Anti-Communism

not the guy who posted that,but duckduckgo brought me to this website debunking it.

semiticcontroversies.blogspot.com/2011/04/in-brief-trotsky-quote.html

>inb4 trusting a website with the name "semitic-controversies"

Can't remember where I got it originally, i've saved it quite a while ago.

>the military industrial complex benefiting
>I know very little about the inner workings about the private sector of military industry but the idea that they could make a profit from the paranoia of the red scare makes me wet myself

Very well, here are some legitimate sources from first hand witnesses to communism:

Staff Sergeant Kurt Hummel, Military Post Number L 31 605 Lg Pa. Paris, to his local group

Northern Russia, 12 August 1941

Bolshevist conditions are indescribable. I had never imagined that such misery was possible. People here know nothing about electric lights, radio, newspapers and the like. One can't call what they live in houses. There are only shanties with rotten straw roofs. Huge neglected fields lay around. We haven't yet found even a small shop. This is what people call the Soviet paradise. I wish the few outsiders who still remain in Germany could be shipped here. There is misery wherever one looks. One has to see it to realize how beautiful Germany is.

Soldier Heinrich Stähr tells his work mates at the Hamburg Hochbahn A. G. about conditions frequently mentioned in other letters as well:

The roads. We in the infantry are probably the best judge of good and bad roads, since we have to march for kilometer after kilometer on them. Here too the Soviets haven't lifted a finger. The main roads are no better than field paths. Believe me, my dear comrades, the soldiers have had many a justifiable curse after marching 40 or 50 kilometers on such a road. Besides, it is 30-35 degrees C. in the shade, and huge clouds of dust make it almost impossible to breathe. Swamps, forests, and bad roads make military action unpleasant, but we keep moving forward.

Medical corporal Paul Lenz, Military Post Number 7 14 628 Posen, to the local group of the NSDAP, Arneburg:

Only a Jew can be a Bolshevist; for these bloodsuckers there is nothing better to be, for there is then nothing to stop them. Wherever one spits there is a Jew, whether in a city or a village. As far as I know (we asked the people, wanting to know the truth) not a single Jew every worked in the workers' paradise. Even the littlest bloodsucker had a post with big privileges. He lived in the best buildings, if one can call them buildings. The real workers lived in small buildings, or better, in animal stalls, just like day laborers in old Russia. It makes no difference whether one is in a village or in a city like Minsk with over 300,000 inhabitants, the stalls are everywhere. Even before the war, most workers knew nothing but hunger, misery and slavery. Some may be interested to know that there were theaters, operas, etc., even big buildings for them, but only those with money got in, and they were the blood suckers and their lackeys.

Because the US was competeing for control of markets and resources of the world with the Soviet Union. Ideology was a tool for this. The US actually would support communists like Pol Pot when the oppurtunity to gain influence presented itself. They also would attack right wing ideolgies that that favored the Soviet Union. There were neo-fascist ideas in western europe that viewed the Soviet Union as an ally to fight off American influence and control of Europe. One in particular that comes to mind was a Spengler influenced one that saw the Soviet Union as ultimately a Russian nationalist entity and not a internationalist socialist one.

Flyer W. M., Res.-Lazarett Salzlwedel to his Cell Leader Schroeder

I have seen the "wonderful workers' paradise" in the Soviet Union with all its terrible misery, and wish that those who thought differently could spend a few weeks here to see and experience what we have. The misery and horror of Bolshevism is terrible.

I hope that volunteering for our proud army may atone for my earlier sins, and that when I am back home, you, dear party member, will accept me as an honest person. In that hope, I send you my warmest greetings.

Heil Hitler!

signed W. M.

Corporal Otto Kien, Military Post Number 18, 756, to the Factory Leadership t the Conrad Scholtz Factory. Barmbeck

Russia, 8 August 1941

Anyone who earlier had different opinions of the Soviet Union is quickly cured of them here. The poverty is terrible. Not even the farmers have anything to eat. They beg from us. There are lice and filth everywhere. One has to be careful one doesn't get them from the inhabitants.

These people don't know anything else. They sit in their huts and remove lice from each other. They don't mind if anyone watches. I've had my fill of this workers' paradise. We'll be glad to be out of here. In the past we saw pictures of malnourished children. They were not exaggerated. One can't believe it if one hasn't been here.

Corporal J. F., Military Post Number 26,280 to his Local Group

In the Field, 3.8.41

What we have seen of the so-called Soviet paradise is worse than we ever imagined. Anyone back home who still has any doubts should come here. All his doubts will disappear. Everywhere we go, the people are happy to be freed from Bolshevism, and looks to the future with confidence. We soldiers can say to those back home that he [Hitler] saved Germany and all of Europe from the Red Army. The battle is hard, but we know what we are fighting for, and, confident of the Führer, we will win. In the hopes of a victorious return,

Heil Hitler
Corporal J. F.

