You mean in the USSR? The ones the Red Army was sent to stop? The ones perpetrated by the anti-communists, conservatives, Ukranian Nationalists, and various peasant militias? The communist party did not incorporate racist pogroms into its program and actively worked against them
Attempted murder is a crime yes. Stalin was fine with the many pogroms immediately after the communists took over. They briefly used the Jews to help them with thier agenda then immediately turned on them. Starting during the war and continuing on.
He was gearing up to put them all in gulags but he died first. You say that’s worth ignoring but let me ask you this: if I built a jail in my house, buy an abduction van and began writing down all your movements, and tell people I’m planning to imprison you for no reason. Is that alarming? Is that showing where my morals lay? Is it a crime? would you want me arrested?
Stalin was fine with the many pogroms immediately after the communists took over
And yet, the communists actively worked to end the pogroms. Almost as though Stalin’s personal opinions didn’t actually matter and the party was in charge.
They briefly used the Jews to help them with thier agenda then immediately turned on them. Starting during the war and continuing on.
Yeah, so it’s time for you to go get sources that document how the Bolsheviks and the Communist Party actively planned and executed porgroms against the Jews, because that didn’t actually happen and your claim is going to require some evidence.
He was gearing up to put them all in gulags but he died first.
That’s cool. So your claim is that the Communist Party itself was actively racist except for the fact that the Communist Party didn’t follow through with supposed plans against Jews. So… you’re saying that the party itself was not racist in this way, but rather that perhaps Stalin personally was, but never got to steer the party to act on his racism.
You realize that’s what you’re saying right? You’re undermining your first point by trying to appeal to Stalin’s personal character and stating that it didn’t happen.
Is that showing where my morals lay?
Yeah, this is the problem. You’re trying to say that the Communist Party was itself deeply racist, but instead you’re trying to transfer stories about a specific person who was elected by the Communist Party to establish a moral judgment that then is supposed to transfer back to the party, despite you being completely unable to point to actual events that support your claim. It’s not even guilt by association, it’s guilt by association with a thought-crime.
Thank you. Education can save lives, especially in this world where we are relentlessly bombarded with disinformation. To many people, “communism” is a label that means something different from what was intended. “Some communists did some racist things,” sure. “Communism is racist,” no.
Capitalism is not inherently racist either, but it is easier to exploit. The people with power use their power to help themselves get even more power. In our timeline, it’s mostly white dudes.
A response I often hear is “look how many people died under communism.” I’m looking. Now let’s count deaths under capitalism. Now let’s look at the specific causes, etc. Remove the labels and trace the underlying wires. Debug humanity so we can make a better future for all. Or perhaps more aptly as climate change accelerates, defuse the bomb before we all fucking die.
I would disagree with you here. Capitalism is not an abstract ideal. Neither is racism. They are both specific historical processes. Historians generally seat the origins of capitalism in the invention of common stock in 1602 by the Dutch East India Company. Historians also seat the origins of the racism to the mid-1400s in Portugal when Prince Henry sponsored mass slave catching in Africa and commissioned the author Gomes Eanes de Zurara to write a positive account of his exploits. This writing, “The Chronicle of the Discovery and Conquest of Guinea”, established a moral basis for violent human trafficking, subjugation, and mass theft.
By the time the Dutch East India Company invented common stock, what investors were investing in for the initial IPO was the massive expansion of a private militarized merchant company that had racialized human trafficking and slavery as a core pillar of the company’s operations and profit.
There was literally never a time in human history that capitalism existed separately from racism. Capitalism was built on the foundations of racism and integrated all aspects of racism into its mechanics.
In an academic setting of pure abstract theory you could potentially invent a theoretical form of capitalism that isn’t racist, which could be useful for thought experiments or maybe some creative fiction. But Capitalism as you and I know it has always been fundamentally enmeshed with racism as we know it.
Right, which is why I said “in our timeline.” The concept of capitalism is not inherently racist, but historically racism has always been part of it. Kind of like how the fact that communist countries have failed historically does not mean that communism itself is always doomed to fail.
I see so you’re saying Stalin was more of a figurehead and not some sort of person “in charge” of the operation of the party and thus his leadership is irrelevant to what the party was doing? A man who kept his personal beliefs from influencing the government as a whole?
