Cool. But you said before that this doesn't justify the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, so why do you keep insistently bringing it up over and over?
Ukraine
- Thread starter Silvanus
- Start date
Neither does Ukraine. Bandera's history is full of ideological U-turns with the exception of his desire to have an independent Ukraine. As you claim to be well informed (by making such bold statements) you should know that after a short period of collaboration he spent years in a concentration camp because the OUN proclaimed an independent Western Ukrainian state, right? You would also know that he fought against both Soviets and Nazi's at the end of WW2 when he was finally released?
And he received the title for the following reason: "defending national ideas and battling for an independent Ukrainian state.". Not because he collaborated with Nazi's for a short while.
But to be clear, despite his U-turns overall he remained a hard Nationalist and was a shitty and racist person overall. But that doesn't change the fact his collaboration with Nazi's was actually just a very small part of his fight for an independent Ukraine and that he wasn't proclaimed a National Hero because he was a collaborator. Just like I suspect Russia doesn't have statues of Stalin to glorify the mass murder of millions of innocent civilians.
And when has it been normalized? When was it incorporated in the Ukrainian national guard?
No they are not doing anything aggressive when they are trying to retake territory taken by military dictators armed and backed by Russia (which even sent its own Fascist militia and quite likely also regular troops )
Last edited:
I'm not "bringing it up"; people keep minimizing a Nazi movement that is cozy within the Ukrainian state. Not only that, but our governments and media want to give them more weapons. And these Nazis are to a large extent so influential because of longstanding Western support.
Without all the Poles, Jews, and Russians.
Liberals:
And his followers kept killing Poles and Jews and fighting for the Nazi war machine. Because the "independent Ukrainian state" he wanted was an ethnostate. Ukraine for Ukrainians.
Such courage fighting against the Nazis after he'd enthusiastically collaborated in their genocides but then realized they were going to lose. And after taking Nazi money to sabotage the Soviets. Not even the United States was stooping quite so low back then, so what's his excuse?
Hitler was also quite the patriot, but Germany had the good sense not to let that count more than the racism and genocide (after that good sense was knocked into them, anyway).
Shortly after they had helped an unconstitutional coup take power; also around the time Ukrainian revanchists felt aggrieved that subject peoples treated with hostility by the new government had taken the opportunity to leave.
The end of the Soviet Union was a tragedy, and the "glorification" of it in former Soviet states is largely an organic expression of popular sentiments.
Because I expected this type of verbal "diarrhea" i edited my post and added the following;I'm not "bringing it up"; people keep minimizing a Nazi movement that is cozy within the Ukrainian state. Not only that, but our governments and media want to give them more weapons. And these Nazis are to a large extent so influential because of longstanding Western support.
Without all the Poles, Jews, and Russians.
Liberals:
"But to be clear, despite his U-turns overall he remained a hard Nationalist and was a shitty and racist person overall. But that doesn't change the fact his collaboration with Nazi's was actually just a very small part of his fight for an independent Ukraine and that he wasn't proclaimed a National Hero because he was a collaborator. Just like I suspect Russia doesn't have statues of Stalin to glorify the mass murder of millions of innocent civilians."
His followers lead by someone who he had a lot of disputes with. And see above.
How... How can you say such stupid nonsense? Please explain? Bandera got the Nazis to hate him way before they started to lose, that's why he ended up in a concentration camp... He fought against Nazis because he cared about an independent Ukraine and neither Soviets nor Nazis wanted that.
Yup, meanwhile Putin has made it official policy to forget about Soviet atrocities and only remember the good things. I wish they had German good sense.
Lavrov, are you sure it isn't you?!
Nono Azov was incorporated into Ukraine's national guard after a military coup backed by the Russian government which provided weapons, soldiers and a Fascist militia was conquering eastern Ukraine and Azov ended up being key in stopping them.
Former Soviet states under democratic rule hate the Soviet era. I wonder why.... Maybe the expression is not that popular.