Were those enough sources?

saying
>inb4 my source is shit
doesn't make it better

shit, now i understand why Stalin wanted to get rid of him

its just a meme about the title having the word "semitic" in it, not me saying that the source is unreliable. You do realize you are on Veeky Forums, right?

Pretty sure he asked you for a source to that quote.

Yeah, nobody is denying that Russia was horrible under the Communists. My original question was why fund wars against Communism when the country is destined to collapse on its own? You stormfags always turn everything into a Jewish conspiracy, you kill all nuance in this board.

He was wanted a source for the Trotsky quote you absolute Mongol.

they needed to come up with some kind of justification for all the military shit

because it is a revolutionary world wide utopian meme. It cant just exist in harmony with other countries, its very combative

terrible bait

The reason that communism had to be fought is simply that it calls for a global revolution.(though Stalin kind of abandoned that concept in favor of a more realistic foreign policy)

As for us stormfags always turning everything into a Jewish conspiracy, there doesn't have to be a "jewish conspiracy" for jews to do something bad. The problem is usually that a number of jews do destructive things while the jewish community as a whole isn't involved, but still covers their asses because they're fellow jews.

Here you go again with the fuckin Jews. Why is everything about race with you guys, I've never been able to have a coherent conversation with a stormfag because they always go back to that topic. You guys are more borg minded than Communists.

You brought up the idea of a "jewish conspiracy". I merely explained that that's not our position.

Because communism should not be allowed to exist.

Reminder that nazis and communists helped each other take land in Eastern Europe.

We should have kept the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact tbqh, but sadly Hitler misjudged Stalin to be an ideological communist, which would have to be removed to protect the nation.

Are you the one who posted those quotes? Because that would make your post kind of ironic. Posting quotes that paint a picture of how awful a regime that you think an alliance should have been kept with, I think, entails some irony.

It would have been shitty for the russians, but not our problem. With hindsight we know that they collapsed on their own eventually.

You can't expect a stormfag to not constantly contradict themselves they're not exactly known for their intelligence.

These are the people that worship a dead Jew but also hate Jews.

Because it is seen as the exact opposite of everything that represents America

Helping a regime that they eventually went to war with get closer to their country and obtaining resources doesn't sound that great of an idea.
By the way, are you implying Germany wouldn't have collapsed?

>These are the people that worship a dead Jew but also hate Jews.

"The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions ofthe Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity. Bolshevism practises a lie of the same nature, when it claims to bring liberty to men, whereas in reality it seeks only to enslave them. In the ancient world, the relations between men and gods were founded on an instinctive respect. It was a world enlightened by the idea of tolerance. Christianity was the first creed in the world to exterminate its adversaries in the name of love. Its key-note is intolerance."

-Adolf Hitler (Hitler's Table Talk, July 1941)

This. US is a beacon of freedom and prosperity.

I'm saying they shouldn't have gone to war, because however terrible Stalinism was for the people living under it, it didn't present the existential threat that legitimate Marxism would have presented.

>Freedom and prosperity

Yet everyone of our phone calls is recorded and our internet history is cataloged. I chuckled user.

US-Capitalism is just tyranny by private individuals / corporations rather than tyranny by the state.

This is a bunch of dumb shit. For starters, how is capitalism at all competitive? About a handful of companies own everything and the ones that can't buy each other out just collude.

This reads like a fucking teenager who has never read anything outside of fucking History 101 made this shit. At least the fucking Libertarians who hang around places named "The Mises Group" or some shit can type like adults when they try to debunk Marxism, this shit is pathetic.

Pretty sure that whole invading Eastern European territories thing was a red flag on Stalin not being isolationist and a regular marxist yet they helped him with that. Also pretty sure that they meant to go to war with USSR before the pact yet they still helped them invade those territories, gaining resources and getting bigger. Really makes me think.
Btw, do you think Germany wasn't going to collapse? Perhaps you might want to read "The Wages of Destruction" by Adam Tooze.

How is it tyranny by corporations?
Also, it'd be pretty fucking ironic to be against tyranny and admire Hitler
Lol.

>retty sure that whole invading Eastern European territories thing was a red flag on Stalin not being isolationist and a regular marxist
It was certainly seen as such at the time, hence Operation Barbarossa.

>yet they helped him with that. Also pretty sure that they meant to go to war with USSR before the pact yet they still helped them invade those territories, gaining resources and getting bigger.
They were busy in the west. Hitler offered the western allies peace every chance he had, but they didn't take the offer.

