Was he really that bad?

Leopold II was a foreign ruler who never set foot in the FCS, for one.

>new york times : trash
Kill ys you'reself

Yes

>pol pots fucking right hand man gives a stellar review of his former employer
Are you fucking retarded

Pol Pot wished to achieve a noble goal in the form of an agrarian socialist state and thus restore Cambodian national pride. Some mistakes were made within the regime as within other regimes, however Pol Pot and his rule over Cambodia remain a beacon of agrarianism in the world.

...

>some mistakes were made
Killing off a quarter of your population including people who just had glasses is a bit more than a mistake commie-kun.

>Right-wing dictators are universally hated.

Go to /pol/ sometimes and see just how wrong you are

The Belgian rule, cruel as it was, was the only thing stopping the tribes from genociding eachother. As soon as the Belgians left, the Congolese got back at massacring eachother and they do to this day with as a highlight the massive slaughter of 9 million people during the Rwanda Genocides of the nineties.

>Spaniards hate Franco
hahaha
that's why they were openly singing fascist anthems again recently because of Catalonia, amirite?

t. Gnome Chumpsky

>socialist state
>noble

Nice meme.

t. David Horowitz

I'd argue that the Free Congo State didn't really prevent inter-tribal massacres so much as it empowered some tribes (like the Zappo Zap) over others. I'd also argue that the Belgian Congo was a somewhat different entity than the FCS - not that it was benign, but it was also under parliamentary control instead of an absolute monarch and his hired goons, so no more hand mountains (or not as many).

>billionare-owned news outlets which regularly target left-wing countries with war propaganda are communist
lmbo

BBC's fake news report about (socialist) Syria "chemical weapons":

youtube.com/watch?v=Uv2XS0TVHQo

Get with the times mate, even your average Republican hillbilly recognizes NYT as fake news.

Nice source

Most people in /pol/ are non-white Americans, who have never lived in fascist Spain or Chile, so their opinions are irrelevant.

Who's "they"? A small minority of Spaniards (mostly wealth elites) don't represent the majority of Spaniards. If you don't agree try waving a Francoist flag in Barcelona or Seville, don't be surprised when you wake up in the hospital though.

Hi Chomsky, whatcha doin' on Veeky Forums?

Citing pol pot's deputy as a source on how benevolent pol pot was is like citing "popeye" velasquez as a source on how kind and benevolent pablo escobar was.
>these people visited pol pots grave, so cambodians must really have liked him
I have yet to see any sort of evidence that the majority of cambodians actually liked pol pot

>why do many Cambodians miss the Khmer Rouge era?
Does your source actually claim that? a steady trickle hardly seems like a lot of people.

Other things to consider -

Upwards of a quarter of the population died during the 5 or so years of his rule so you can bet the strongest opponents to the regime would have been swept up in that.

-Initially they were able to shake off the dominance of the urban elite

-The nationalism and temporary relevance he created even if it was contextual and resulted in the suicidal decision to make war on Vietnam.

I realize I very much symplify things. Was very impressed by Jeff Geraerts' Gangreen series in which he describes his time as a Belgian paratropper in the Congo.

go back to bed chomsky

>I have yet to see any sort of evidence that the majority of cambodians actually liked pol pot
As far as I'm aware, there hasn't been a study done to determine Cambodian opinions on Pol Pot. But from articles like OP, you can deduce that a significant proportion of the population is nostalgic for the Khmer Rouge period.

Many Columbians have a nuanced view of Pablo, on the one hand he was a killer and a thief, but so are the people who run Columbia. At least Pablo gave some of his proceeds to the poor, which is more than you can say for the existing Columbian elite.

>Upwards of a quarter of the population died during the 5 or so years of his rule so you can bet the strongest opponents to the regime would have been swept up in that.
Do you have a non-imperialist source to back that up?

>-The nationalism and temporary relevance he created even if it was contextual and resulted in the suicidal decision to make war on Vietnam.
It was Vietnam which declared war on Cambodia, not vice versa. The Vietnamese wanted to incorporate Cambodia into an Indochina federation with the Vietnamese as the leading partner.

Chomsky is an anti-communist who hates Pot Pot along with all other reformers and revolutionaries from the Global South, so not sure what point you're trying to make here.

Not an argument Kike Schlomo.

>you can deduce that a significant proportion of the population is significant about the khmer rouge period
Nigger the article literally says that there is only a steady trickle of people going to the grave site, hiw the fuck is that a "significant" proportion of the population?

>do you have a non-imperialist source to back that up
Ben Kiernan's "the pol pot regime"

I guess I figured you Cambodians are subhumans, and this just proves it here.

Plenty of people worship and revere old tyrants and demonic individuals especially if their cause was lost, thus vindicating them in their eyes. That doesn't mean they didn't commit crimes. The holocaust very much happened despite modern worship of Hitler.
The people who do this are called Betas or Sheeple. They get an immense feeling of satisfaction and achievement at the idea of pleasing and placating horrible people. Its these kind of people that you can thank for the rise and inhuman crimes of these tyrants

You forgot to provide a source for your claims of many people missing the Khmer Rouge era.

>Do you have a non-imperialist source to back that up?
Sure
Genocide in Cambodia : Documents from the Trial of Pol Pot and Ieng Sary (2000) pages.465 and 506.

>It was Vietnam which declared war on Cambodia, not vice versa. The Vietnamese wanted to incorporate Cambodia into an Indochina federation with the Vietnamese as the leading partner.

The invasion happened after Pol Pot sent his forces across the borders and started slaughtering Vietnamese villagers and capturing towns as well as ethnic Vietnamese in the border regions.

Sending in soldiers to occupy your neighbors territory and slaughter its populace is a defacto deceleration of war, wouldnt you agree?