But hey apparently it's ok to glorify mass murder, orchestrated famines which ao killed millions of Ukrainians, mass use of forced labour and Gulags because... "Communism" i guess? I sure prefer being a "liberal" than a man with such a blatant disregard for Human life and dignity as you.
As someone with far more contacts from former Soviet states than you have, i can assure you, that "glorification" of the Soviet Union is very much not an expression of popular sentiment.
His declaration of an independent Ukraine stipulated that it would "work closely with the National-Socialist Greater Germany, under the leadership of its leader Adolf Hitler which is forming a new order in Europe and the world and is helping the Ukrainian People to free itself from Moscovite occupation." The declaration was also celebrated with a bunch of pogroms. Bandera believed Hitler would greet an independent fascist Ukraine as an ally. This is the "national hero" of Ukraine. The Germans also voluntarily released him, which is a striking contrast to how attending a Nazi concentration camp would often proceed.
Public opinion actually tends to be divided on that, even at what we are to believe was the Soviet periphery.
Doubt.
I love how you accuse me of fantasizing, and then just blatantly confirm what I said with absolutely zero irony.
You trying to read people for peddling simplistic, black and white moralistic narratives based on propaganda just reads to everyone else as a massive self-own because noone else is actually doing that to anything approximating the extent you are.
As for this selective and pretend antifascism, what happened to "fascism is a matter of taste?"
I swear, tankies pretending to have a spine is somehow even more disgusting than liberals doing the same.
Last edited:
And yet it got him alongside other leaders of OUN in concentration camps or simply executed. And they voluntarily released him because he would fight against the Soviets. But he also turned his back on Germans. People lie...
But this is still irrelavant as this is not what he was proclaimed a hero for... Just like I hope Russia doesn't glorify the Soviet era in an attempt to glorify persecutions, purges, massive use of forced labor, gulags and orchestrated famines leading to millions dying. Otherwise surely you could understand why Ukrainians do not want to become a vassal state of a country which glorifies the murder of millions of Ukrainians?
Not at all, no. This reminds me of that time in Albania when asking a tour guide if they (Albanians) looked back at Hoxha's rule with Nostalgia. They looked at us like we were a bunch of retards and said "No, off course not". And I realize he wasn't a Soviet but his rule was pretty much the same: hated freedom and he was ruthless in the name of "communism".
I am fairly certain that if you'd go to baltic states or eastern european ones you'll have the same "are you retarded?!" look if you ask whether people look back at the Soviet Era positively. Except in Belarus and Russia, off course.
Last edited:
Again, very well fantasized. It is the people who insist it's a great idea to pursue any number of efforts from punishing Russian civilians with sanctions to risking nuclear war in order to antagonize Putin who are the voices of reason and moral nuance. And the outsize focus on something happening to a white country is also very proper and morally complex. My gosh, they've listened to the television and adopted the viewpoints intended for them to adopt; this illustrates a deep understanding of the moral complexity of the situation.
Half of these people faint with outrage on the mere suggestion of material aid for the Palestinian resistance. These are not well-considered opinions coming from a place of moral understanding. They are manufactured consent.
Let's have a no fly zone over Israel. And BDS. And give Hamas some military equipment; maybe NYPD can spare a little more after whatever surplus they're sending to Ukraine.
Oh, but that's "whataboutism". Because the agenda set by the ruling class with all its various malleable premises is not meant to be applied consistently; we'll sanction others for what we do ourselves and pretend this makes us moral; no, it means our ruling class is opportunistic. And American imperialists and their useful idiots will defend the action in the case where it helps American imperialism and shrug their shoulders at the inaction in the cases where it would hurt it. Because that's not the agenda right now. And anyway, nothing to be done about it. Pointing out American and Western hypocrisy is Russian propaganda, now let's go arm some Nazis to fight off the Asiatic hordes.