>Btw, do you think Germany wasn't going to collapse? Perhaps you might want to read "The Wages of Destruction" by Adam Tooze.
Let me guess, it assumes that Germany would have kept rearmament policies for all eternity and concludes that that would not have been sustainable?

lol your shitty ideology is dead forever, only to be resurrected by edgy internet kids in brief displays of LARPing, and your failure idol shot himself after getting utterly blown the fuck out by "inferior" Communist Slavs

trying to hold back the unstoppable tide of history.. for more temporary profits and power, communism is inevitable. It's communism or extinction.

m-muh master race

The political system of a country matters very little. If it wants to keep existing, the majority of it's subjects have to at least tolerate it. The thing that matters is where those subjects get their opinions.

>In this Anglo-French world there exists, as it were, democracy, which means the rule of the people by the people. Now the people must possess some means of giving expression to their thoughts or their wishes. Examining this problem more closely, we see that the people themselves have originally no convictions of their own. Their convictions are formed, of course, just as everywhere else. The decisive question is who enlightens the people, who educates them? In those countries, it is actually capital that rules; that is, nothing more than a clique of a few hundred men who possess untold wealth and, as a consequence of the peculiar structure of their national life, are more or less independent and free. They say: 'Here we have liberty.' By this they mean, above all, an uncontrolled economy, and by an uncontrolled economy, the freedom not only to acquire capital but to make absolutely free use of it. That means freedom from national control or control by the people both in the acquisition of capital and in its employment. This is really what they mean when they speak of liberty. These capitalists create their own press and then speak of the 'freedom of the press.' In reality, every one of the newspapers has a master, and in every case this master is the capitalist, the owner. This master, not the editor, is the one who directs the policy of the paper. If the editor tries to write other than what suits the master, he is ousted the next day. This press, which is the absolutely submissive and characterless slave of the owners, molds public opinion. Public opinion thus mobilized by them is, in its turn, split up into political parties. The difference between these parties is as small as it formerly was in Germany.

Nice argument, commie scum.

meanwhile, in another timeline

>It was certainly seen as such at the time, hence Operation Barbarossa.
Um, you just said it didn't present the existential threat of legitimate marxism...

>They were busy in the west. Hitler offered the western allies peace every chance he had, but they didn't take the offer.
Yeah, and while they were busy in the west, Soviets were getting land as part of this pact they had, what is your point?
Oh, what a peaceful fellow this Hitler guy, he invaded countries but he made peace offers!!! Also, we were talking about Molotov-Ribbentrop, don't know why you bring this up.

>Let me guess, it assumes that Germany would have kept rearmament policies for all eternity and concludes that that would not have been sustainable?
Reading the book might be better than whatever reductionist account I could give of it.
Anyway, I would think that borrowing large amounts of money, going into a huge deficit to prop up a war economy isn't that sustainable unless there is a war.
Btw, there were shortages in peacetime Gernany.

It would certainly be a better world than the one we have now.

I wonder if you are aware that Hitler didn't get rid of capitalism, that they were financed by capitalists, that there was a privatization campaign (fun fact: the word 'privatization' was made to describe this campaign), that strikes were banned, that people like Strasser were purged, that some corporations got slave labor.

ma comrade
bump

>Um, you just said it didn't present the existential threat of legitimate marxism...
It didn't, Stalin just wanted buffer states. But to Hitler it logically seemed to prove Stalins commitment to world communism.

>Oh, what a peaceful fellow this Hitler guy, he invaded countries but he made peace offers!!!
The invasion of Poland was a perfectly justified reconquest of german land and every other fight against the western allies was not Hitlers fault. Since the Wehrmacht was tied down in the west, he needed to secure Germany's eastern border, which he did with the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.

>Anyway, I would think that borrowing large amounts of money, going into a huge deficit to prop up a war economy isn't that sustainable unless there is a war.
The flaw with all those theories is that the economy would not have stayed the way it was pre-war. The rearmament policy was there to rearm the country, which it did successfully. Hitler even said that the economic policy would have to be redesigned after the war was over.

it was either the us hold up the old imperialist world order, and in the process transform that in to the modern liberal democratic global capitalist system, or let the rest of the world fall into chaos like after world war 1 and that would have just seen papa stalin marching to the far corners of the world, or at least most of Europe.

fascists beat anarchists, commies beat fascists, liberals beat commies.

>It's communism or extinction.

What if you will get both?

Not having a centrally planned economy doesn't make them capitalist. The capitalist nations let the rich exploit the poor in the name of freedom and the communist countries let the poor exploit the rich in the name of equality. National Socialism forced the rich and the poor to work together. That meant on the one hand a ban on strikes, but on the other hand it also meant very high benefits for workers.