Look I don’t even hate communism no more than I hate capitalism. “Real (insert your view) had never been tried! These problems aren’t a problem with the system, the leaders aren’t really trying to be pure (blank)”
I get it. Don’t get fooled into thinking communism around the world is some great utopian dream. Racism, exploitation, corruption… it’s the same everywhere. You’re eating cereal and believing the blue bits aren’t the same flavor as the red bits. It’s an illusion.
I see so you’re saying Stalin was more of a figurehead and not some sort of person “in charge” of the operation of the party and thus his leadership is irrelevant to what the party was doing?
No, I’m saying that just because you can point to Stalin’s personal racism doesn’t mean that the party itself integrated racism into the party platform. You claimed that the Communist Party was racist, and then used pogroms as an example, but none of the pogroms in the region were executed by the Community Party and the ONE retreat you have presented is that Stalin wanted to harm the Jews but ultimately the party did not. That’s not evidence for your position. It’s evidence against your position.
Don’t get fooled into thinking communism around the world is some great utopian dream
You don’t have to protect me. I promise. I’m a big kid now. I wear big kid pants and I almost never wet my bed anymore.
Racism, … it’s the same everywhere
No. It’s not. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of racism, and you really need to educate yourself. Racism as you and I know it is European racism. It is a distinct historical process. It has a starting point, it has a historical development driven by historical material conditions, and it spread around the world via the European empire. It is not some kind of platonic ideal, it is a specific construction.
exploitation, corruption … it’s the same everywhere
Absolutely. These are words we use to describe the behavior of systems. The systems exhibit these behaviors to a greater or lesser extent and they have different reactions to these behaviors.
For example, when business leaders in China cut corners and sold tainted baby formula to make more money, and it resulted in sick and dead babies, the state executed them. Meanwhile, Nestle kills babies all over the world and the US calls it “shareholder supremacy”.
So yes, exploitation and corruption ARE the same everywhere, but different systems stand in different relation to these phenomena.
The doctors plot happened. Many Jewish people were rounded up tortured and executed by the regime! People died for being Jewish. Stalin died before rounding up all the Jews but the communist party rounded up and killed Jews for being Jews. That happened.
“And this wasn’t an isolated incident. It came after several years of increasingly antisemitic repression under Stalin, including the campaign against supposed “cosmopolitans” and the destruction of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee”
Oh I see all the racism in Russia is actually everyone else’s fault not Russia. Got it.
The Han Chinese were already racist before communism so it doesn’t count either.
Wow I’m so glad communists regimes can’t be racist because nothing counts.
You say I have “one” example. The truth is I just don’t have all day to list the many many examples. Especially since after each example I give you’ll only stomp your feet and say “that doesn’t count!” Every time. What’s the point.
I didn’t say communism is non-discriminatory. Your willingness to jump from “racism” to “discrimination” demonstrates you don’t understand the topic at all.
What about China and The Uyghurs?
China absolutely has a problem with Han supremacy and assimilated European racism, no doubt. But the situation with Uyghurs is not evidence of it. The situation with the Uyghurs, quite literally, is only framed as an Islamophobic “racism” problem by the white supremacist Islamophobic West. When the Arab League surveyed the entire situation, not only did they not find any evidence of Islamophobia, they actively approved of the Chinese program. Why?
Because the problem in Xinjiang is the problem of manufactured extremism. Manufactured by whom? The US and UK primarily. They have a decades long history of training, arming, and even fomenting Islamic extremism in the entire region (go look at where exactly Xinjiang is on a map). Remember the Mujahideen? Remember how the US created al-Qaeda? Remember how the current president of Syria had a huge bounty on his head for being a literal head-chopper in ISIS but then it turns out he’s been actively working with the US military intelligence apparatus for at least 7 years? Yeah, so the US has been continuing their 50-year program of creating terrorist extremists and they were doing it in Xinjiang with the Uyghur community. The US and UK have built a substantial program of reinterpreting Islam to justify terrorism and spreading that in isolated and economically under-developed Islamic communities to create terrorist cells, very much like what the US did with Evangelical Christians right here in the USA (and most terrorist attacks in the US are from white Christian who were radicalized, even if tangentially, by these programs).