It's not really better if people who are wrong are consistently wrong.
People have done polls on this. But your anecdote is pretty impressive.
That's not a good thing.
Being "correct" (which is to say favoring the global hegemon enforcing some action on some part of the rest of the world that they've managed to convince their population deserves it for some reason) only in situations where it helps American imperialism is just being an American imperialist that cynically abuses atrocity propaganda.
Correct, and they show that with some exceptions most countries are vastly more satisfied with the current system.
And I'd rather believe an inhabitant of a country which has faced communist rule than an American who just repeats bullshit propaganda ad nauseam. Bullshit propaganda he is allowed to repeat because he doesn't live in a country/system he continuously promotes.
Do you think Russia chose the grandson of history's most famous Nazi collaborator, Vyacheslav Molotov, to hold a significant role during this debacle by coincidence?
Besides which, if you think it's more acceptable to sponsor fascist violence covertly, then I think your priorities might be out of whack.
Really does stick in the craw when you pretend to give the slightest shit about civilians (after apologia for an army intentionally bombing civilian residential areas and hospitals) or risking nuclear war (after apologia for the government explicitly threatening nuclear war).
You don't actually care about these factors one iota. They're convenient tools, to be peppered into a post if it's convenient and then forgotten as soon as they're not. Quit the unbelievable charade that these are matters of principle for you, because it's quite obvious nobody here is thick enough to fall for that.
Last edited:
And what about your downsized focus on the victims in this war? (compared to the topic about Israel) Combined with your love of the USSR which orchestrated the death of millions of Ukrainians I guess I should conclude you have a huge racist boner against Ukrainians?
Both conflicts are in totally different stages. Israel has been an established state for decades and has even won a war against all its neighbors already. Just like I don't think Ukraine should ever dream of getting Crimea back I don't think anyone should dream about Israel disappearing. But I wouldn't mind sanctions against Israel. Unfortunately the biggest roadblock to any progress in the Israeli-palestinian conflict is the US's unconditional support of Israel. A role you have taken for Russia in this conflict.
Correct
Former Soviet Countries See More Harm From Breakup
As the 22<sup>nd</sup> anniversary of the Soviet Union's collapse approaches next week, residents in seven out of 11 former Soviet republics are more likely to say the breakup harmed their countries than benefited them.
news.gallup.com
Well, no.
The older people who had experience of the Soviet Union are especially less likely to think its dissolution was a good thing.
"under democratic rule "Former Soviet Countries See More Harm From Breakup
As the 22<sup>nd</sup> anniversary of the Soviet Union's collapse approaches next week, residents in seven out of 11 former Soviet republics are more likely to say the breakup harmed their countries than benefited them.
Well, no.
The older people who had experience of the Soviet Union are especially less likely to think its dissolution was a good thing.
*Sees list of countries* ....
From your own link: " People Living in Fear More Likely to See Harm "
At least you tried.
Damn! You must really stand against the ruling party's violent repression of Russian left-wing groups, communists and unions, then, eh?
...oh.
This is that deep moral understanding you're talking about, @Terminal Blue?
oh wow
*looks at chart*
Of those who said no one is afraid, 27% of people saw the dissolution of the Soviet Union as a benefit and 45% as a harm.
Were you hoping I wouldn't go back and cite the numbers right back at you? It's still that lopsided in the best case for you!
Advertising that you're cool with Nazis is generally less acceptable than not doing that.
Have you recently suffered a head injury? Do you need help?
What deep moral understanding? This is not a topic about Israel so I am not going to lay down my entire opinion on the whole conflict. But, deep understanding involves being able to see two different conflicts at different stages involving different protagonists may require different approaches.
Oh wow... still looking at the list of countries.... Still thinking back about the fact I clearly said democratic countries had little regrets about the soviet era.... and I still don't see a dispute there. But congratz, the USSR was barely better than brutal dictatorships and semi functional (and I am probably being generous here) democracies.