It wasn't a fight against communism but a continuation of the long standing fight of the Anglos against Russian imperialist ambitions. After Russian imperialism was stalled the need for fighting communism ceased.

because the US elites could end like the czars if communism takes over.

>It didn't, Stalin just wanted buffer states. But to Hitler it logically seemed to prove Stalins commitment to world communism.
Lol, vassal states is in my opinion a better term.
Regarding Hitler, that's the point. He saw in Stalin's intentions to expand communism and yet that very pact was signed.

>The invasion of Poland was a perfectly justified reconquest of german land and every other fight against the western allies was not Hitlers fault. Since the Wehrmacht was tied down in the west, he needed to secure Germany's eastern border, which he did with the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.
Justified for whom is the question. Also what you refer to as securing the eastern border entailed making the area of Soviet control closer to their border.

The flaw with all those theories is that the economy would not have stayed the way it was pre-war. The rearmament policy was there to rearm the country, which it did successfully. Hitler even said that the economic policy would have to be redesigned after the war was over.
How do you think that debt was going to be paid back? If you could point me to some work disputing Tooze's work, that'd be cool.

>believing that what marx said in Das Kapital has any sort of credibility and wasn't just the culmination of faulty essays and weak thesis's he made about subjects he didn't know shit about.

Just a reminder that every attempt at implementing a system that had its roots in his works ended in disaster.

What a bunch of vague stuff. Who determines what exploitation is? Why isn't banning independent unions and strikes exploitative Isn't giving some corporations slave labor exploitative?
Btw, USSR banned unions and strikes and gave workers some benefits too. And they too had an economy bound for collapse.
Nazis and commies are two sides of the same coin.
Reminder that nazi regime suffered shortages in peacetime.
I wanna make a correction, I didn't mean to say that Hitler didn't get rid of capitalism, I meant that he didn't get rid of capitalists. His flawed system was socialist.

Oh, and I forgot to say that free market capitalism produces better living standards than both of these flawed socialist systems and socialism is inherently flawed (both the one that still has capitalists as in Nazi Germany or the one that is against capitalists as in USSR). Freedom is above socialism, nazi or commie.

>Why resist an ideology that supports the eradication of your people, culture, and values, and will rob you blind to boot?

I dunno OP, it's pretty weird.

>My original question was why fund wars against Communism when the country is destined to collapse on its own?
>Why dedicate time and effort to putting out a fire and preventing the spread of a fire to neighboring buildings when the fire will just burn out on it's own, eventually?

>replying to someone who agrees with you instead of debating with the stormanon.
>calling the stormanon dumb, and not even in a reply to him
>combining atheist rhetoric and a simplified view of things in a vain attempt to scream hypocrite
>posting a down syndrome person for that extra "ur dumb" oomph.

>>Why dedicate time and effort to putting out a fire
They were "putting out a fire" with bombs. USA was obviously the good guy compared to Stalin, but after 1953 or 1956 their imperialist policy was hardly different from the Soviets'.

>They were "putting out a fire" with bombs.
A perfectly valid method of fire-fighting.
newatlas.com/explosives-extinguish-bushfires/32305/

Jeez, maybe because Stalin wanted to take over Western Europe, and eventually the whole world?

Um, excuse me sir. Stalin wanted to LIBERATE the peoples of the world from the oppressive bourgeois! Why are you against progress?

Absolutely subversive

>watching two autistic kids in a fistfight

But in this case there were people in these buildings.
Stalin. Stalin died in 1953.

>don't true imperialism

Give a source for the alleged Trotsky quote you dumb fuck. Ten pages of butthurt soldiers taking part in their trade's ancient favorite hobby of bitching and moaning about the weather and how much they hate the locals doesn't count.

God demanded their kind be punished and humiliated

>capitalism requires market growth and mass labor exploitation for profits
>socialism is against profit and exploitation
regardless of whether you believe the USSR managed to achieve any of those things, its only natural for capitalists to stop an ideology whose main goal is to take away their power, much like monarchs persecuted republicans even before they could rally people up to their cause, just look at how badly unions were beaten by riot police and infiltrated by cointelpro, socialism is by far the biggest threat to the establishment and I'm glad the left that focused on class struggle has been completely neutralized

You can make this joke all you want but communism made major, quantifiable material improvements to the lives of people in the former Russian Empire

Fascism just caused Italy and Germany to become American puppets with their national identities violently scrubbed out

Correct. The US is also led directly by business leaders, while other countries (especially before WW2) were often led by a more aristocratic political elite

t. kulak

This, you take out the tumors regardless of whether they are cancerous or not

>Fascism just caused Italy and Germany to become American puppets