So again, why did the Arab League approve of China’s program in Xinjiang? Because it was actually effective. The number of terrorist attacks in Xinjiang plummeted following China’s implementation of their program. Economic opportunity was expanded, education, literacy, and health outcomes all skyrocketed. Uyghur women in Xinjiang had massively expanded academic, economic, and family-planning opportunities. It’s honestly a huge achievement, and one that the Arab League would be highly interested in understanding - the first ever deradicalization program aimed at Muslims radicalized by the decades-long Western radicalization program.
So, what about China and the Uyghurs? Not a racism thing. Not a discrimination thing. Not a Han supremacy thing. It’s an anti-terrorism program aimed at threading the needle, maintaining the Xinjiang autonomous region while neutralizing the radicalization threat from the West. And it’s working, not just well, extremely well, and the Uyghurs in Xinjiang every year are posting continued population growth, positive academic growth, positive economic growth, and they’re all still practicing Islam.
Again Jewish people in Russia experienced lots of racism from the Russian people.
100%! Even members of the Red Army went rogue and did pogroms against Jews in Russia. Absolutely happened, no contest. But they were cut from the Party because the Party itself understood that antisemitism was not something that would build a healthy society.
China : It’s an anti-terrorism program. Yeah so is what’s going on in Israel lol.
This is what we call reductionism. China is not “cracking down on Muslims”. The Arab League regularly issues condemnations of the US treatment of Muslims. It has not issued a condemnation of the Chinese treatment of Uyghurs. At a certain point, you’re going to have to start asking yourself why this is the case, and you’re going to have own up to the fact that if you think the Arabs are motivated to stay on China’s good side, look at what happens to Arab countries on the USA’s bad side.
There’s no way around this one. The false equivalency is simply unsustainable in the face of reality
Oh yes China’s murder, rape, and imprisonment is okay because you like them. Also, the Arab League aren’t some human rights organization. Not sure why you focus on them… Other than, that is right, they are in China’s influence.
I get it, China does the right kind of cultural genocide. Their soft understanding hand gently holds the throat of its adversaries until they suffocate. There is no way around this, I am against human rights abuses and you act as an apologist.
I think you’re forgetting quite a few pogroms
You mean in the USSR? The ones the Red Army was sent to stop? The ones perpetrated by the anti-communists, conservatives, Ukranian Nationalists, and various peasant militias? The communist party did not incorporate racist pogroms into its program and actively worked against them
Stalin didn’t like Jews and was on his way to build camps himself. The doctors plot was leading up to that.
So you’re saying that the communist party itself was deeply racist because of stuff that might have happened but didn’t? Do I have that right?
Attempted murder is a crime yes. Stalin was fine with the many pogroms immediately after the communists took over. They briefly used the Jews to help them with thier agenda then immediately turned on them. Starting during the war and continuing on.
He was gearing up to put them all in gulags but he died first. You say that’s worth ignoring but let me ask you this: if I built a jail in my house, buy an abduction van and began writing down all your movements, and tell people I’m planning to imprison you for no reason. Is that alarming? Is that showing where my morals lay? Is it a crime? would you want me arrested?
And yet, the communists actively worked to end the pogroms. Almost as though Stalin’s personal opinions didn’t actually matter and the party was in charge.
Yeah, so it’s time for you to go get sources that document how the Bolsheviks and the Communist Party actively planned and executed porgroms against the Jews, because that didn’t actually happen and your claim is going to require some evidence.
That’s cool. So your claim is that the Communist Party itself was actively racist except for the fact that the Communist Party didn’t follow through with supposed plans against Jews. So… you’re saying that the party itself was not racist in this way, but rather that perhaps Stalin personally was, but never got to steer the party to act on his racism.
You realize that’s what you’re saying right? You’re undermining your first point by trying to appeal to Stalin’s personal character and stating that it didn’t happen.
Yeah, this is the problem. You’re trying to say that the Communist Party was itself deeply racist, but instead you’re trying to transfer stories about a specific person who was elected by the Communist Party to establish a moral judgment that then is supposed to transfer back to the party, despite you being completely unable to point to actual events that support your claim. It’s not even guilt by association, it’s guilt by association with a thought-crime.
You’re grasping at straws.
