
myriad of arbitrarily drawn class and ethnic categories, which
disqualifies him from being a true fascist.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8624#msg8624
date=1631033424]See his Lebensraum policy[/quote]
From your own post:
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8624#msg8624
date=1631033424]he wanted to colonize Eastern European
people[/quote]
In other words, his Lebensraum policy targeted other "white"
people, therefore it was no attempt to establish a "white"
ethnostate.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8624#msg8624
date=1631033424]His ambition to recolonize some parts of
territory in Africa continent
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/questions-debates/questions-regarding-aryanism/msg8462/#msg8462[/quote]
The territories in question had been taken over by Britain and
France after WWI, so whatever ambitions Hitler may have had in
this regard were above all aimed at removing British and French
colonial rule.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8624#msg8624
date=1631033424]If you see that state control of people's
property and disarming people from having gun as an enslavement,
not see that thing as a effective method of the state to lead
people and manage people's well-being, then I don't know anymore
what I must say to you[/quote]
The principle moral evil of communism is that it aims to
establish an utopian society so pleasurable that people will
feel no desire to transcend material existence altogether,
leading to a potentially infinite number of non-consensual
childbirths and thus, a potentially infinite number of victims
of initiated violence.
Add to that communism's inherent class identitarianism, which
arbitrarily forces people into categories ("proletarian",
"bourgeois", "kulak" and so on) they didn't choose.
[quote author=kameradbaren link=topic=159.msg8624#msg8624
date=1631033424]Because overpopulation happen in region which
inhabited by "white" Russian people, and "non-white" Russian
people's population was not many during that time, so "white"
Russian people was forced to be transferred from one region to
another[/quote]
Russia's population didn't peak until 1992:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia#After_WWII
At that point, Russia had a population density of 22.5
inhabitants/square mile (148,538,000 inhabitants/6,612,100
square miles).
Estonia's Soviet era-population was at its historic low in 1941:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Estonia
At that point, Estonia had a population density of 58.3
inhabitants/square mile (1,017,475 inhabitants/17,462 square
miles).
In other words, Estonia at its most sparsely populated still had
a much higher population density than Russia at its most densely
populated.
Uzbekistan's Soviet era-population was at its historic low in
1950:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Uzbekistan
At that point, Uzbekistan had a population density of 36,6
inhabitants/square mile (6,314,000 inhabitants/172,700 square
miles).
In other words, Uzbekistan at its most sparsely populated still
had a much higher population density than Russia at its most
densely populated.
Draw your own conclusions.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page