There will be a "steady trickle" of people no matter what, because otherwise it would be a chaotic clusterfuck. There is also a "steady trickle" of people trying to see Lenin in Moscow or Mao in Beijing, that doesn't tell you anything about the people's attitudes towards those leaders.

>In 1994, Kiernan was awarded a $499,000 grant by Congress to help the Cambodian government document the Khmer Rouge's abuses.
Definitely an unbiased source... A $500,000 cash bribe from the US Gov. definitely wouldn't influence someone's writings about anti-imperialist Global South reformers/revolutionaries

Also the reviews for his book are mostly pretty bad, see pic related.

where the fuck is the meme image is this

>Genocide in Cambodia : Documents from the Trial of Pol Pot and Ieng Sary (2000) pages.465 and 506.
From what I understand, this is a collection of testimonies from alleged Khmer Rouge victims. Testimonies are unreliable and can easily be distorted to support preconceived narratives.

>Sending in soldiers to occupy your neighbors territory and slaughter its populace is a defacto deceleration of war, wouldnt you agree?
Prior to this, the Vietnamese were sending spies and agents into Cambodia to overthrow the government and puppet the country. Pol Pot's reaction was extreme and perhaps unwise in hindsight, but at the time he was just protecting his nation from foreign aggression.

>that diesn't tell you anything about people's attitudes towards the leaders
Exactly. The trickle of people coming to visit his grave is not enough to say that a significant proportion of the population actually likes him

>in 1994, kiernan was awarded a cash grant ti study the khmer rouge
And? You realize that the government chose him because he would have been the least biased out of all the historians they could have chose? If you'd actually read that wikipedia article, you would have seen that Kiernan was originally pro-rouge. This isn't even relevant, because he didn't collect any US government money when he wrote his book.
>the reviews for his book are pretty bad
Actually its a four out of five on amazon, but nice try cherry picking that one review.
>testimonies are pretty innacurate
Generally speaking, when you have a massive amount of testimonies that all corroborate with each other, that means they can be trusted. Have you read the book? Would you like to comment on any of the specific testimonies presented within? Or are you just talking out of your ass?

rekt

>from what i understan, this is a collection of testimonies from alleged victims
So you understand literally nothing about it, then? There are many documents listed within that book that deal with investigations of the actual mass graves themselves, its just as much testimony as it is actual hard evidence.

>From what I understand...
Its documents from the trial which whilst that does include testimonies - from both sides- it also includes the final judgement of the court.

Bear in mind you yourself are relying heavily on testimonies.

>Prior to this, the Vietnamese were sending spies and agents into Cambodia to overthrow the government and puppet the country.
Do you have a good source on this? From what Ive read Vietnam only started wanting to change the regime after its repeated attacks, massacres an incursions - remembering that Pol Pot sent his army to seize a Vietnamese Island the day after Saigon fell.

>Pol Pot's reaction was extreme and perhaps unwise in hindsight, but at the time he was just protecting his nation from foreign aggression.

You could make that argument if his actions consisted of expelling or arresting foreign agents but tell me how did it make sense to cross the Vietnamese border, seize territory and then start slaughtering the inhabitants on the basis of their ethnicity? Remembering that this is the country which threw out France and the US coalition.

stop wearing glasses

>Do you have a good source on this?
youtube.com/watch?v=_uyIlKnITho

What? Seville was always one of Francos most popular areas of support. His legacy is controversial among Spaniards today but generally in Seville he's more respected than reviled

Nationalism is hell of a drug.

>Pol Pot's reaction was extreme and perhaps unwise
Massacring an entire Vietnamese villiage was "perhaps unwise"? Not even the most ardent burger would think MyLai in those terms

He was the only actual, literal communist who ever existed. None of the other commies had the guts to abolish money or wage labor.

Why did he collude with capitalists and Reagan then when his regime fell?

Your source - an anonymous video - doesnt actually provide evidence of Vietnamese attempting to subvert/take over Cambodia prior to Cambodian hostilities just that the leadership suspected it.

Where it gets dishonest is that it cites the Vietnamese attack of the Koh Tang Islands as proof of their desires to take over Cambodia. It fails to mention that the Vietnamese only invaded one month after Pol Pots troops crossed the border seized the island Thổ Chu and started massacring native Vietnamese - 513 of which were taken to the island of Koh Tang to be executed.

So not only had Pol Pot invaded Vietnam before this event the Vietnamese were they attacking a island that was used as a death camp.

Has an OP ever gotten BTFO'd this hard?

The Times is not journalism

Yes it is

take my (You)

In asia, tyrants are adored.
The more terrible the tyrant,

the more his memory is cherished.
Alexander the great, timur...

I was actually about to post a thread asking whether there are Pol Pot apologists and it looks like I got my answer.

>Syria is socialist
>Pinochet's regime was fascist
>Most Franco supporters are wealthy elites
Lol, this has to be bait, right?

Because to Cambodians

Local Leaders (even if they are assholes) > Vietnamese.

Its slightly more complex, they tend more to be the bog standard hyper anti imperialist types rather than actual advocates of his bizzare mixture of collectivism, nationalism and primitivism.

Not sure about him.
I know he was a communist so I'm immediately skeptical.
Besides that I have never looked into Khmer with great detail.
From what it appears, it was anarchy and the dictators only managed to maintain power by progressively singling out foreign influence as a target which only added to carnage.
With the collapse of infrastructure came the inevitable liquidation of millions as the capacity of the state to provide for It's populace was severely diminished.

Seems like one of the worst failures if communism to boot.

>BBC
>Billionaire owned

lolwut

Well I guess the government does make billions in revenue