Thank you. Education can save lives, especially in this world where we are relentlessly bombarded with disinformation. To many people, “communism” is a label that means something different from what was intended. “Some communists did some racist things,” sure. “Communism is racist,” no.
Capitalism is not inherently racist either, but it is easier to exploit. The people with power use their power to help themselves get even more power. In our timeline, it’s mostly white dudes.
A response I often hear is “look how many people died under communism.” I’m looking. Now let’s count deaths under capitalism. Now let’s look at the specific causes, etc. Remove the labels and trace the underlying wires. Debug humanity so we can make a better future for all. Or perhaps more aptly as climate change accelerates, defuse the bomb before we all fucking die.
I would disagree with you here. Capitalism is not an abstract ideal. Neither is racism. They are both specific historical processes. Historians generally seat the origins of capitalism in the invention of common stock in 1602 by the Dutch East India Company. Historians also seat the origins of the racism to the mid-1400s in Portugal when Prince Henry sponsored mass slave catching in Africa and commissioned the author Gomes Eanes de Zurara to write a positive account of his exploits. This writing, “The Chronicle of the Discovery and Conquest of Guinea”, established a moral basis for violent human trafficking, subjugation, and mass theft.
By the time the Dutch East India Company invented common stock, what investors were investing in for the initial IPO was the massive expansion of a private militarized merchant company that had racialized human trafficking and slavery as a core pillar of the company’s operations and profit.
There was literally never a time in human history that capitalism existed separately from racism. Capitalism was built on the foundations of racism and integrated all aspects of racism into its mechanics.
In an academic setting of pure abstract theory you could potentially invent a theoretical form of capitalism that isn’t racist, which could be useful for thought experiments or maybe some creative fiction. But Capitalism as you and I know it has always been fundamentally enmeshed with racism as we know it.
Right, which is why I said “in our timeline.” The concept of capitalism is not inherently racist, but historically racism has always been part of it. Kind of like how the fact that communist countries have failed historically does not mean that communism itself is always doomed to fail.
I see so you’re saying Stalin was more of a figurehead and not some sort of person “in charge” of the operation of the party and thus his leadership is irrelevant to what the party was doing? A man who kept his personal beliefs from influencing the government as a whole?
Look I don’t even hate communism no more than I hate capitalism. “Real (insert your view) had never been tried! These problems aren’t a problem with the system, the leaders aren’t really trying to be pure (blank)”
I get it. Don’t get fooled into thinking communism around the world is some great utopian dream. Racism, exploitation, corruption… it’s the same everywhere. You’re eating cereal and believing the blue bits aren’t the same flavor as the red bits. It’s an illusion.
No, I’m saying that just because you can point to Stalin’s personal racism doesn’t mean that the party itself integrated racism into the party platform. You claimed that the Communist Party was racist, and then used pogroms as an example, but none of the pogroms in the region were executed by the Community Party and the ONE retreat you have presented is that Stalin wanted to harm the Jews but ultimately the party did not. That’s not evidence for your position. It’s evidence against your position.
You don’t have to protect me. I promise. I’m a big kid now. I wear big kid pants and I almost never wet my bed anymore.
No. It’s not. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of racism, and you really need to educate yourself. Racism as you and I know it is European racism. It is a distinct historical process. It has a starting point, it has a historical development driven by historical material conditions, and it spread around the world via the European empire. It is not some kind of platonic ideal, it is a specific construction.
Absolutely. These are words we use to describe the behavior of systems. The systems exhibit these behaviors to a greater or lesser extent and they have different reactions to these behaviors.
For example, when business leaders in China cut corners and sold tainted baby formula to make more money, and it resulted in sick and dead babies, the state executed them. Meanwhile, Nestle kills babies all over the world and the US calls it “shareholder supremacy”.
So yes, exploitation and corruption ARE the same everywhere, but different systems stand in different relation to these phenomena.
You seem to be confused.
The doctors plot happened. Many Jewish people were rounded up tortured and executed by the regime! People died for being Jewish. Stalin died before rounding up all the Jews but the communist party rounded up and killed Jews for being Jews. That happened.
“And this wasn’t an isolated incident. It came after several years of increasingly antisemitic repression under Stalin, including the campaign against supposed “cosmopolitans” and the destruction of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee”
Oh I see all the racism in Russia is actually everyone else’s fault not Russia. Got it.
The Han Chinese were already racist before communism so it doesn’t count either.
Wow I’m so glad communists regimes can’t be racist because nothing counts.
You say I have “one” example. The truth is I just don’t have all day to list the many many examples. Especially since after each example I give you’ll only stomp your feet and say “that doesn’t count!” Every time. What’s the point.
What about China and The Uyghurs? This idea that communism is non discriminatory is laughable _
I didn’t say communism is non-discriminatory. Your willingness to jump from “racism” to “discrimination” demonstrates you don’t understand the topic at all.
China absolutely has a problem with Han supremacy and assimilated European racism, no doubt. But the situation with Uyghurs is not evidence of it. The situation with the Uyghurs, quite literally, is only framed as an Islamophobic “racism” problem by the white supremacist Islamophobic West. When the Arab League surveyed the entire situation, not only did they not find any evidence of Islamophobia, they actively approved of the Chinese program. Why?
Because the problem in Xinjiang is the problem of manufactured extremism. Manufactured by whom? The US and UK primarily. They have a decades long history of training, arming, and even fomenting Islamic extremism in the entire region (go look at where exactly Xinjiang is on a map). Remember the Mujahideen? Remember how the US created al-Qaeda? Remember how the current president of Syria had a huge bounty on his head for being a literal head-chopper in ISIS but then it turns out he’s been actively working with the US military intelligence apparatus for at least 7 years? Yeah, so the US has been continuing their 50-year program of creating terrorist extremists and they were doing it in Xinjiang with the Uyghur community. The US and UK have built a substantial program of reinterpreting Islam to justify terrorism and spreading that in isolated and economically under-developed Islamic communities to create terrorist cells, very much like what the US did with Evangelical Christians right here in the USA (and most terrorist attacks in the US are from white Christian who were radicalized, even if tangentially, by these programs).
So again, why did the Arab League approve of China’s program in Xinjiang? Because it was actually effective. The number of terrorist attacks in Xinjiang plummeted following China’s implementation of their program. Economic opportunity was expanded, education, literacy, and health outcomes all skyrocketed. Uyghur women in Xinjiang had massively expanded academic, economic, and family-planning opportunities. It’s honestly a huge achievement, and one that the Arab League would be highly interested in understanding - the first ever deradicalization program aimed at Muslims radicalized by the decades-long Western radicalization program.
So, what about China and the Uyghurs? Not a racism thing. Not a discrimination thing. Not a Han supremacy thing. It’s an anti-terrorism program aimed at threading the needle, maintaining the Xinjiang autonomous region while neutralizing the radicalization threat from the West. And it’s working, not just well, extremely well, and the Uyghurs in Xinjiang every year are posting continued population growth, positive academic growth, positive economic growth, and they’re all still practicing Islam.
Again Jewish people in Russia experienced lots of racism from the Russian people.
China : It’s an anti-terrorism program
Yeah so is what’s going on in Israel lol.
100%! Even members of the Red Army went rogue and did pogroms against Jews in Russia. Absolutely happened, no contest. But they were cut from the Party because the Party itself understood that antisemitism was not something that would build a healthy society.
Stalin wasn’t cut from the party.
That was some serious propaganda. China cracks down on Muslims = Good. The US = Bad.
Another human rights abuser and apologist.
This is what we call reductionism. China is not “cracking down on Muslims”. The Arab League regularly issues condemnations of the US treatment of Muslims. It has not issued a condemnation of the Chinese treatment of Uyghurs. At a certain point, you’re going to have to start asking yourself why this is the case, and you’re going to have own up to the fact that if you think the Arabs are motivated to stay on China’s good side, look at what happens to Arab countries on the USA’s bad side.
There’s no way around this one. The false equivalency is simply unsustainable in the face of reality
Oh yes China’s murder, rape, and imprisonment is okay because you like them. Also, the Arab League aren’t some human rights organization. Not sure why you focus on them… Other than, that is right, they are in China’s influence.
I get it, China does the right kind of cultural genocide. Their soft understanding hand gently holds the throat of its adversaries until they suffocate. There is no way around this, I am against human rights abuses and you act as an apologist.